Graduate and Professional Student Assembly Minutes

Big Red Barn Greenhouse February 25, 2002 5:30–6:30 p.m.

Attendance: 2001–2002 GPSA Members 4/23 8/27 9/24 10/29 11/26 1/28 2/25 3/25 4/22 Shaffique Adam P P P P E P P Virginia Augusta P P P P P P P Pat Carr P P P P P P P Rob Chesley A A P A A A A Tyrell Haberkorn P E P P P P E Karsten Hueffer P P P P P P P Gavin Hurley P P P P P P P Bhaskar Krishnamachari A A P P E E P Joan Moriarty P P P P P P P Aaron Saathoff P P P P A P P Elisa Salas P P A P A P P Outi Salminen P E P P P P P John Sebastian P P P P P P P Jeff Siegel A A A P A A A David Toomey P P P P P P P Others Present: Phil McPheron, Bonnie Bailey, and Margaret Heavey

I. Call to Order P. Carr, president of the 2001–2002 GPSA, called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m.

II. Open Forum D. Toomey expressed concern that travelers mail doesn’t cc the sender or keep track of messages sent. He inquired if he was the only one bothered by this. He suggested contacting CIT to ask why travelers mail works this way and asking if they could change it if there is enough interest.

P. Carr asked why D. Toomey is using travelers mail?

A. Saathoff asked if D. Toomey was suggesting these be made as changes or options. He stated he wouldn’t want copies of his outgoing messages getting sent back to him, but he could see making it an option for users to decide for themselves.

E. Salas commented she gets too much mail anyway, but agreed it would be good if it were possible to allow users to set their own preferences with regards to this. She agreed she wouldn’t want it to be automatic.

P. Carr said he’d check into options. The people who wrote the original scripts are long gone, but he’ll bring it up with the appropriate people still at Cornell.

III. Approval of GPSA Minutes A. November 26, 2001 B. January 28, 2002 Approval of the minutes was tabled for discussion later in meeting. However, it was then delayed due to time constraints.

IV. Committee/Officer Reports A. Executive P. Carr announced the following committee appointments: Gavin Hurley to the General Committee of the Graduate School, David Toomey to the Committee on Alcohol, John Sebastian to the Library Council, and Virginia Augusta to the Diversity Council.

P. Carr asked if there were any objections to these committee appointments.

Members voiced no objections.

D. Toomey reported he had attended his first meeting for the Committee on Alcohol and it was primarily focused on undergraduate issues. Slope Day issues were the big topic for discussion and things such as erecting fencing around the perimeter of the hill and banning hard alcohol were some of the ideas broached.

P. Carr summarized for COR members that he was approached with a request to have the GPSA give money towards senior week. In exchange for giving money, grads would then be able to participate in senior week activities such as attending wine tours, dinner cruises on the lake, brewery trips, etc.

V. Augusta stated she saw no connection between senior week and the GPSA.

Other members concurred.

P. Carr asked if the GPSA wanted him to report back that they are not interested in donating money.

Members voiced resounding agreement.

B. Communications This topic was tabled for discussion later in meeting. However, it was not discussed due to time constraints.

C. Others This topic was tabled for discussion later in meeting. However, it was not discussed due to time constraints.

V. Business of the Day A. GPSA reorganization P. Carr distributed two handouts related to reorganization. The first was one version of a proposed resolution and the second offered an amendment to part of the proposed resolution. He summarized that reorganization would serve two purposes. First, it would simplify the currently used cluster system. The proposed reorganization would be modeled on the system used by the graduate school and categorize the fields by area. The current cluster system is much more random. The second purpose would be to have a balanced body based on perspective rather than numbers. He explained that D. Toomey had disagreed and thus this amendment was being introduced as an alternative. P. Carr noted that of the 20 fields listed in physical sciences, only 4 were not engineering.

J. Moriarty reported the approximate population of graduate students in each area: � Humanities has 439 grads of which 359 are PhD’s � Social Sciences has 1337 grads of which 604 are PhD’s � Biological sciences has 909 grads of which 764 are PhD’s � Physical Sciences has 1431 grads of which 1018 are PhD’s The professional school numbers are: � Management has 550 grads � Law has 560 � Vet has 300

A. Saathoff questioned how the grad school divides fields; ex: ABEN is in both Biological and Physical Sciences.

P. Carr replied the Grad school doesn’t recognize colleges, only fields.

E. Salas noted the amendment is compromised of 13 grads plus 3 professional students, which equals 16 total representatives. This would increase the total GPSA membership from 15 to 16. She also asked for the proportion of engineers in Physical Sciences.

J. Moriarty responded engineers represent about 1000 of those in Physical Science; a little fewer than 600 of those are PhD’s.

G. Hurley suggested the amendment should allow areas to determine their GPSA make-up.

A. Saathoff stated that Physical Sciences should specify one seat on the GPSA has to be filled by an engineer.

J. Sebastian questioned if this was a move toward a population-based system?

D. Toomey said each area roughly gets a seat for every 500 people or so.

J. Moriarty stated humanities would be over-represented based on simple numbers. However, she supported P. Carr’s idea, which gave representation based on experience.

K. Hueffer added he liked areas as defined. He liked the amendment and thought it was fair for everyone.

S. Adam commented it was a compromise between numerical and population based representation.

A. Saathoff reminded members that even with the amendment humanities is still over represented if one does the ratios. Their one rep. would represent 219.5 people. The next closest ratio is vet at 300. He favored trying to strike a balance, even with the modified system.

J. Moriarty said she’d like to argue against taking one seat away from the humanists. This would not be best as they’re often overlooked in money and power situations.

E. Salas inquired about the difference in benefits between physical sciences and engineering?

S. Adam replied engineers make more money in the job market.

B. Krishnamachari said if one was going to give representation, it ought to be because the population is greater, not because an area makes less money.

E. Salas said she was in favor of humanities getting two seats. She also agreed with specifying that physical sciences reserve one seat for an engineering representative.

A. Saathoff noted that, philosophically speaking; the amendment is something of a balance. He didn’t think going to either extreme would be beneficial.

A member disagreed with the amendment, stating this trend is dangerous; even though humanities is small it should hold fair representation.

G. Hurley stated he didn’t agree with numbers argument. In his experience the GPSA works by consensus. He would be perfectly happy to “over represent” the humanities. He agreed with the amendment, commenting he represents the engineering experience.

J. Sebastian questioned the logic in a population-based system.

V. Augusta noted that question was a good example of the different thought processes between humanists and those in the sciences.

B. Krishnamachari noted the GPSA usually does work with consensus; however there might be situations that arise where the numbers do matter.

D. Toomey said he agreed the GPSA works with consensus. There is diversity within fields themselves and different points of view are provided.

P. Carr questioned if anyone else had anything to say that’s not redundant?

G. Hurley pointed out if one compared the amendment to the current cluster system that basically everyone is staying as is with one extra member added to social sciences.

D. Toomey called to question.

P. Carr announced the GPSA was voting on the amendment to the resolution. It would read:

Amendment to Resolution 5: Amendment of GPSA Membership

Whereas, Resolution 5 does not balance representation proportional to student population;

Be It Therefore Resolved, To amend the second resolved clause to read:

and three (3) from each of the four areas as deemed by the Graduate School: Physical Sciences, Biological Sciences, Social Sciences, and Humanities. and from the areas as deemed by the Graduate School two (2) from Humanities, three (3) from Biological Sciences, four (4) from Physical Sciences, and four (4) from Social Sciences.

The amendment passed 6–4−1.

E. Salas proposed taking one of the seats from social sciences and adding it to the humanities.

K. Hueffer agreed, saying he thought this amendment solved the problem of more fairly representing humanities. He stated all groups would be represented and suggested they then leave it as is.

J. Moriarty said she was in favor of E. Salas’ proposal. As a social sciences representative she stated she was comfortable with giving Humanities another seat.

V. Augusta questioned why physical science was getting four representatives instead of three?

A. Saathoff suggested dividing physical sciences, to specify at least one seat be designated for engineering and one for non-engineering.

E. Salas pointed out that, for those concerned with numbers, science representation still outweighed non-sciences.

D. Toomey stated he thought there was a lot of diversity within social sciences.

P. Carr motioned to incorporate these suggested amendments. It would read:

Amendment to Resolution 5: Amendment of GPSA Membership

Whereas, Resolution 5 does not balance representation proportional to student population;

Be It Therefore Resolved, To amend the second resolved clause to read:

and three (3) from each of the four areas as deemed by the Graduate School: Physical Sciences, Biological Sciences, Social Sciences, and Humanities. and from the areas as deemed by the Graduate School three (3) from Humanities, three (3) from Biological Sciences, four (4) from Physical Sciences, and three (3) from Social Sciences.

A vote on this amendment passed by 4–3.

P. Carr stated they would now hold a discussion on the full Charter amendment.

E. Salas noted the total number of representatives needed to be changed from 15 to 16.

A. Saathoff repeated amending section 4.1 to specify the physical sciences breakdown.

B. Krishnamachari supported adding language to the first resolved clause to specify that at least one of physical sciences seats shall be from engineering and at least one shall be from a non-engineering field.

V. Augusta mentioned for the sheer purpose of fulfilling this requirement, the four best, most experienced and interested people should be elected. What if there are four enthusiastic engineering members and no interested non-engineering students in a given year?

G. Hurley disagreed. He wondered if it would be clear in the area of physical sciences what fields are engineering?

A member called to question.

P. Carr asked all those in favor of the proposed changes to amending 4.1? It would read:

Be It Further Resolved, To amend Article 4.1:

The Graduate and Professional Council of Representatives may allocate not more than one of its three at-large seats to any one constituent group(s) of students which it determines to be underrepresented. Should it be determined to allocate a seat or seats to specifed groups of students, such allocation shall be in accordance with procedures promulgated by the GPSA and contained in its procedures and/or bylaws. At least one of the Physical Sciences seats shall be from an engineering field and at least one shall be from a non-engineering field.

This passed by a vote of 9–0.

A. Saathoff noted the time was 6:30 p.m.

P. Carr asked members if there were any objections to voting on R.5 tonight?

A. Saathoff said he wasn’t sure how he would like to vote tonight. He said he’d like more time to consider this.

P. Carr questioned all in favor of voting now?

The motion failed by a vote of 5–6.

Members continued discussing the resolution.

D. Toomey suggested tabling this until the next meeting.

A. Saathoff stated this changes how the future GPSA operates and he felt reluctance to hastily changing it. He was in favor of postponing the decision.

G. Hurley said he was in favor of moving forward now.

V. Augusta suggested sending tonight’s product to COR. She questioned if there was a sense from COR last time on what they preferred?

O. Salminen suggested sending a message out to COR.

S. Adam recognized the merit of taking this to COR, but also acknowledged they’ve spent the whole meeting discussing this. He reminded members that COR members don’t vote. Did members feel that taking this back to COR would bring out new issues the GPSA should factor into deliberation, or was it probable that issues were already brought out at COR and/or GPSA members have probably covered potential issues in this discussion tonight? It would be a shame to spend another entire meeting discussing the very same issues.

V. Augusta asked to re-vote on whether to vote on the resolution.

P. Carr questioned all those in favor of tabling the discussion.

A vote to table the discussion failed 4–7.

P. Carr questioned if members wanted to vote on whether to vote on the resolution.

This passed by a vote of 7–3.

P. Carr said voting on R.5 would need to pass by 2/3 of seated membership because it’s a Charter amendment.

Resolution 5 passed as amended. It reads:

R.5 Resolution Amending GPSA Membership

Whereas, The current system selecting a GPSA from the Council of Representatives is cumbersome and does not guarantee a balanced body;

Be It Therefore Resolved, To amend the Article 4 preamble of the charter to read:

Graduate and professional students of Cornell University shall create a Graduate and Professional Council of Representatives, comprised of comprising representatives from each professional school and graduate field. The Graduate and Professional Council of Representatives shall elect and empower an operative body, the GPSA, to ensure effective and efficient operations. The GPSA shall consist of fifteen (15) sixteen (16) graduate and professional school students, of whom one (1) shall be from each of the professional schools (Law, Vet, JGSM), three (3) shall be at-large, and the remaining nine shall be distributed by graduate field clusters as follows: � One (1) from the Division of Biological Sciences and the Graduate Veterinary fields. � One (1) from Biological Sciences in Agriculture. � One (1) from Social Sciences in Agriculture. � One (1) from Architecture, Art, and Planning and Social Sciences in Arts and Sciences. � One (1) from Humanities in Arts and Sciences. � One (1) from Physical Sciences in Arts and Sciences. � Two (2) from Engineering. � One (1) from Human Ecology, Industrial Labor Relations, Hotel Administration, � Law, and Management.

and from the areas as defined by the Graduate School: three (3) from Humanities, three (3) from Biological Sciences, four (4) from Physical Sciences, and three (3) from Social Sciences.

and

Be It Further Resolved, To amend Article 4.1:

The Graduate and Professional Council of Representatives may allocate not more than one of its three at-large seats to any one constituent group(s) of students which it determines to be underrepresented. Should it be determined to allocate a seat or seats to specifed groups of students, such allocation shall be in accordance with procedures promulgated by the GPSA and contained in its procedures and/or bylaws. At least one of the Physical Sciences seats shall be from an engineering field and at least one shall be from a non-engineering field.

and

Be It Further Resolved, To strike “Representatives for the at-large seats are elected by the entire Council of Representatives, after the designated seats are filled,” and “seated” from Article 4.4 such that it reads:

The voting members of the GPSA will be elected in the spring, by and from the seated Council of Representatives prior to the first week in May. Representatives nominate and vote by caucus for the voting GPSA member(s) who represents their field cluster/professional school, as described above (Article 4). Representatives for the at-large seats are elected by the entire Council of Representatives, after the designated seats are filled. All voting GPSA members are elected to a one-year term, with no limit on the number of terms they may serve. Voting GPSA seats are not transferable. If there is no candidate either elected or appointed pursuant to the above procedure, that seat is thrown open as “at-large,” and a representative is elected by the Council of Representatives. The seat reverts to its original designation at the next regular election.

and resolved to strike Article 4.4a:

Twelve (12) representatives are elected to the Graduate and Professional Student Assembly designated seats as stated in Article 4. The elected twelve (12) Graduate and Professional Student Assembly members are to announce their affiliations and interests to the Council of Representatives. By nomination and/or self nomination for the at-large seats, the Council of Representatives members may identify groups/interests that are not adequately represented by those elected to the designated seats. The candidates running for the at-large seats and receiving the most votes shall be seated on the Graduate and Professional Student Assembly. Any seat(s) not identified to represent an under represented group/interest shall represent the graduate/professional students at-large.

and

Be It Further Resolved, To change “cluster” or “field cluster” everywhere throughout to “area.”

Respectfully submitted,

Patrick Carr Joan Moriarty GPSA President GPSA Secretary

David Toomey GPSA Representative Arts and Sciences (Humanities)

Approved as amended by the Graduate and Professional Student Assembly by a vote of 10–1 on 02/25/02.

B. Endowment V. Augusta reported she contacted an account representative from the controller’s office regarding the $100,000.00 and was told the money is currently in an appropriations account and cannot be invested. The controller’s office is looking into this further; it may be why money hasn’t been invested in the past.

P. McPheron told members that the money is probably earning interest in some account, though it may not be getting posted to the GPSA account as Cornell does not just let money sit around.

VI. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 6:48 p.m.

Submitted,

Margaret Heavey Office of the Assemblies