Student Assembly

MINUTES - DRAFT
Cornel University Student Assembly
April 26, 2007
4:45 — 6:30 P.M.
Art Gallery, Willard Straight Hall

I. Call to Order

The meeting was called to order at 4:50 p.m.

II. Roll Call

Present: Mazdak Asgary, Chris Basil, Sarah Boxer, Daniel Budish, Mark Coombs, Kate Duch, Danielle Fernandes, Adam Gay, Elan Greenberg, Vince Hartman, Ryan Lavin, Grace Leonard, Neal Nisargand, Remy Roizen, Ahmed Salem, Rammy Salem, Sarah Santana, Calvin Selth, CJ Slicklen, Kwame Thomison, Gene Weinstein

Unexcused: David Crockett, Shivaun Deena, Maddie Ehrlich, Jos� Gonzales, Roger Gousse

III. Open Microphone

S. Boxer asked if any members of the community wished to speak.

Mike Walsh came forward to speak. He said that he hopes to get his PhD in 2010 and is the outgoing Vice President of the GPSA. He announced the GPSA had their last meeting on Monday, April 23. Elections were held and Yu Yu will be the President of the GPSA next year. He said that she is fantastic. He said that the GPSA gave out a number of awards after the meeting which included a special award called the “Friend to the GPSA Award.” He announced that this award is being given to K. Thomison. M. Walsh thanked K. Thomison on behalf of the GPSA for a great year of working together to improve the Cornell Community.

S. Boxer asked if the GPSA had amended their charter to have a representative on the Slope Day Programming Board.

M. Walsh said that there will be a GPSA representative on the Slope Day Programming Board.

S. Boxer asked if the GPSA had a way of tracking how many graduate students attend Slope Day.

M. Walsh said that a survey parallel to the one that undergraduates take will be administered.

IV. Approval of the Minutes

There were no corrections to the 4/19/2007 minutes. There was a call for acclimation. It was seconded. There was no dissent. The minutes from the 4/19/2007 SA meeting were approved.

V. Announcements/Reports

’07-‘08 SA Internal Operations Meetings Reminder — R. Lavin

R. Lavin said that he sent an e-mail to all the new representatives asking them to please sign up for a thirty minute session with him. They will discuss goals, duties and responsibilities and plan for the summer.

Image Committee Report — L. Chernosky

L. Chernosky introduced himself as the co-chair of the Image Committee. He said that the purpose of the committee is to improve Cornell in every sense of the word. He said that recently, the committee has flown under the radar and he hopes to change this. The previous co-chairs of the committee conducted an in depth survey of the top 25 schools in hope of using the results to improve Cornell. The previous co-chairs also attempted unsuccessfully to meet with President Skorton and managed to begin recruiting more members. He said that he would like to continue building up membership drawing on a broad cross section of campus. The committee plans on holding a number of forums next semester to solicit ideas as to how to increase enrollment of underrepresented minorities and geographically diverse students both nationally and internationally. The committee will continue to promote no loan financial aid. He said that the committee also plans on releasing a comprehensive report similar to the one of the previous co-chairs next fall. Cornell has improved in the rankings from 14th to 12th, applications to Cornell have grown over 50% since 2001, admissions rates have been slashed from 30.5% in 2000 to approximately 25%, and there has been a slight increase in underrepresented minorities. He said that Cornell is lacking in that it does not have a concrete narrative about what Cornell stands for�a means of distinguishing itself from other top tier universities. He encouraged representatives to join the list serve and to e-mail him with any questions.

Big Red Review Update — T. Stasko

T. Stasko said that he appreciated the help of the SA representatives. He said that the Big Red Review received over 200 hundred reviews and over 400 students signed up for the site. He said that the only major change he made to the website this semester was to add 1300 cross listings of courses. He said that the primary reason that he came to the meeting was to seek continued support in expanding and promoting the website. He asked if it was possible to say in advertising that the site was endorsed by the SA.

M. Coombs said that the SA did endorse the Big Red Review. He apologized for not doing more to advertise the site. He said that SA representatives attempted to send out a campus wide e-mail discussing the site but were unable to do so. The SA will continue to work on supporting the site next year.

K. Thomison said that the consensus last time T. Stasko came to speak to the SA was that the SA supported the website. He said it would be fine for him to say that the site is endorsed by the SA in advertisments.

UA Update — K. Duch

K. Duch said that the UA had their last operational meeting Wednesday, April 25. There will be an organizational meeting next week for all new members. The main topic of conversation at the meeting was the Transportation Advisory Committee. Representatives from TCAT came to speak about the bus program. In the future free bus passes will be extended to first year students only. She said that graduate students are very unhappy with the way that things are right now and would like to take more action in the fall.

VI. Business of the Day

Class Councils Presentation — K. Tappen

K. Tappen, ‘07, introduced herself as the Senior Class President and said that she would present the four undergraduate class councils’ expenditures as well as the convocation and senior week budgets. All of the class councils spent their money wisely. She noted that they had a decrease in their byline funding allocation last year. The SA had previously recommended that the Class Councils focus on holding larger scale events. She said that the councils really acted on this recommendation over the past year holding bigger events that had higher attendance rates. She said that the councils appreciated having K. Thomison sitting in on the elections committee. She said that it worked out very well and thanking him for coming.

K. Thomison asked if K. Tappen had the attendance numbers for the Worlds Fair event.

K. Tappen said that the police officers working the event estimated the attendance to be around 2000 people. She said that the expenditure on the World’s Fair looks very high because many groups funded the event.

C. Selth commended the Class Councils for addressing the SA’s recommendation and focusing on large scale attractive events.

S. Boxer agreed with C. Selth also praising the Class Councils.

M. Coombs formally congratulated K. Tappen on doing an outstanding job this semester.

C. Selth said that there seemed to be a lot of frustration expressed by students in regards to the selection of a convocation speaker. It seems that students did not have a concrete understanding of the selection process or of the reasoning behind the need for confidentiality. He recommended that the Convocation Committee really try to expand their PR next year in explaining the selection process and the need for confidentiality to appease student frustration.

K. Tappen said that the Convocation Committee did attempt to explain the selection process this year. A column was written for the Daily Sun. She said that a lot of issues were misconstrued. E-mails are sent out to juniors in the spring explaining how they can become involved with the Convocation Committee and that all those involved with the Class Council automatically have input. She said that they will work on expanding their public relations efforts next year.

Convocation Committee Presentation — K. Tappen

K. Tappen said that the production of tickets has been a primary expense this year. Other expenses were incurred due to the purchase of supplies and copying materials used in sending offers to invited and honorarium guests. The budget she passed around is still tentative because convocation has not actually occurred yet. She said they are making an effort to hold the convocation ceremony outside so that all guests can be accommodated. Holding the event outside costs over $100,000 more that holding it inside.

Senior Week Presentation — K. Tappen

K. Tappen said that Senior there are three chairs of Senior Week who have been planning events all year long. She said that tickets went on sale about 2.5 week ago. Ticketed events cost approximately $150,000 but are covered by ticket sales. During senior week, there will be wine tours everyday, cruises on Cayuga Lake, wine and cheese events, boating on Bebe Lake and night time events on campus. The evening events will be held from 11 p.m. until 3 p.m.

K. Thomison asked about the website category which was allocated $5000 on the budget handout.

K. Tappen said that that cost referred to conrelltickets.com.

S. Boxer asked how much money is made from senior week.

K. Tappen said that no profit is made from senior week. She said that the committee contracts with a lot of different wineries and rents buses to ensure that there will be no drinking and driving. They provide a service and coordinate it so that individuals do not have to do it themselves.

WSH Student Union Board Presentation — S. Hutchinson and J. Stein

S. Hutchinson introduced herself as the Programming Director of the WSH Student Union Board. She said that this year the WSH Student Union Board received an increase in funding which they put to good use. They focused on holding large scale events and attracting larger numbers of people to the building. The most successful events this year included Movies on the Slope where V for Vendetta was played and the art gallery openings every few weeks. She said that the Board has been finding musicians to play in the browsing library during lunch hours and started an Art Club co-sponsorship program through which non-art majors can come practice art. The board was also able to participate in the AIDS Quilts Program through which they brought quilts to the Memorial Room during World AIDS Day. The event was very successful and many people came and paid their respects to AIDS victims.

J. Stein, an incoming executive board member, said that the Trivia Night that they held was very successful and that people had to be turned away due to capacity issues. He also said that Bingo Night was a success. It appears expensive because all the supplies had to be purchased. They will be able to reuse these supplies to put on more Bingo events in the future. Procrastination at the Straight is an upcoming co-sponsored. They will be having inflatables, massage therapists, video games and other fun events.

S. Boxer said that the WSH Student Union Board did a great job. She asked if any members of the e-board had gotten involved with the Master Plan Workshops. She said that there has been a lot of talk about Willard Straight Hall and asked if the organization has had any input into the discussions.

S. Hutchinson said that they try to meet with Dean Hubbell who keeps them updated on what is going. She said that she and other members of the organization try to attend the Master Plan Workshops.

R. Salem asked if the WSH Student Union Board was planning on running all of the same events next year.

S. Hutchison said that they will definitely have Movies on the Slope next year and will do another trivia event. She said that they are also trying to bring back some of the events that they have done in the past.

Talk with President Skorton

President Skorton thanked the representatives of the SA for their involvement in the Cornell community and for their willingness to facilitate discussion with student body over the past year. He also thanked all undergraduate, graduate and professional students for coming together in wake of the Virginia Tech tragedy. He said that he will be spending a great deal of time looking carefully at issues of campus security, mental health and stress. Although summer is approaching, he and other administrators will be looking for feedback from the SA and the students at large especially as more concrete concerns such as campus communication are brought forward. He again thanked the students for helping to make his transition so successful. He said that he feels more connected to the student body than he could have imagined.

K. Thomison thanked President Skorton and said that the SA has enjoyed working with him over the past year as well.

S. Boxer thanked President Skorton for taking the time to come and speak at the meeting. She asked what the protocol is at Cornell when a student has mental health concerns about another student.

President Skorton said that S. Boxer asked one of the most important questions that a student could ask. He said that when he first came to Cornell, he asked VP Murphy to develop a briefing so that he could understand the way that Cornell has addressed mental health and stress issues in the past in hopes of examining what has and has not worked for both the Ithaca and Weill campuses. He said that the briefing developed by VP Murphy involved meeting with the director of Gannett as well as other Gannett professionals and a Weill physician. He left the briefing with a great deal of admiration for the process that has already been developed but would like to work on improvement in three areas. First of all, he would like to focus on increasing the staff and emphasizing a preventative approach. Secondly, he would like to continue working on a way to be responsive of student concerns regarding the mental health of their peers and emphasized finding the sweet spot between student privacy and general public interest. He stated that through both federal regulation and the general ethics of professional practice, there is a very strong emphasis on personal privacy. Thirdly, he mentioned an attempt to further push the envelope on identifying those who might have problems without stepping over the line. President Skorton emphasized a continued commitment to mental health and stress issues.

VP Murphy said that the administration hoped that the campus wide e-mails sent out recently could trigger a conversation to the right people. The administration and health care professionals could take over from students once they have identified students they feel are having psychological problems.

President Skorton said that he would like to engage in dialogue about firearm regulation and its interaction on campus. He said that there is a huge, broad controversy on regulation in general and one that should be discussed within the Cornell community.

M. Coombs thanked President Skorton for attending the meeting. He said that the general student body does not have a clear understanding of the programs and responsibilities of the SA due in part to communication issues. For example, the SA endorses the Big Red Review website and a number of representatives felt that the administration would be apprehensive in allowing the SA to send out a bulk e-mail notifying students of the site. Additionally, the SA faced difficulty in sending out campus wide e-mail notifying students of the Spring Break Bus Program. He asked President Skorton if he had any ideas for how the SA could have better communication with the general student body.

VP Murphy said that although M. Coombs is correct in saying that the administration would be hesitant in allowing the SA to send out campus wide e-mails, she would be willing to revisit the issue. She said that she has received feedback from students stating that they do not read bulk e-mails because so many are received.

President Skorton recommended having the SA try to obtain feedback from students regarding what type of communication tool would be most effective for the SA. He suggested trying to test whether or not bulk e-mails are read by students. He has been told by many students that they do not read the e-mails that he sends out. He said he would be willing to further discuss communication mechanisms with the SA and is supportive of their efforts.

M. Coombs said that he appreciates the administrations willingness to revisit the issue and feels that e-mails seem the most effective way for the SA to communicate.

Dean Hubbell suggested looking at other campuses to see how their student governments communicate with their respective student bodies.

C. Selth thanked and commended President Skorton for his work on climate change this year. He said that he feels that President Skorton’s actions really reflect students’ efforts and goals over the past few years. He also thanked President Skorton and other members of the administration for being so collaborative on other issues as well over the past year. He asked President Skorton what he found to be the most effective method to communicate with students.

President Skorton said he feels that all communication, including office hours and forums, is valuable and that each type reaches a different sector of the student body. He said that he would like to continue in the same manner next year. He said that a lot of students responded to the columns that he wrote for the Daily Sun and that he has received a lot of feedback over the past year suggesting that communication was indeed occurring. If students stop submitting feedback or stop attending forums, then the mechanisms through which he communicates with the student body will need to be reevaluated. He said that he has agreed to meet more frequently with the Daily Sun to facilitate collaboration between it and the administration.

K. Thomison thanked President Skorton on behalf of the SA for attending the meeting.

VII. Unfinished Business

No unfinished business was discussed.

VIII. New Business

R. 42 Resolution Regarding the IDI — M. Combs, S. Deena, A. Salem, S. Santana, C. Slicklen, M. Sweeney

R. Gousse and J. White have been added as cosignatories to the resolution.

A. Salem said that the resolution supports the Intellectual Diversity Initiative (IDI). Intellectual diversity has recently become an important topic of discussion and is a type of diversity that the Cornell community ought to embrace. The IDI is a means of guaranteeing that students’ interests are served in the best possible manner. The authors of the IDI and the sponsors of the Resolution believe that students’ interests are best served in an environment that supports education as opposed to indoctrination. He said that although he and the other sponsors believe that Cornell University upholds this value for the most part, there have been instances where students have been denied the right to express their intellectual opinions. Eric Jarvis published a column in the Daily Sun detailing how he had been told not come to class because he wanted to present a view contrary to that of the professors. The sponsors of the resolution believe that this type of action and request should be unacceptable and that all students’ points of view should be embraced in the classroom. A diverse marketplace of ideas is vital for students to make the most informed decisions and to become the most effective leaders. The resolution has nothing to with politics and is not biased towards any political ideology. The resolution is solely concerned with intellectual diversity which is an issue of prime importance at Cornell.

M. Sweeney, ‘07, a sponsor of the resolution, said that intellectual diversity was the topic of President Skorton’s first column in the Daily Sun. The sponsors are encouraged by the fact that President Skorton views intellectual diversity as an important issue on campus. She emphasized that the resolution is seeking to safeguard a right and that it is not slanted towards a particular ideology.

A. Gay asked if issues surrounding intellectual diversity were truly a problem at Cornell. He asked if a large number of students were actually being indoctrinated.

M. Sweeney said that she has been stopped by freshmen who have burst into tears because they have had professors tell them that they have to change their essay topics because their professors do not agree with them. She has heard students complain that professors will not call on them because of the points of view these students wish to express. She said there are times that professors will write irrelevant comments on tests or essays. The main objective of the resolution is to help to ensure that everyone’s voices are heard and that intellectual diversity is safeguarded. She said that there is a large population of Cornell who is more hesitant in confronting professors regarding issues of intellectual diversity and that these students should have an outlet to address their concerns. A good proportion of students are uncomfortable filing bias reports because they fear that voicing their concerns will have an adverse effect on their grades.

M. Coombs said that the resolution does not accuse Cornell University of any wrong doing.

A. Gay said that implicit in the concept of the resolution is the idea that there is a problem.

C. Selth said that he is concerned because the IDI seems to be a newly refashioned Academic Bill of Rights. Although he aggress that there is no partisan language in the resolution, it does appear to be reprimanding a problem at Cornell. He asked what procedures the document sets up for students who fear confronting professors or submitting bias reports. The resolution and attached initiative appear to be more of a set of standards as opposed to a means of addressing the problem.

M. Sweeney said that the language in the resolution is not as strong as the language in the Academic Bill of Rights. The resolution is an important first step in addressing concerns regarding intellectual diversity. In the future the sponsors would like to meet with the Diversity Council and open up dialogue with the administration to determine more concrete courses of action.

C. Selth said that he is a little uncomfortable comparing intellectual diversity with the “Open Doors, Open Heart” Initiative as the wording of the resolution does.

R. Salem said that he likes the idea of the resolution. He asked how the sponsors would recommend dealing with professors who express dissatisfaction with a student’s point of view only in grades and not in comments. He asked if the resolution would open up a way for students who are unhappy with their grades to contest them on the basis of denial of intellectual diversity.

A. Salem said that R. Salem’s question was an important one. He said that as C. Selth pointed out, the resolution purports a set of principles. The resolution in and of it self is in no way binding. It is a sort of sense of body resolution indicating that the students support intellectual diversity and that some sort of action should be taken to ensure that the right is protected. He said that it is not correct to assume that students will abuse the concept embodied in this resolution. The sponsors are hoping that the resolution will encourage students to engage in open dialogue with their professors regarding concerns that they have.

S. Boxer said that she is a double humanities major and has never experienced any problems with professors at Cornell. She said that it certainly is terrible if any students feel persecuted for expressing their beliefs. She said she is wondering how the resolution serves as a safeguard. She said that she dislikes when the assembly passes resolutions that are general statements indicating how the assembly feels about issues.

M. Sweeney said that passing the resolution will help when the sponsors go to the administration to discuss addressing the issue. It defines what is meant by intellectual diversity and indicates what the student body is concerned about.

E. Greenberg said that in his three years of attending class at Cornell, he has not encountered anything close to what the sponsors are describing. However, making the assumption that there is a problem relating to intellectual diversity at the university and that the resolution will aid in addressing this problem, he asked why there are not more cosignatories that are more representative of the student body. He also asked making the same assumptions, why the resolution is not a year or longer campaign that engages individual faculty members and departments. He said that intellectual diversity is a major issue at Cornell and the resolution does not seem fit to address it.

M. Sweeney said that a member of a liberal organization has signed he resolution. The sponsors also have a petition circulating and are looking to bring the resolution before the faculty senate. She said that she there are certain stigmas that are difficult to overcome attached to anything.

E. Greenberg said that the way an initiative such as the IDI is perceived by groups on campus is very important. He questioned how successful the resolution could be if there are a number of groups on campus who view the resolution as a useless endeavor.

M. Sweeney said that groups hesitated in supporting the resolution not because they viewed it as useless but because they viewed it as conservative.

E. Greenberg asked how the perception of a conservative bias can be overcome.

M. Coombs said that he was skeptical of the Academic Bill of Rights because of its partisan association. The resolution regarding the IDI takes the principles embodied in the Academic Bill of Rights and removes the partisan bias.

E. Greenberg asked why a partisan bias is perceived by groups if the sponsors tried so hard to remove it from the resolution.

A. Salem said that just because the cosignatories are not completely representative does not mean that the resolution is biased. He noted that the facebook group has been joined by members from a wide spectrum of political affiliations. He said to look at the SA members who are sponsoring the resolution.

V. Hartman said that assumptions cannot be made based on representatives’ personal experiences. He reiterated that the SA is representative of the student body and having six SA sponsors of a resolution is a pretty big percentage. He said that he is concerned about the indoctrination approach. He asked if the IDI would require professors to teach all points of view for risk of being accused of exclusion. As an example he asked if professors of evolution would be required to teach intelligent design according to the IDI.

A. Salem said that having the IDI will allow debates to occur. He said that the “exclusion of other viewpoints” refers to the fact that teachers cannot exclude certain issues from debate. The resolution does not require them to teach their subjects addressing every view point.

V. Hartman says that he feels as if the language of the IDI calls a teacher choice not to teach a certain subject matter indoctrination. For example, according the resolution, it would seem that an evolution professor’s choice to not teach intelligent design would be indoctrination. He does not feel like this interpretation of language is good.

R. Lavin said that he feels that this is an important issue and applauded the sponsors for bringing it before the SA. He said that the number of people that this resolution affects is unimportant. If any number of people are not being allowed to express intellectually diverse opinions, a problem exists. He said that he is concerned that no course of action is provided for students. He said he agreed with certain aspects of the resolution and disagreed with other aspects. He asked if the sponsors were willing to change it.

A. Salem said that he likes the idea of the resolution but would be willing to discuss its wording. He will be certain to take the representatives concerns into consideration. He said that he believes that the appropriate course of action, after support by the SA for the initiative has been demonstrated by passing the resolution, would be to take the resolution before the David Harris and other members of the administration to begin dialogue.

N. Nisargand said that he has been in classes where professors have talked down to students expressing certain political viewpoints if the members were taking anecdotal evidence into account. He said that he thinks that what the sponsors are saying make sense. He said that he does not see why diversity of thought or discussion has been pegged as a conservative issue. However the SA has had issues in passing general resolutions that set no concrete courses of action. He suggested adding a clause creating a liaison or ad hoc committee to explore the issue further.

A. Salem said that he thought that N. Nisargand had a good suggestion.

M. Coombs said that focus of the resolution is on a universal idea. It should not be labeled as conservative or liberal.

N. Nisargand told the sponsors that it may be helpful for them to find a cosignatory more to the left to appease some of the members on the assembly.

K. Thomison mentioned that the University Diversity Group embodies a lot of these ideals.

R. 43 Resolution Regarding SA Liaisons to Byline-Funded Groups — S. Boxer and A. Gay

S. Boxer said that the resolution establishes three liaisonships to byline funded groups. The liaisons would keep the SA updated about the organizations and be an important resource if there were any internal or external concerns about the financial situation of the groups. It is completely with the bounds of the SA to be privy to these organizations. The first organization that she and A. Gay would like to see a liaison appointed to is CU Tonight. CU Tonight said that they would not have a problem adding an SA member to their e-board. The second organization is the Slope Day Programming Board. They too would have no problem adding an SA member to their e-board and their charter actually states that an SA member should be a part of their e-board. The third organization is the Collegiate Readership Program. In the past the SA VP of Finance has been a member of the e-board of this program but it is expanding and she would like to see another member of the SA take on the role. She said that it would be great to have a liaison to every group that the SA byline funds. She said that these three groups have had the most issues in the past and that it is especially important for the SA to be aware of what is going on with them.

A. Gay emphasized that the resolution is reflective of a mutual agreement between the SA and the byline funded groups. He said that he and S. Boxer talked to individuals from the organizations who understand that the SA is not in anyway seeking to impose upon the groups but rather to understand their funding processes. He said that the resolution is helping to further establish a relationship between the SA and the byline groups it funds.

S. Boxer emphasized that the SA is not imposing itself on these organizations. The organizations are looking to develop a relationship with the assembly because the SA is their funding source.

A. Gay said that the creation of these liaisonships give representatives a chance to become more involved in both the assembly and the wider community.

S. Boxer said that the resolution could not be placed on business of the day because it is a charter change. The resolution would need to be approved at the next meeting.

V. Hartman said that he likes the spirit of the resolution. He noted that Appendix B of the SA charter states that liaisons can be appointed to byline funded groups. He asked why the SA did not take advantage of this clause if they had problems in the past.

S. Boxer clarified that as the charter stands, the SA can appoint liaisons to the general body meetings of the groups that are byline funded. The resolution creates liaisons to the executive boards of these groups. There are internal matters that are resolved solely within the e-boards of these organizations. The resolution allows the SA members to become intimately acquainted with the organizations so that funding issues can be resolved in the best way possible. Issues have also arisen with these organizations being hesitant to reveal information to SA members. Placing an SA member on the executive board would alleviate this problem by establishing an ongoing relationship between the two organizations.

V. Hartman said that SA members can join these groups as executive members by participating in the groups. For example, he said that he is on the executive boards of byline funded groups. He asked why not keep the liaisons that are already established in the charter.

A. Gay said that a liaison on behalf of the assembly is concerned with the interests of the SA more so than a community member participating in the groups. These liaisons are representatives from the SA to the organizations that they fund and are looking to make sure that the funding process is carried out in the best manner possible.

S. Boxer said that it would not really be appropriate for an SA member to speak about their participation in an organization during a meeting.

K. Thomison pointed out that the liaisonships to the CU Tonight and the Slope Day Programming Board are not new. The resolution is more about reflecting the liaisonships in the charter so that the charter matches those of the funded organizations.

V. Hartman asked why these liaisonships are to be appointed by the VP of Finance as opposed to a vote by the general student assembly body.

K. Thomison said that he wrote that part of the resolution and that it does not have to be that way.

A. Gay said that such a responsibility has historically and naturally falls under the duties of the VP of Finance. By having the VP of Finance appoint the liaisonships, there is a better chance of holding the liaisons accountable and making sure that they follow through with their duties.

C. Slicklen said that he thinks that the liaisonships are a great idea. He pointed out that there was a discrepancy in the organizations named in the resolution with both the Slope Day Programming Board and the Slope Day Steering Committee being named.

S. Boxer clarified that the organization for which a liaisionship is being made is the Slope Day Programming Board. She said that she would edit the resolution to reflect this.

A. Salem said that the sponsors should consider amending the resolution so that the liaisons are elected by the general SA body. If this is done, all SA liaisons would be appointed in the same way. He believes that elections are a more fair way of selecting liaisons.

K. Thomison clarified that not all liaisons are voted on. For example, this year he appointed a few individuals as liaisons to the Slope Day Programming Board.

S. Boxer said that the leadership of the Slope Day Programming Board is very concerned about confidentiality. The organization would also like to be involved with the selection of the liaison and this is easier done when the VP of Finance has the power to appoint the liaison.

A. Salem said that he is sure that there is some fair process that can be established to take into account both the concerns of the byline funded organizations as well as the SA.

A. Gay asked if A. Salem would be more comfortable if the liaisons were appointed by the President.

A. Salem said no.

IX. Adjournment

There was a motion to adjourn. It was seconded. There was no dissent. The meeting was adjourned.