Student Assembly

Minutes — April 30, 2013
Cornell University Student Assembly
4:00 — 6:00, 301 Physical Sciences Building

I. Call to Order/Roll Call

A. Gitlin called the meeting to order at 4:05pm.

Members present

S. Balik, J. Batista, G. Block, G. Braciak, M. Cho, R. Desai, A. Gitlin, I. Harris, T. Hitinger, J. Lee, G. Lovely, M. Lukasiewicz, J. Marshall, J. Mueller, C. Pritchett, U. Smith, M. Stefanko

Members tardy

S. Breedon, A. Chopra, D. Iwaoka

Members excused

E. Bonatti, P. Scelfo, N. Terrones

Members unexcused

R. Gitlin, D. Kuhr, D. Muir

II. Open Microphone

• None

III. Announcements/Reports

Appropriations Announcement — R. Desai

• Meetings are all done for the semester
• J. Batista: How is the task force working out?
  • They’ve met with all the groups that were recommended a decrease. In the process of writing reports

IV. Business of the Day

R.48 Addressing the Student Activity Fee Endowment Fund - R. Desai, A. Gitlin

• $5 out of SAFC every year go into an endowment that they had hoped would one day cover the SAFC portion of the Student Activity Fee
• Calculated that it would take twice the lifespan of the university to accomplish this — not efficient
• Resolution to cancel the $5 and pull out a bit of money each year to use as for an innovation fund (this year about $20K)
• Nothing passed with this resolution this semester is binding — must be voted on again by the next SA
• Supported by Ari Epstein and Dean Hubbell for what the resolution accomplishes and where it is going
• A. Bores: Clarification of prohibited applications in Section 8?
  • If an application could have gone through the byline process (time permitting) then they would be prohibited from applying
  • Motion to amend Strike section 8.C
  • Call to question, seconded
  • Amendment passed by a vote of 18–0−0
• G. Block: Motion to amend: In Section 9.B.1.C.C. change “more than 80%” to “less than 50%”
  • Found friendly
• U. Smith: Okay with stopping flow into the endowment but not quite comfortable with continuing the funding as it essentially sounds like another funding board
• J. Marshall: How will this be publicized? Isi t possible to add this funding to Appropriations so as to avoid another funding board?
  • E-board will be publicizing
  • Intentional separation from Appropriations
• J. Batista: In full support of the resolution as it provides funding for a completely different target audience. This will also be a way for the SA to have more of a presence on campus
• I. Harris: Rationale behind having the President, VP Finance, and VP Outreach on the committee?
  • President for oversight, Finance for overlap with Appropriations Committee, and Outreach voice ideas/opinions of the student body
• S. Breedon: Motion to amend: Include VP Diversity and Inclusion in committee
  • S. Balik: Cocnern that there are two many exec members — should leave more spots open
  • R. Desai: Discussed in Appropriations Committee and turned down as it is the job of the VP Outreach to connect the student body with the SA. Having the VP Diversity and Inclusion on the committee doesn’t mean that members of the multicultural community will necessarily be targeted
  • C. Pritchett: Feels VP Diversity and Inclusion will provide a necessary perspective
  • Call to question, seconded, dissent expressed
    • Motion withdrawn
  • G. Block: E-board positions are supposed to be doing everything (eg: outreach) — seems faulty to have them explicitly placed on a committee in order for them to do their jobs
  • R. Desai: Feels that there is an integral role for VP Outreach and VP Diversity and Inclusion as it is their job to bring opinions of the student body to the assembly. Motion to amend: Strike President and VP Finance, but keep VP Outreach and VP Diversity and Inclusion
    • Found friendly by sponsor of amendment
  • Call to question, seconded
  • Amendment passes by a vote of 15–2−1
• A. Bores: Under eligibility, why is a group ineligible if they ‘requested’ funding instead of ‘received’ funding?
  • Idea is that the same exact proposal isn’t constantly presented
• U. Smith: Motion to split the resolution and vote on the first Be It Therefore Resolved Clause and everything afterwards separately
  • G. Blocks: Feels splitting won’t provide any substance
  • J. Batista: The Innovation Fund component doesn’t make a lot of sense. Thinks it should be thought over, discussed, and voted on by the new SA
  • R. Desai: The purpose behind the resolution is to have something concrete on the table that is to be the starting point of the discussion. Friendly amendment: The final sentence of the resolution to read: “�in the Fall of 2013 before Appendix C of this resolution is added to the charter or before subsection 3 is added to the bylaws”.
  • Call to question, seconded
  • Motion fails by a vote of 5–11–0
• Motion to table until the next meeting
• Resolution 48 tabled

R.49 Amendment to Appendix B of he Student Assembly Charter — R. Desai, C. Pritchett, D. Muir

• A few slight changes due to some conflicts with the Charter, as pointed out by President Skorton
• Motion to table until the next meeting
• Resolution 49 tabled

R.54 Approving the Student Assembly Finance Commission’s Executive Board Members and Commissioners — C. Pritchett

• Call to question, seconded
• Resolution 54 passed by a vote of 17–0−0

R.53 Adding Student Trustees as Ex-Officio Members — A. Bores, G. Lovely, D. Muir

• Allows the trustee a voice in debate and the ability to make motions — does not allow for a vote
• Call to question, seconded
• Resolution 53 passed by a vote of 17–2−0

R.51 Clarifying the Purpose of Student Assembly Special Projects Funds — R. Desai, D. Muir, C. Pritchett

• Funds are to be specifically for SA initiatives — initiatives that SA members are involved in or events that align with the purpose of the SA
• A. Bores: Motion to amend: NOT to strike “but not limited to” in Rule 3
  • Found friendly
• Call to question, seconded
• Resolution 51 passed by a vote of 18–0−0

A. Gitlin adjourned the meeting at 5:45pm.

Respectfully submitted,
Chelsea Cheng