Minutes — February 7, 2013
Cornell University Student Assembly
4:45pm — 6:30pm, Willard Straight Hall Memorial Room
I. Call to Order/Roll Call
A. Gitlin called the meeting to order at 4:50
- Members present
- S. Balik, G. Block, E. Bonatti, G. Braciak, S. Breedon, I. Chen, M. Cho, A. Chopra, A. Gitlin, R. Gitlin, I. Harris, T. Hittinger, D. Iwaoka, D. Kuhr, J. Lee, G. Lovely, M. Lukasiewicz, J. Marshall, D. Muir, C. Pritchett, P. Scelfo, U. Smith, N. Terroness
- Members unexcused
- J. Batista, R. Desai, J. Marshall, M. Stefanko
II. Approval of the 1/31/13 Minutes
- Minutes approved by unanimous consent
III. Open Microphone
IV. Presentation by CRP Lecturer David West, LEED AP
- Urban planner leading a campaign to change a parking law in Ithaca
- Minimum parking spaces during development
- Current laws make it difficult to add more housing and makes current housing very expensive
- What comes with the construction of parking lots
- Promoted car usage
- Undermining of public transit
- Increase in green house gas emissions
- Traffic generation
- Impact of new law (minimize parking): sustainable transportation (TCAT, rideshare, biking, walking)
- Currently, 25–50% of apartment garage spaces are empty — costs covered by tuition and increased rent
- Needs to get this campaign out of committee — asking the SA to get involved
V. Announcements/Reports
Agenda Announcement — J. Mueller
- Responsibility of members to look at the agenda before meetings
Collegetown Community Plan Announcement — D. Iwaoka
- Collegetown Community Plan objectives
- Stronger sense of community
- Giving the community a voice — place responsibility on all individual’s actions
Green Revolving Fund Announcement — S. Balik
- Cornell will provide a $1 million dollar boon to create the fund!
VI. Business of the Day
R.32: Toward a Responsible Endowment — S. Balik, Rebecca Macies, Anna-Lisa Castle
- There are currently 200+ colleges working on divesting from the fossil fuel industry
- HSBC issued a report: predicted a 30% drop in coal and a 20% drop in oil usage by 2035
- Financial risk that comes with divested is so small that it can be considered negligible
- U. Smith: SA has been consistent in passing green resolutions — this should be no different
- Mitch Paine (GPSA President): The GPSA would like to be involved in the conversation — would be happy to provide students with expertise in the appropriate fields
- D. Kuhr: For those that have fears about the response of the Administration, they have clearly shown that they are willing to put themselves behind this kind of initiative (see Green Revolving Fund)
- G. Block: Important that the SA get behind this and keep pressure on the Administration
- J. Weinberg: What are the next steps?
- Grass roots campaign — expect those kinds of tactics
- Hoping that the SA will help collaborate in a multi-dimensional effort
- Katarina Athanasiou ‘13: It is key that the Sa get behind this. Even though it may be a lofty goal that can’t be achieved this year, groundwork can be provided so that future assemblies will be able to
- Call to question, seconded, dissent expressed
- Vote to vote: 13–7−1 Return to debate
- P. Scelfo: Afraid that we are condemning companies involved in fossil fuels — there is great potential for returns there
- It has been done successfully before
- Keep in mind the timeline — not asking to divest tomorrow
- G. Lovely: Remember this is a Sense of the Body resolution — the SA is showing support for what the students want. This would be a recommendation to the Administration — can trust that they will act responsibly
- C. Pritchett: Questions whether or not this is under the purview of the SA
- Call to question, seconded
- Community vote: 2
- Roll call vote: 20–2−0
- Resolution 32 passed by a vote of 22–2−0
| S. Balik | Yes |
| J. Batista | Absent |
| G. Block | Yes |
| E. Bonatti | Yes |
| G. Braciak | Yes |
| S. Breedon | Yes |
| I. Chen | Yes |
| M. Cho | Yes |
| A. Chopra | Yes |
| R. Desai | Absent |
| R. Gitlin | Yes |
| I. Harris | Yes |
| T. Hittinger | Yes |
| D. Iwaoka | Yes |
| D. KUhr | Yes |
| J. Lee | Yes |
| G. Lovely | Yes |
| M. Lukasiewicz | Yes |
| J. Marshall | Absent |
| J. Mueller | Yes |
| D. Muir | Yes |
| C. Pritchett | Yes |
| P. Scelfo | Yes |
| U. Smith | Yes |
| M. Stefanko | Absent |
| N. Terrones | Yes |
VII. New Business
R.33: Re-affiliating Ivy Council with the Student Assembly — C. Pritchett, Jessica Barragan, Nick Judson
- Cameron and Jessica are co-head delegates of the Ivy Council at Cornell University
- Ivy Council started in 1993 — Ivy League leaders wanted a way for the universities to discuss problems/solutions/ideas/etc.
- Current functions
- Ivy Leadership Summit (keynote speakers, panels)
- 8Ivy Policy Conference (policy, achievement)
- Ivy Corp (Community outreach, student engagement)
- Cornell is the only school whose Ivy Council chapter isn’t affiliated with the student government
- Looking to create Ivy Council as a committee — would have members be official policy liaisons
- D. Kuhr: What’s the long term plan for recruitment and retention?
- Committee structure — policy liaisons, leadership opportunities
- S. Breedon: What will the relationship be between the liaisons and the SA?
- Provide recommendations on how problems might be handled based on what they learn from other chapters
- G. Braciak: Why was the Ivy Council un-affiliated in the first place?
- Was deed useless to the SA
- M. Lukasiewicz: How much funding will be needed? What will the committee do throughout the year?
- Funding only for transportation
- Policy liaisons would meet every two weeks — would also discuss resolutions that should be presented
- U. Smith: How many people have been involved? How does Cornell stack up against peer institutions?
- Brown and Dartmouth are the biggest participants in meetings
- About 10–40 Ivy Council delegates per chapter
- Looking to keep the Cornell number low
- Motion to table until the next meeting, seconded
- R.33 tables by unanimous consent
R.34: Amendment to Appendix A of the Student Assembly Charter — R. Desai, C. Pritchett, D. Muir
- Amendment to state what the Appropriations Committee will do during non-funding cycles (follow up task forces)
- Committee will tell student organizations whether or not they will most likely increase, decrease, or maintain funding during the next cycle
- If a decrease is recommended, members of the Committee will meet and work with the organization to help re-align their finances
- This will improve the relationship between the Committee and by-line funded organizations
- G. Block: How much influence should the Committee have during their off-years?
- Merely provided suggestions to help better the organizations
- Currently Roneal meets with the all the groups already — creating a more formal process
- D. Kuhr: How will this operate? Isn’t this the goal of meeting every two years?
- Solely relying on reports might not send the appropriate message
- Increase in communication, better relationship
- A. Bores: What will be the implementation if this is passed now as opposed to next year? How will it be enforced?
- Committee plans to meet with every organization by the end of this semester
- Not sure about enforcement — encourages that the question be asked again next meeting
- Chelsea Cheng ‘15: Will there be a bias based on which Committee members meet with the organizations? Are members aware of this commitment?
- If anything it will decrease bias as currently, only the chair maintains communication
- Committee is aware and willing — will be made clear to future applicants as well
- E. Bonatti: Should the SA have access to the info as well? What makes members qualified to provide recommendations? They are either voted in by the SA or picked by the VP of Finance
- SA shouldn’t have access — it wouldn’t benefit either party
- Members are directly or indirectly voted in by the SA to represent them and the student body
- The committee was created for the purpose of being qualified to make recommendations
- Resolution 34 tabled until the next meeting
A. Gitlin adjourned the meeting at 6:30pm
Respectuflly submitted,
Chelsea Cheng