Minutes
University Assembly
Wednesday, September 24, 1997
Art Gallery, WSH

I. Call to Order

J. Kozlow called the meeting to order at 4:40 p.m.

II. Announcements

III. Approval of Minutes

The minutes of August 27, 1997 were approved

IV. Report from Chair

Leadership Meeting

J.Kozlow presented an overview of the leadership meeting of 9–23–97. In a quick summary of the events of the meeting, he stated that the Student Assembly brought three issues to the attention of the administration. These consisted of the founding of a Women’s Resource Center on campus, discussion about the Residential Communities Implementation Plan Steering Committee Report and the lack of discussion about race in the report, and Financial Aid and Government support for higher education. J. Kozlow stated the University in turn brought up the issue of Senior Week activities and the involvement of students and community members in this event and its impact on both. J. Kozlow then presented an overview of the two issues the GPSA brought to the administration. The first issue detailed the funding of the CUEMS. The concern of the GPSA was if the university would support the activity or if it would continue to be supported by the activity fees in order to keep this service active. The other issue brought up, according to J. Kozlow, was the monthly billing of parking permits. J. Kozlow moved onto the actions of the Employee Assembly. The EA addressed the issue of Project 2000 with Provost Randel due to the absence of Sr V.P. Rogers.

Annual Assemblies Fall Retreat

J. Kozlow reviewed the Annual Assemblies Fall Retreat. He stated that the Assemblies addressed three topics in a group approach. The three topics consisted of the Assemblies involvement in the budget process; citizenship at the University; and the relationship between the faculty, students, staff, and employees. In the last discussion group topic many advances were made which will be filtered back into the respective Assemblies. D. Grubb added that the budget meeting provided no tangible outcomes.

Year-end report and President Rawlings’ Response

J. Kozlow stated that President Rawling’s letter consisted of comments to Professor George Good, who served as Vice Chair of the 1996 −1997 University Assembly. J. Kozlow summarized the letter as being an appreciation for the work invested by last years UA and best wishes to this year’s UA. The letter also addressed the issue of the search for a Judicial Codes Counselor, which are positions that will be filled during the academic year. This letter was available to the UA through distribution at the beginning of the meeting.

Changes to the Monthly Meeting Schedule

J. Kozlow stated that it was M. Esposito’s intention, who was excused from this meeting, to suggest a bi-weekly meeting schedule for the UA. J. Kozlow then reviewed a proposal by D. Grubb in which the UA would meet once a month, with the option of a follow-up meeting to finish any unsettled business. This would help ensure that meetings are kept to the hour and a half, two hour range. J. Kozlow concluded the discussion by stating that M. Esposito would follow-up this plan with E- Mail messages to all the members. He stated that this issue will hopefully be brought up at next month’s meeting.

V. Constituent Assemblies’ Reports

Faculty Senate

D. Grubb stated that he was unable to attend the previous meeting, but sent a reporter in his place, who stated that nothing much occurred at this meeting. He reported that the entire meeting consisted of internal matters of organization.

Employee Assembly

D. Geohring stated that the EA has had only one meeting this year. The issue of Project 2000 was addressed. Other than that issue, she stated that no pressing issues had formulated as of yet. C. Gardener later added information dealing with certificate courses at Cornell, such as the one offered at NYU, which would allow adults to enroll in various shill development classes instead of following a degree curriculum. D. Marsh added that this program appeared to have a lack of support.

Graduate & Professional Student Assembly

C. Cole stated that R. Gary Hartz would be delivering a report at the next UA meeting. He asked if he could decline a presentation for today’s Assemblies report, due to the fact that R.G. Hartz would be addressing these issues next meeting. J. Kozlow then asked D. Marsh to speak of the events of the past GPSA meeting. D. Marsh stated that the largest issues consisted of parking and the unification of constituencies to join together. She stated the rest of the meeting consisted of “housekeeping” items.

Student Assembly

J. Kozlow gave an overview of the recent concerns of the Student Assembly. He stated that overall the main concerns consisted of a Women’s Resource Center, the present election which would be seating five new members into the Assembly, the auditing of Campus Store products produced in sweat shops, and receiving reports from the local UAW on employee issues and the progress of minorities and women. The Woman’s Resource Center Issue was also brought up in the leadership committee meetings. D. Marsh asked if there was presently a Women’s Research Center. J. Kozlow responded that the present resource center is run by volunteers and is only available to the public at selected times. This student run resource center has limited literature and funding. In response to this issue, C. Cole asked about the existence of a Men’s Resource Center. J. Kozlow stated that there is no such center, due to the fact the men are not considered a minority. He said he would take the concerns of the UA on this issue back to the SA Resolution Committee. Concern has arisen as to what needs are not being met by the university. J. Kozlow also added that there exists a need to publicize the needs of the community.

VI. Business of the Day

J. Kozlow introduced Marjorie Hodges, the Policy Program Manager for Information Technologies, onto the floor, who would be addressing the topic of the University Data Access Policy. M. Hodges gave an overview of the Data Access Policy necessity and procedures. She explained that this is a communications policy that deals with the issue of data accessibility. The committee she represents develops policies to suggest to the administration in their formation of an access policy. M. Hodges explained that the idea of a data access policy at Cornell originated in the 1980’s, but an actual policy was never put into effect. She explained that a data access policy deciphers who in the institution has access to what data. An example of this policy would be the availability of faculty’s salaries to the Cornell community. The access code would set the foundation for deciding what data is available.

M. Hodges explained that last year the committee she represents, that is non-university based, was founded to begin developing various plans for this policy based on student, faculty and employee ideals. The plan drafted by the committee is not to be the ultimate decision. The committee will develop three policy options and present these to the President and administration. To develop these plans, M. Hodges explained that her committee will be approaching all the University Assemblies of the campus, distributing questionnaires. It is expected that the members of the Assemblies will take the surveys back to their constituencies and provide an opinion representative of their group. These surveys will be returned to the Office of the Assemblies and will then be considered in the development of the policy.

She explained that the most difficult part of this process was finding the point on the continuum that would create the best solution. The continuum that exists is between total open access and restricted access necessary to perform an individual job. M. Hodges explained that Cornell has a small variance in this continuum, but there still exists many heated issues. These issues include access to grades and the accessibility to the Faculty’s salaries and benefits and how much of this information should be available to the public.

M. Hodges explained that the time prediction is extremely optimistic. There is a goal of having the presentable three options completed by the end of this month, with an optimistic plan of incorporating this plan into the university by the end of the semester. She explained that this calendar may seem extremely fast, yet plans have been formulating for over a year. M. Hodges asked for a fast response of reactions by the Assembly in order to keep the time plan on schedule. She then asked for questions from the UA.

J Kozlow inquired about the issue of the availability of course evaluations over the internet. He stated that this issue has surfaced in conversations between the Student Assembly and Dean Stein. He inquired if this issue would fall under the umbrella of the data access policy.

M. Hodges stated that an issue such as that would be too specific for the policy. The policy is intended to last into the future and they are approaching a more general outlook that can stand the test of time.

S. Caldwell inquired about the reality of data abuse and if this regulation would extend to E-mail. M. Hodges responded by stating that there always is a danger of data abuse. E-mail, she stated, is not presently regulated, nor is there any plan to monitor mail in the future. She reminded those gathered that E-mail is never confidential. She recalled the past issue of a college students’ E-mail being printed on the cover of the NY Times.

She concluded by stating that the purpose of the policy is to balance efficiency and protection. M. Hodges optimistically stated she is hoping that people will turn to her with their ideas for the data access policy. She left her E-mail address of mwh2.

VII. New Business

Ombudsman Search Committee

J. Kozlow stated that it is the responsibility of each represented Assembly to place a member on the Ombudsman Search Committee. Before reviewing the members that have volunteered, J. Kozlow reviewed the role of the Ombudsman Committee. He reviewed the members that agreed to serve for this on the Search Committee. J. Kozlow stated that he would represent the Student Assembly, S. Caldwell would represent the faculty, R. G. Hartz would be representing the GPSA, and D. Marsh would represent the Employee Assembly. This committee members were approved by acclimation.

Judicial Codes Counselor Search Committee

J. Kozlow also combined the selection of the representatives for the Judicial Codes Counselor Search Committee with the passing of the Ombusmond Committee. He reviewed the members of the group as being C. Cole(GPSA), M. Travis(SA), M. Hartill(EA) and J. Cisne(Faculty). This committee’s membership was also approved by acclamation.

Student Assembly Resolution- Elect membership of University Assembly from the Community

S. Rockwell, a representative of the Student Assembly, was welcomed to the floor to present his views on the Recommendatory Resolution to the University Assembly to Elect Membership from the Community. S. Rockell stated that the concern of the election process now is that the appointed members of the University Assembly cannot handle the workload of serving on multiple assemblies and still provide the necessary commitment to the UA. S. Rockwell insisted that the present plan is only a working document and he is presently striving to find an acceptable solution to, what he feels, is a lack of commitment to the UA. His basis of this action is to make the UA a more community based organization. He feels because the UA has so much legislative power, it should have a stronger connection to the community. S. Rockwell reviewed his plan in stating that one member from each of the Assemblies would serve on the UA, to keep the present connection between the Assemblies. However, the remaining seats would be filled through community election by the represented constituency.

J. Kozlow stated that today’s meeting is only a discussion, to aid S. Rockwell in his formulation of this new proposition. J. Kozlow questioned the election process. He stated that perhaps the election process should remain up to the individual Assembly. This would allow each Assembly the means to create an election system which could best represent their interests. He brought up the example of the Faculty Senate, who may be more interested in just appointing their representative, instead of holding direct elections.

S. Rockwell responded by stating that the reason for this change in process is to make the representation more community based. Therefor the example of the appointment of the Faculty Senate does not alter the present election process, ruining the underlying reason for the change in policy. He felt that the UA should decide the election process to access community support.

C. Cole questioned the difference in the altering of Article 2.1. S. Rockwell cleared up the fact that the definition of constituents in the phrasing meant the community as a whole, not the Assemblies. S. Rockwell reiterated that one member would be selected by the respected assembly and the rest would be chosen at large.

J. Kozlow stated that the present election of C. Cole (GPSA) is through specific fields, not through an at-large election. He claimed that this could be the reason for some of the grayness in the election process. He suggested that for the GPSA representation, one member be chosen by the present process and the remaining be chosen at-large not by classification of fields.

D. Grubb stated that the reason for the change in the election process is not uniformly spread throughout all the Assemblies. He stated that as a member of the Faculty Senate, he must only serve on occasional ad hoc committees. Therefore, the time constraint serving on duel assemblies does not seem as urgent in all Assemblies. S. Rockwell responded by referring to the Union issue of the past year. He felt for such an issue the UA should be more community based in order to fully serve the groups it represents.

D. Grubb then questioned the power of the UA. S. Rockwell responded by describing the UA’s authority regarding Cornell’s Campus Code of Conduct, the fact that the President looks to the UA for support in the appointment of the JA, and the legislative authority over the Campus Store, Transportation, etc. He then closed his discussion by leaving his e-mail, spr6.

University Assembly’s Response to the Residential Communities Implementation Plan Steering Committee Report

J. Kozlow started by defending the Office of Assemblies. Because of staff alterations the UA response was not distributed to the members. D. Grubb quickly reviewed his proposition to the members gathered. He stated that the report was extremely well written and after review he felt that there was a need to recognize the efforts of the Residential Communities Committee. J. Kozlow stated that the document to be passed is only commending the effort of the report, not necessarily stating agreement or disagreement to the report. The following motion was unanimously passed:

The University Assembly commends the Residential Communities Implementation Plan Steering Committee on their extensive and broadly based recommendations for action in the Committee’s report that are aimed at improving the sense of community in Cornell and improving the Cornell experience for all undergraduates.

Endorsement of Hockey Tournament

J. Kozlow introduced G. Brandt to the floor to discuss the upcoming Hockey Tournament. He began by providing an overview of the tournament to the UA. He stated that the tournament is to benefit the UAW Food Bank. There will be four teams involved in the tournament, each one representing either the faculty, graduate students, undergraduates, and staff. Each player in the tournament must be a member of the Cornell community. The Steering Committee is made up of representatives from each Assembly and the Faculty Senate. The process of choosing the teams will be through a lottery system, with the sign-up tables being located in Willard Straight Hall. The tentative dates are set for January 23 and January 24. G. Brandt also added that there is a no contact-no slap shot rule in effect. J. Zern cleared up the fact that he is no longer serving on the steering committee and instead M. Travis has fulfilled that position. M. Travis stated her e-mail address, in case anyone needs to contact her, as mlt9. The following motion was unanimously passed:

The University Assembly enthusiastically supports the Hockey Tournament, and especially supports the non-checking rule.

VIII. University Assembly Committee Reports

J. Kozlow reviewed the activities of the committees represented by the UA. Unfortunately, many of these committees have yet to meet. D. Geohring reported on The Board on University Health Services. She had an extreme concern on the productivity and future of The Board on University Health Services. She exclaimed that there was a lack of direction for The Board. D. Geohring reported that the committee was disorganized to the point where at the past meeting a quorum did not exist for voting procedures. She also stated that the students involved on the committee are not understanding the importance and the total picture of serving on the committee. D. Goehring stressed the need for updating the membership list to help establish organization for future meetings. She inquired if any attendance rule existed for committees. D. Goehring continued that the members are not being held responsible for their committee representation and perhaps it is time to instigate a procedure to insure attendance. She reported the changes in health care policy included hour alterations and the closing of the overnight care facility. She also stated that the Aetna Card was just voided by the center. D. Goehring questioned if a retiree could be placed on the committee to provide a stability in the history of heath care. D. Grubb stated that this option was never considered. She also suggested that a regulated meeting time should be established to help create a stable attendance record. D. Goehring continued by stating that an identification of problems and solutions is necessary.

Cole suggested that an Ad Hoc meeting should be established in order to address this issue further.

J. Kozlow claimed he would pass this responsibility onto M. Esposito.

C. Gardner asked if there was a motion to create a Ad Hoc committee to address the problems existing in the committee system. No motion was filed. D. Goehring announced that the next Heath Services meeting would be on October 14, 1997.

The Campus Store Administrative Board meets on the same day as the Student Assembly meetings, creating a scheduling conflict for the UA representative. H. Chung reviewed the Codes and Judicial Committee’s orientation on the Judicial system. He described the orientation as basically being an introduction into Cornell’s judicial policy. Throughout the orientation roles of the judicial representatives were discussed. H. Chung also added that he had been removed from the CURW committee. J. Zern stated that there would be a meeting for a planning session for the follow-up on the Assemblies Retreat on Tuesday, Sept. 30 at 1:00 on the Statler Lobby/Terrace.

IX. Adjournment

The meeting was adjourned my J. Kozlow at 6:07 p.m.

Respectfully Submitted,
Mark A. Frontera