MINUTES
Graduate & Professional Student Assembly
GPSA Discussion Meeting
Monday, October 17th, 2011
Bache Auditorium, Malott Hall
5:30–7:00 P.M.

I. Welcome & Introductions, 2 min.

E. Cortens called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. He announced Andrew Elliott would be replacing J. Pacelli as a voting member. A. Elliott introduced himself.

Thereafter, attendance was done by roll call. Voting members present: Kyle Albert, Bryan Alkemeyer, Steven An, Nicole Baran, Yan-Jiun Chen, John Ciecholewski, Evan Cortens, Andrew Elliot, Carl Ferkinhoff, Yevgeniy Izrayelit, James Keach, Alison Nash, Erik Smith, Mia Tootill, Crystal Wilson Voting members late: Marquis Hawkins, Rebecca Robbins Voting members absent: Randa Adra (excused), Michelle White

II. Approval of the Minutes from September 26, 2011, 1 min.

E. Cortens asked if there were corrections to the minutes from Sept 26, 2011. Seeing none, he asked if there was any objection to their approval. Seeing none, the minutes from September 26, 2011 were approved.

III. Reports of Officers and Committee Updates, 10 min.

1. Executive Committee (E. Cortens)

E. Cortens informed the GPSA there are still some committee vacancies. If anyone is interested, they should contact the GPSA Executive Board. The list of committees and vacancies is online at committees.cornellgpsa.com.

2. Appropriations (C. Heckman)

C. Heckman said the committee had met with all the applicants for byline funding and discussed their applications. These meetings were open to the public but no one from the public attended. C. Heckman said the committee would meet over the next two weeks to develop recommendations for funding.

3. Communications (S. An)

S. An said the committee met last week. He noted they have three people on the committee.

4. Finance Commission (M. Tootill)

M. Tootill said they’ve had 2 meetings to review applications. At the meeting last week, a lot of the funds were allocated. She noted they have about $30,000 left for the rest of the year. Since funding will likely be depleted by the end of this semester, she told people to apply for funding soon, because it may not be available later.

5. Graduate & Professional Student Programming Board (Y. Chen)

Y. Chen said the Programming Board meets on a bi-weekly basis on Thursdays at 8 p.m. She announced a mixer next Thursday at the Big Red Barn and urged people to come. She thanked the board members for a great mixer last week. She reminded members to look for event announcements on the GPSA Facebook page or to friend Cornell GPSPB.

6. Student Advocacy (R. Robbins)

R. Robbins said she would like to have more committee members. She explained they are planning a dinner in November. She asked students who were interested in being involved to email her if they had any questions.

7. Student Trustee Update (D. Evensen)

D. Evensen informed the GPSA of a “Listening Session” on Tue, Oct 18 in Mann Library, from 4–5 p.m. to answer questions about the Board and its functions. It would be attended by 8–9 members of the Board of Trustees. He urged people to attend.

IV. New Business

1. Discussion of Resolution 4, A Resolution Expressing Graduate and Professional Student Support for Cornell’s Proposal for an Engineering and Technology Campus in New York City (S. An), 15 min.

S. An spoke on the resolution he put together with D. Evensen. He said it seeks to rally support for the NYC tech campus and explained why Cornell is the best candidate. He said the resolution also addressed concerns expressed before in the form of:

• a) Cohesion, both academic and social with the Ithaca campus.
• b) This campus will not impact Cornell financially as it will primarily be funded by philanthropy, both by NYC and private donors.
• c) This campus will expand in the future to include various fields like the social sciences, biology among others.
• d) In planning all of this, the administration will continue to seek advice from the GPSA.

S. An further said since the proposal deadline was 11 days away on Oct 28, passing this resolution now would show support from the student community, and would provide the Cornell proposal greater strength and momentum.

E. Cortens asked if there were any objections to adding 2 sponsors to the resolution:

• a) Cresten Mansfeldt (GPSA Civil and Environmental Engineering Representative, former President and member of the Provost’s NYC Tech Campus Advisory Committee)
• b) Yevgeniy Israelit (GPSA Physical Sciences Representative and member of the Provost’s NYC Tech Campus Advisory Committee).

Seeing no objection, they were added and the resolution was amended. Following this, the GPSA moved into formal debate on the resolution.

K. Albert expressed concerns about funding, resources and integration. He said the UA will be talking to President Skorton about some of these issues at their next meeting. He also said some of wording of the resolution put it across like a complement to the university’s bid. R. Robbins acknowledged K. Albert’s concerns but added they needed the resolution to pass at this meeting to show student support. E. Cortens further explained since the proposal was due in 11 days, it needed to pass at this meeting to be included in the proposal submission. J. Ciecholewski agreed with the tech campus proposal and saw it as a great opportunity for Cornell. D. Evensen addressed questions about funding; since the faculty of the College of Engineering and the Department of Computing and Informational Sciences were going to be involved in the project in a big way, he wanted to know what they felt about philanthropic funding. Furthermore, D. Evensen said funding was going to be done in a strategic manner and would not create any problems for Cornell. He additionally wondered if this project would be an extension of the Ithaca campus or create a new model by going against the current mission of the university.

C. Heckman was curious about the say donors would have in campus affairs in return for their philanthropy. He also asked if these funds would be new or taken away from existing Cornell fellowships and other grants. D. Evensen clarified this by saying funds for the NYC campus would not draw money away from other sources. Planning for the NYC campus would fall within Cornell’s strategic plan. Regarding the Faculty, he said some of the faculty would be transferred from the Ithaca campus to the NYC campus to supervise administration and strategic planning. D. Evensen said there are other universities in the running, but Cornell and Stanford are the forerunners.

B. Alkemeyer offered an amendment rephrasing of lines 32–36. A number of suggestions were made to the wording of the amendment. Ultimately the amendment was proposed as follows: “WHEREAS, This interdisciplinary focus has immense potential to not only involve and further develop Cornell’s internationally acclaimed engineering, computing, and information sciences programs, but also to draw on and further develop our excellence in other physical, natural, and social sciences disciplines; and”

Seeing no further discussion on the amendment, E. Cortens put the question on the amendment to the assembly. There were 15 in favor, 0 opposed and the amendment was adopted.

Thereafter, seeing no further discussion on the amendment, E. Cortens put the question on the resolution to the assembly. There were 14 in favor, 0 opposed and the resolution passed.

2. Discussion of Resolution 5, A Resolution Reviewing the Role of Student-Elected Trustees on the Board of Trustees (E. Cortens), 10 min.

E. Cortens explained the resolution. He said the Board of Trustees were meeting this weekend and have appointed a taskforce discuss this issue. The GPSA then moved into formal debate on the resolution.

Y. Izrayelit asked if the resolution was specifically calling for an additional seat on the board for students. E. Cortens said the resolution was very general now and did not advocate a particular course of action. He asked A. Bores, undergraduate student trustee to speak on his proposal. A. Bores said an additional student member on the Board was needed to effectively represent the needs of the student body. He explained his proposal to the Board has 3 possible scenarios:

• i. Adding another student seat-increasing the total number of trustees. This would require passage by the NY State Legislature.
• ii. Replacing a current alumni board-appointed member
• iii. Adding an additional student without adding an additional vote. There would be an undergrad election every year. The candidate would be elected in sophomore year and go through the orientation process. In the candidate’s junior year, he/she would be a Designate; they could have their voice heard at meetings and reach out to the student body but they would not have an official vote. In their senior year, the candidate would be an official voting member on the Board of Trustees.

M. Walsh, a former student elected trustee, agreed and said an additional student member was needed to represent the student community. He also said he would like to see some younger students on the board. However, he had a problem with the 4th whereas clause - the issue of undergraduates being disadvantaged with elections every second year. While he understood, his experience with elections in the past had been the opposite. In the past, freshman had gathered a lot of votes from the student body. S. An asked what the phrase “willingness to work” in the resolution meant? E. Cortens responded that the GPSA would consider forming a committee to work with the Board of Trustees if asked.

D. Evensen motioned to move into informal debate. B. Alkemeyer seconded. Seeing no objections, the GPSA moved into informal debate on the resolution.

C. Mansfield asked what the chances of students in short-term graduate programs to run for the post of the student trustee were. A. Nash said students from short-term masters programs had the freedom and flexibility to choose to run for the position of trustee, as opposed to PhD students who wanted to form connections to become faculty members. So far, she had not come across any students in the masters programs being upset with the issue of representation. B. Alkemeyer said it seemed logical to have two undergraduate and one graduate student trustees, to keep it proportional in terms of numbers.

Seeing no further comments, M. Hawkins motioned to close debate and pass the resolution. K. Albert seconded the motion. Seeing no objection, E. Cortens put the question on the resolution to the Assembly. There were 15 in favor and 0 opposed. Resolution 5 was adopted.

V. Presentations by Organizations Applying for Byline Funding

1. Cornell Cinema - Mary Fessenden, 10 min.

M. Fessenden spoke about Cornell Cinema, who they were, what their mission was, their programs, the movies they screened, the broad range of topics they covered and the research opportunities they offered. She said in a town as small as Ithaca, the Cinema provided an effective source of entertainment. She said they currently had 4 graduate reps on the Cinema board and asked more graduate students to volunteer to work there, while stating its benefits. She also asked the GPSA for an increase in byline funding from $11.05 to $11.50 per student. She said an increase in funds was needed since funding from NY State and the Cornell Council for Arts (CCA) had gone down while film and maintenance costs have gone up. She stated if they were granted the increase, the Cinema would hold ticket prices constant at $4 for the next 2 years.

After this, E. Cortens opened the floor to questions. K. Albert asked how they distinguished if a student was a graduate or an undergraduate student to charge them different ticket prices. M. Fessenden said they had a CU ID card-reading system. Y. Chen raised issues of the Cinema being empty and of its space not being utilized on some occasions. She asked how the Cinema planned to better implement issues of marketing and publicity. To this, M. Fessenden said compared to Cinemapolis, in downtown Ithaca, the attendance at the Cinema was better. She added since the Cinema shows a wide range of programs they may have smaller attendance for some programs, but a larger audience for others. She said due to increasing competition from the Internet and other sources cinema in general is in a decline. A. Nash asked how much Cinema currently received from the undergraduate student activity fee. M. Fessenden said it was currently $10/student, but they were asking for a proportionate increase from the Student Assembly also.

2. Athletics - Jeff Hall and Larry Quant, 10 min.

Athletics is asking for the same amount of funding ($7) as last cycle and in return, they are providing the same level of benefits they have in the past. They listed as one of the benefits providing the Big Red Sports Pass for all graduate and professional students and discounted men’s hockey tickets up to $80. They would maintain the current ticket price for all games and work with the GPSA to increase recreational activities.

After the presentation, E. Cortens opened the floor for questions. K. Albert asked about the Big Red Sports Pass, since it was free for everyone who signed up online for it. J. Hall and L. Quant said getting students to sign up for the pass was a marketing strategy. In the future, they will have limited tickets for certain events. M. Tootill asked if they knew how many graduate vs. undergraduate students sign up for the Pass. While they didn’t have an exact number, they know about 7000–8000 students sign up for the Pass each year. They said they could send the exact numbers to E. Cortens after the meeting.

N. Baran said she thought the gym hours were not flexible for students with hectic schedules. To this, Andrea Dutcher said the fitness centers were open 6am to 11:30pm Mon-Fri, 10am to 10pm Saturdays and 11am to 12am Sundays. She said the gyms couldn’t be open at other times, as they need time for cleaning. A. Elliott asked if the gyms could be open during the holidays for grad students, as the only open gyms then were on North campus, which were not convenient for graduate students. A. Dutcher said since most gym workers were undergrads who leave campus during the holidays, they couldn’t have gyms open. Since they were out of time, E. Cortens said he would entertain further questions on this issue via email.

3. Big Red Barn — Kris Corda, 10 min.

K. Corda spoke about the Big Red Barn, the student center for graduate students. She said there were a lot more events hosted in the barn each year and they need more funds for its upkeep. She said she is asking for an additional dollar per student. They need these extra funds on account of the loss of financial support from the graduate school due to budget cuts and an increase in green procedures like composting and recycling.

C. Clark asked for the costs of composting in the barn. K. Coda explained how the cost of land-filling and composting is split. K. Albert asked if they were implementing any procedures to increase the snack service and make it more efficient. To this, K. Corda said Dining handled the serving of food in the barn and the beer sales covered a lot of the Barn’s expenses. They had not done much in the way of marketing, due to university policy restrictions, but would look into it. J. Keach asked what the previous amount for the barn was. K. Corda said it was $7 and they wanted $8 now. M. Hawkins asked if the increase was temporary or permanent. Kris Corda stated she didn’t know the future situation. Y. Izrayelit asked about an increase in TGIF hours. K. Corda said the problem was space for the storage of beer for additional hours. M. Holden asked if they could open the barn earlier. K. Corda said half an hour would not make a significant difference but they could look into it. A. Nash asked if students could reduce the barn’s costs by bringing their own cups. K. Corda said it was a health issue and they couldn’t have students bring their own cups for refilling. D. Evensen asked if beer could be served on days other than Fridays and if this along with discounts on drinks could be advertised. To this, K. Corda said university alcohol policy prohibits them from advertising the sale of alcohol. Elington Jr. asked if it would be possible to get an additional keg of beer for the barn. K. Corda said it was not, due to lack of space.

4. Slope Day - Noelle Cornelio, 10 min.

Since there were no reps present from the Slope Day group, C. Heckman explained the Slope Day Programming Board has asked for an increase from $3 to $6. He further stated while grad students attend Slope Day, they don’t pay proportionate costs. The Slope Day Programming Board had been attentive to grad students in their requests for performers, beer options or seats available on their board for graduate students so they had a say in decisions. Since the price of Slope Day increases every year, they need more funding to even keep the show the same.

Since N. Cornelio and J. Rau arrived a little late, E. Cortens asked if the meeting could be extended to 7:05 p.m. Seeing no objections, the meeting was extended.

N. Cornelio spoke about Slope Day as an event open to all students. They were now a fully independent student-funded organization, with no help from administration. Since attendance has increased over the years, the Programming Board has tried to meet student demands for better services and better performing artists. To continue to have a great show for Slope Day, they need funds. J. Rau spoke of why they needed financial support of about $6 from the GPSA. J. Rau said if they did not receive $6 from the Graduate and Professional Student Activity Fee, they would have to charge a $25 admission fee for those wishing to attend. N. Cornelio said they would be conducting a survey soon about programming choices for Slope Day.

K. Albert asked if the Slope Day Programming Board would consider the use of employees. N. Cornelio said they had rarely had employees in the past. M. Tootill asked what the numbers of undergrads vs. grads who needed EMS services on Slope Day. N. Cornelio said they didn’t have the exact numbers, undergrads have a higher number of incidents than grads. However, they provide EMS services to all students. Y. Israyelit asked what being independently funded meant and what its benefits were. J. Rau said in the past, they were helped either by the administration or the Cornell Concert Commission but were not completely student funded.

5. International Students Board (ISB) - Shirley Gu, 10 min.

S. Gu explained the role of the ISB. It is comprised of American and International students and aimed to promote culture awareness and diversity on campus. She said about 40% of graduate students on campus are international students and people attending ISB events consisted of both undergraduate and graduate students. Therefore, to better meet the needs of the international student body, they need more funding. She presented events the ISB hosted in the past like the Masquerade Ball, the Mini World Cup, the International Festival among others. She asked for an increase to $1.50 per student.

C. Ferkinhoff asked if the ISB was willing to advertise its events to the GPSA in order to increase grad attendance. S. Gu said they are working on better publicity for their events. Y. Chen asked since GPSAFC worked on GPSA funding, why didn’t student organizations go through them. S. Gu said the since ISB knew the needs of international students better, they preferred to go through the ISB.

VI. Motion to Adjourn

Seeing no further topics of discussion, A. Nash motioned to adjourn the meeting. Y. Izrayelit seconded. Seeing no opposition, E. Cortens adjourned the meeting at 7:07 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Shriya Patnaik