Student Assembly

MINUTES
Cornell University Student Assembly
September 18, 2008
4:45 — 6:30 P.M.
163 Day Hall

I. Call to Order

R. Lavin called the meeting to order at 4:45PM

II. Roll Call

Representatives V. Andrews, C. Basil, A. Craig, L. DeLencquesaing, E. Diakow, L. Engelmeyer, M. Heinz, N. Junewicz, R. Latella, R. Lavin, G. Mezey, T. Miller, B. Smith were all present.

Liaisons O. Sandoval, N. Baker, E. Shannon, N. Diaz, S. Tata, M. McDermott were all present.

Representative R. Stein had an unexcused absence.

Representative R. Salem had an excused absence and made it to the later portion of the meeting.

III. Approval of the Minutes — September 4, 2008

There was a call for acclamation, it was seconded, and the minutes were approved.

IV. Open Microphone

R. Lavin invited any undergraduate student who wished to talk as they are all ex-facio members of the Student Assembly

Verin, class of 2009 asked about the issue involved in using the name Cornell for the Cornell review. R. Lavin responded that it was going to be introduced as new business this meeting, and unfinished business next week.

R. Lavin noted that there is a meeting schedule attached with all of the official venues for the rest of the year.

A. Craig motioned to move Resolution 8 to Business of the Day. It was seconded without dissent.

V. Announcements/Reports

Gorge Safety Report — Fire Chief Brian Wilbur and City Clerk Julie Holcomb

R. Lavin updated that a few SA representatives along with some campus representatives have met to discuss gorge safety. They discussed what they could do as students and at the city level. Julie Holcomb sits on communication sub-committee of the Gorge Safety task force. Spoke of nature of enforcement and Fire Chief Brian Wilbur is the committee chair. At the meeting they talked about alternatives and incentives for students to not expose themselves to dangerous situations in the gorges as well as the educational aspect that needed to be taken up to educate about the gorge culture. R. Lavin thanked them for coming and asked to briefly explain the history of the gorge committee.

J. Holcomb gave a brief history. After they lost students in gorges, they wanted to prevent it from happening again. Council made up of people from all around, especially here. They wanted to let out what the issue was and how to keep people safe. They broke into two sub-committees. One is made up of the police officers, firefighters, EMS people, and the other committee is the communications subcommittee. Their goal is educational campaigns and spreading the word. There were recently very detailed maps showing where there are lots of obstacles to shorten response time, etc. The maps are phenomenal and distributed to all people around the county. The communications sub-committee worked with the Ithaca Journal and the Ithaca Times to try to have them be responsible journalists for media attention and asked them to not putting pictures of the dangerous gorges in the papers advertising people to go here. That was a great success.

Yet, still we lost another student this summer and were devastated. They came up with idea of reaching out to the students AT Cornell. The gorges make Ithaca unique but are EXTREMELY dangerous and want to know the best way to get the word out. The committee needs YOUR suggestions because their media coverage was a bit off the mark. Media has changed significantly in the past five years. There aren’t all the local television stations, and a lot of radio is now satellite based, not local. They’re here for help from the students. As R. Lavin mentioned, they brainstormed to find alternatives to swimming in gorges for how to educate and how to enforce. They have put up fences, signs, and memorials but none of these are effective. They need the student help, which is why they’re here.

Fire Chief B. Wilbur added information to help define the scope of the issue. They do about 12 gorge operations a year. Some operations are rescuing people who are injured, some are recovery of bodies. Recoveries are devastating. They’re all struck by the immense waste that the death represents, and the whole future that was in front of them that is gone. They also recognize risk it creates for their own people. The fire department takes the lead to get people into the gorge. Any time they do that is a risk. Fortunately they haven’t lost public safety people in a long time, but it has happened in the past. Gorge rescue operation can cost between $1,200 all the way up to $8,000 or even $10,000 dollars. The time cost is anywhere from 4–6 hours to successfully complete. A lot of environment surrounding the gorge issue. They don’t want ANY kind of loss for community or safety people. The board of fire commissioners is currently working on an ordinance to charge costs to person involved in the gorge issue. This is becoming a bigger issue for the community, and they hope it becomes a bigger issue for the students because they have the best opportunity to help. Thank you.

R. Lavin opened the floor to questions, comments, and discussion. At Friday’s meeting, the discussion revolved around the educational aspect, danger and safety, as well as alternatives to these dangerous places.

T. Miller asked what ordinances are in violation when people are in the gorges. J. Holcomb responded that there is a law chapter entitled “Peace and Good Order”. It basically states that swimming anywhere in the natural waters in the city of Ithaca is prohibited unless it has been designated swimming area with lifeguards on duty.

Vice-President Basil said that he heard some discussion about filling in a supposed hole which was involved in the incident over the summer, but there was a problem with that because it was some sort of nature preserve which is environmentally protected. He asked her to elaborate on that. J. Holcomb replied that this was an idea heard from firefighters first. They wanted to know if they can take danger away from people since they weren’t effectively stopping people from getting into dangerous situations. They wanted to know if they could fill one gorge section behind McGraw (known as Fiji) as it is a particularly dangerous area that there are currents which can drag and place your body underneath a rock ledge where you cannot escape. There was some discussion about either using dynamite to break up the rock ledge or filling the area in with boulders to modify the current, the draw and the natural trap. They are not overly optimistic about that option because of the federal and state regulations about natural waterways. The department of environmental conservation as well as a number of federal and state agencies would have to be involved and aren’t overly optimistic about that as an option to be actively considered. They have asked that if people have engineering skills or hydrological skills to take on as a class project or something to see if the IDEA is physically possible to do something. They’re unsure. Basil asked if she was saying that if Cornell takes the initiative, then city wouldn’t be opposed to the idea. J. Holcomb said that while she can’t speak for the entire city, just their personal opinions. Ithaca is a community that prides itself on being environmentally friendly. While they are definitely interested in pursuing it as from safety aspect, the public and community would have to get involved. It could definitely be rather controversial.

V. Andrews said they mentioned there aren’t any listed safe swimming areas. He wanted to know if it was possible to create one. J. Holcomb said that is a great idea and came up at their meeting Friday. They want to now maybe identify safer areas as well as the dangerous ones. It is something they’re looking into.

R. Lavin wanted a comment about the enforcement issue. The gorge is state property, area around is Cornell. What department in terms of officers and enforcement does the burden lie on and should there be enforcement? There’s not much of a sense OF enforcement. A “scare tactic” isn’t significant.

Fire Chief B. Wilbur responded that this area is something they explored as a part of the gorge task force. They had legal council from university and city. The issue of ownership and who’s responsible were all issues on table. They have no definitive answers. Either agency could write a violation if necessary because of the way enforcement mechanism works. In case of legislation being proposed, it would become an almost de facto event. Fact that they were there would automatically incur that charge if the cost/recovery mechanism was put in place.

R. Lavin asked to clarify. Perhaps if rescue effort would happen, that would apply. But a majority of students would be interested in what happens before a recovery effort is needed. Is there a possibility of some feeling of enforcement? Fire Chief B. Wilbur replied that there have been lots of calls of people reporting swimmers in the gorge since the last death. The police were involved, went down, and moved people out but it was done on an ad-hoc basis. No department has the resources needed to fully police the area. They can’t get where they need to be in time to get the people out. The worst part is if they’re on their way in, and they’re likely to get violation, the people might leave by a riskier route. There was discussion about what judicial venue is most effective, JA or city court. Additional discussions are going on. He felt as if it would be an appropriate place to have it go on between the SA and the gorge committee groups. J. Holcomb added that the penalty for swimming in non-designated swimming area is anywhere from a 100 to 250 dollar fine or 25 hours of community service to 15 days in jail depending on whatever activities were involved in addition to it. If enforcement does occur, all the decisions will be made at city court level.

Vice-President Mezey asked the Chief if the proposed legislation is for both rescue AND recovery. Fire Chief B. Wilbur said that they haven’t resolved that yet. It is distasteful to think of charging for recovery from people’s estate or such. From a practical perspective, it seems as if laws on the books would apply equally. They’re exploring the difference between rescue and discovery. State parks have significant level of enforcement already.

B. Smith asked if it has been considered to do a gorge safety education program in the same manner of the alcohol education program which every an incoming student at Cornell has to take. J. Holcomb said that it hadn’t been until last Friday. They thought it was a terrific idea, especially if they can get in through orientation. B. Smith added that it could also show safer areas and more dangerous ones. J. Holcomb responded that it is great idea which they are hoping to pursue. She does believe that the deputy chief of Cornell police is pursuing a change to the judicial code so that if you get caught in gorges, you could face academic penalties or however that system works. They’re excited about that idea because sometimes money isn’t an issue with certain people. When it impacts student record/academic achievement, it could have more punch. Fire Chief B. Wilbur added that they would be very happy to collaborate with whomever they could on campus. R. Lavin put in that there is a resolution to create ad-hoc safety committee and they would do that.

L. Engelmeyer asked about the feasibility of a life guard system in any of the gorges. J. Holcomb responded that nothing is ABSOLUTELY out of the question, but that idea is difficult because it’s something for the city budget. One alternative they considered was if it was possible to find a shuttle to the city and state parks that are beautiful and places where you can swim. They’re looking into that too. They’re looking for student feedback to see if that’s something they want to do. These are all the kinds of ideas they’re excited to hear about.

O. Sandoval thought those actions were appropriate by using education to help educate the Cornell population on how dangerous gorges are. Each new person gets a gorges booklet. However, you get a whole bag full of orientation materials, so some people may just bypass it. Maybe we could think about doing a scare factor is to talk about the deaths. It is a serious issue, we had student who died recently. He thinks we should put new publications of how serious the deaths are out, but not too much to offend people. J. Holcomb responded that they had talked about doing public service announcements about that. It seemed to be something to give you that sucker punch to let you know it is a big deal. They have not pursued that yet, but it is on their radar screen. The goal isn’t scare people, they just want people to use the gorges responsibly. She thanked him.

Dean Hubbel agreed with everything that had been said. He would hope to amplify the discussion to include edges of gorges. A few students fall in every year. It often has to do with alcohol consumption. He thinks we should look at the gorges not only as a water hazard but also by the edges of the gorge around campus. The fences around are not very substantial. He hopes the initiative to include concern for that aspect of the gorge.

City council member Svante Myrick wanted to let people know that he is available and accessible to talk about this very serious problem from the city perspective.

T. Miller thanked J. Holcomb and the Chief for their work. He wanted to know what time frame were they looking at and when will they be able to get full details about which gorges are the best or most dangerous J. Holcomb said that their goal is to get this done as soon as possible. They want to work on it during the winter months so something will be in place when nice weather hits in the spring. They’re really energized with these new ideas and people as well as new brochures, maps, and signs to point out dangerous areas. They do also have problems in winter in closed trails. During their last significant winter rescue, they lost a police officer. They’re looking to start as soon as possible in order to get the word out.

M McDermott wanted to point out the generational issue of the fact that all the Cornell alumni ask about the gorges and it is not just an issue within the community, but abroad as well. J. Holcomb said that even sometimes it’s the parents who are the problem. That is an excellent point. Another thing is someone admitted to cliff-jumping with their Orientation Leader to let them know that while it’s been fun, they are responsible for new generation and no one wants them to pass on these dangerous behaviors.

R. Lavin thanked J. Holcomb and Fire Chief B. Wilbur for coming. He added that after Resolution 8, they will have a committee to work with. Thoughts for the committee will include: identifying safe swimming areas, best ways of enforcement, involving the campus code, free shuttles to state parks, outdoor swimming area at Cornell, more serious tones in literature and pr, as well as outreach.

Announcement CJ Slicklen

CJ Slicklen is this year’s convocation chair. He is a senior in the hotel school. Convocation is funded through the class councils. He wanted to update the SA to let them know that the process started for selecting the 2009 convocation speaker. Any recommendations are welcome. He asked if there were questions.

R. Lavin asked who is on the convocation committee. Slicklen responded that the 2009 class council, juniors from last year on the student assembly and this year’s seniors from the student assembly, as well as people added by Dean Hubbell for excellent achievements. All together there are about 32 people on the committee. They’re going through the list-making process. If there are any additional questions, feel free to send him an email.

B. Smith with an Announcement

SAFC budget hearings are going on now, and she recommended that all new students go to see how the process works. It is taking place in the International Room of Willard Straight Hall.

Latella with an Announcment

He wanted to announce that anyone interested in Ivy Council should let him know. He would like the application back by October.

VI. Business of the Day

Slope Day Programming Board Charter Changes — Mandy Hjellming

Representatives from the Slope Day Programming board, Mandy and Tyler were there to let them know about changes to the charter. She started with article one, letting the SA know that in the last sentence “GPSA” was added which will be seen throughout the document since they are now byline funded by GPSA. The second change was in section 1, article 2, and is all formatting. Section 2 added “and GPSA” again and section 3 is formatting changes. Article 3, section 1 they added GPSA again. In article 4, section 2 they added the fact that 2 members of SA will be designated as official liaisons. They added that 1 member shall be full member of the board. The second is the vice-president of finance as an ex-officio member. This was added for clarification. Article 5 added Greek liaison and SOS chair with the descriptions further on. This was added because of the involvement of the Greek organizations with Slope Day. The SOS chairs works with Katharine Holmes. These were all things that were already done but are now official. Article 5 section 2 has a paragraph which was just moved, not added. On page 3, about halfway down, they changed “inclusive alternative activities for students” to “supplemental activities” because they want it to be a part of slope day not a separate thing.

Vice-President Basil asked if there was a particular reason why non-alcoholic was taken out. M. Hjellming responded that it was because SlopeFest used to be held on a different place which was not allowed to have alcohol at all, and now that it is on Ho Plaza there is no way to regulate this.

M. Hjellming added that there needed to be a report to both the SA and GPSA about what they were doing. Sections 4 and 5 all added about crucial positions needed for backstage management with Slope Day. Articles 6 and 7 just have the addition of GPSA. Article 8 added that the Slope Day Programming Board would work closely with the Dean of Students’ Office to annually allocate the event costs among the Slope Day Programming Board Budget and the Dean of Students’ budget. That was because of their budget increase and the part of the proposal was to take on costs.

R. Lavin asked then if there were any questions about any of the changes. Vice-President Basil motioned to call to question. It was seconded without dissent and unanimously passed with a vote of 13–0−0.

R. Lavin asked if there was an update on numbers? M. Hjellming responded that the raw data is waiting to be analyzed. The statistics are being worked on. They will have specific data to present but it depends on how long it takes. It could be a couple of weeks.

Resolution 9, Student Assembly Budget- Greg Mezey

Vice-President Mezey decided it was a good idea to put together a budget for the year. Typically, there hasn’t been a formalized budget in the past. They want to have more transparency on what they’re spending and the how money’s being allocated. It also provides a level of accountability. It is a rough outline so they have something to work from in order to spend money on things like ads in the Daily Sun as well as other things that cost is incurred for. He is proposing that appropriations committee along with himself work with committee chairs to put together a detailed budget and come with a finalized budget in greater detail. Right now it is just a skeleton budget to work from to utilize funds. He can go through back side of the paper. DUO codes are department use only codes. General is office and administrative costs for the assembly as a whole. Appeal is there and they set a bit of money aside in case an appeal comes up. Ivy Council is based on travel information, cost per delegate, and past information. There wasn’t a lot of good data to go off of, so it is just round numbers as of now. Appropriations committee is for what they need. This includes copying, and when looking, if they need to revisit any of the byline funded organizations, that’s where that amount comes from. Each committee was assigned a set allocation based on their needs. This will be broken down further. Communications is a big chunk. This includes Sun ads and other types of promotions and advertising materials. He worked with Nikki to develop costs. Sun ads were based on doing 1/week or every other week which is why there is a significant chunk there. More committees are also on the list. Fall election costs are likely to change. 10,000 of the 12,000 is going to come out and it can go toward special projects that as an assembly we feel is worthy of our support. Typically they paid a large chunk per student who voted in an election. Ari created a system to house this internally. A lot of that cost will be re-allocated, but wanted to budget it just in case the system doesn’t work. SAFC has been, in years past, provided with an operating budget. A lot goes to copying and food. He is talking with them to see if that’s the best use of funds. The number is likely to change. Student Clerk salaries is there because they pay clerks to do minutes and the like. Presently they get about $38,000 from the student activity fee. The university reserves a specific percentage in case they go over. Also, they had an opening balance of $8,000. This is just a working budget until they can get more specifics.

R. Lavin opened up the speaker’s list with the point of information that this is a working budget and while last year there wasn’t even a working budget. They’re making steps to be more structured.

V. Andrews asked how often they will be seeing the budgets. Vice-President Mezey responded that he has another resolution for later. He hopes that at the beginning of each fall semester a budget will be submitted by the VP of finance, and then a mid-term report will be provided at the beginning of the spring semester. As better communication is achieved, he hopes to present a short weekly budget update. O. Sandoval inquired as to what goes into women’s issues. Vice-President Mezey responded that it is a committee. Each committee cost is based on what they did in the past had been assigned specific amounts. L. DeLencquesaing asked what was the previous communications budget. Vice-President Mezey responded that it was 168 dollars, he thinks. L. DeLencquesaing inquired as to how it jumped. Vice-President Mezey answered that it was because it was taken out of the general. Now the general is not including that. L. DeLencquesaing asked if they don’t know how much was spent at all. Vice-President Mezey got on the phone with the business manager. She is going to get past spending from the Sun. L DeLencquesaing said that maybe we can discuss what we want to do with publicity. Possible speaking rather than ads. R. Lavin recommended that the communications committee discuss that. N. Junewicz said that they thought Sun ads were the best way to get the word out. One of the goals for this year is to get more people at meetings. They could put the agenda as an ad. It is a good way to ensure sun coverage. That’s why they wanted so much for sun ads. Vice-President Mezey added that Sun ads aren’t cheap. They’re about 80 dollars for an eighth of a page. It is a costly thing. R. Lavin said that yes, it is a PR strategy change. L. DeLencquesaing asked when this will be discussed. Do they have to go to Communications Committee to vote? How do we know? R. Lavin put in that the $5000 isn’t from nowhere. It came from somewhere. It is structurally different. They can always change the budget. It is a rolling document and this is a starting point. It is great that these good points are being brought up. You can go to Communications Committee and it can be amended afterwards. They just wanted to get things rolling. Office wasn’t willing to do things without a preliminary budget. Vice-President Mezey added that he wants each committee to say how they will be spending their money and report to be reviewed so that you can where the money is going. It is a lot of work for the committee chairs to make sure the money is spent appropriately. N. Kumar asked if it was possible to put on website. R. Lavin added that the resolution does go on website. Vice-President Basil just wanted to emphasize that this is not done. He then motioned to call to question. It was seconded without dissent. After a roll call vote of 12–0−2, Resolution 9 passed.

R.8 Creation of an ad-hoc Gorge Safety Committee — Asa Craig

A. Craig said they want to creat a committee to work in conjunction with city committee, university officials and community members. They need to have a lot of student minds together on one committee. They can do outside of SA meetings. They sent out to chief for university and go from there. They’re looking to investigate the things said earlier. They want to move forward with alternatives including shuttle for freshmen, video with actual student testimonies, looking at outdoor swimming pool. That is more of a long term vision, but Ithaca College has one, so there are advantages. It helps hydrants be available, so it is advantageous. This was moved to business of the day so that it could start immediately to work during the winter to prepare for spring and next year. Vice-President Basil motioned to call to question. It was seconded without dissent. Resolution 8 was unanimously passed with a vote of 14–0−0.

R.7 Reprinting of Resolutions and Other Documents — Kate Duch and Becca Smith

There was a motion to move this to business of the day. It was seconded without dissent.

K. Duch said that this resolution was prompted by resolution 26 introduced in the spring that meeting minutes were not to be reprinted. It’s because they felt that if there were corrections, it could be done electronically. This resolution is in the spirit of following that one. Like meeting minutes, resolutions are rarely edited between the meeting introduced and the meeting voted on. If it wasn’t business of the day, everyone would get a whole new copy next week when voted on. Essentially, every representative gets two copies of each resolution. It’s a waste of paper, especially as binders will be gotten soon.

Their goal is to highlight on SA wasting a lot of paper, which is against the goal of a sustainable campus. They want to stop reprinting documents that are unedited. All edited documents will still be printed. B. Smith adds that it is self explanatory and will save paper.

E. Diakow supported this and further asked if there is anyway to print on both sides of the paper. R. Lavin responded that yes, just let the eboard know and they’ll tell the office.

Vice-President Miller wanted to know if this was something we could have just told the office to do. K. Duch responded that Ari said he needed clear direction from the assembly.

Vice-President Basil said this is something that is obviously a great thing. Only impediment is we need to agree to be responsible to bring binders to meeting.

V. Andrews asked why it was so general. K. Duch replied that they can’t name everything. For instance, the slope day charter. They might not get to discussing it that day. It could be printed and never discussed. Some documents could be printed out 5 or 6 weeks in a row.

Vice-President Mezey responded that from a financial perspective he is all for it. It saves at least 14 dollars a year. Vice-President Mezey motioned to call to question. It was seconded without dissent.

By a roll call vote, resolution 7 was passed 13–0−1.

VII. UnfinishedBusiness

Student Assembly Charter Review — Chris Basil

Vice-President Miller motioned to adjourn. There was no second. Vice-President Miller said that it deserves more time than the ten minutes at the end of the meeting. Vice-President Basil replied that it was just chapter one to be gone through today.

Vice-President Basil replied that contrary to last time, everyone is better prepared. He’s hoping for comments and constructive criticism. Starting on page 1, he doesn’t think it’s appropriate to tell office what to do, so he’s striking it. V. Andrews asked why he’s taking it out. Vice-President Basil replied because it’s the SA charter, not the Office of Assemblies job requirements. Vice-President Miller agreed in theory, but they just had to pass a resolution to ask to stop wasting paper. But if Ari said otherwise, he will defer. B. Smith said that maybe we could say “seek support” from office of assemblies instead. So just saying seek support and not telling them what to do. “The student assembly as well as committees or activities sponsored by the assembly shall seek administrative support from the Office of Assemblies” is the new phrasing.

Vice-President Basil added that on page 2, he likes the list format as opposed to paragraph form and makes things more clear. A. Craig asked for clarification. As we’re going through making changes to changes, they can propose or accept and at the end can vote on whole thing. R. Lavin said yes, the sponsor can change anything and we can motion to amend and at the end it will be voted upon. Vice-President Basil continued onto page 3 and bylaw 1.3b which is moved to article 1.10. This makes more sense.

Bylaw 1.3c, Vice-President agrees with the committee. It was superfluous. He doesn’t agree with facetious. The statement said that no action brought to assembly can be amended without previous action. All amendments must cite previous legislation. It’s very delineated in Robert’s rules and there’s no reason to be there. Another goals is to take out the fluff from things that were already clear. M. Heinz noted that this was already sent out and rationales are already there. He questions if it was necessary for Vice-President Basil to tell his rationale. R. Lavin responded no, but if there are no questions, they will have to go through this point by point.

Moving on to 1.4, the Calendar, Vice-President Basil said this is shifting responsibility from SA to Luis or whoever the liaison to provost is. It was added in 1.17 saying Luis is responsible to bring calendar to assembly.

There was a motion to extend by 10 minutes second. It was seconded, but there was dissent. The vote on motion to extend motion fails. R. Lavin adjourned the meeting.

VIII. New Business

R.5 SA Pledge of Allegiance — Tony Miller

Vice-President Miller noticed that Robert’s rules encourages some sort of formality to begin meetings. Maybe a middle ground with rooted tradition is the pledge of allegiance. It is one of the noted options in the rules of order. It would be a nice formality of starting meeting other than just the gavel. We’re a great Ivy League university and represent America and feel it would be beneficial to show some American pride.

Vice-President Basil doesn’t think this is valid or that time should be spent on it. He motioned to table it indefinitely. There was dissent expressed. L. DeLencquesaing asked what the pledge of allegiance is. R. Lavin responded that it is a pledge to the flag of the United States and what it represents. A. Craig said that we do need to remember we’re an international institution. Lots of nationalities are represented and not just one.

There was a vote on the motion to table indefinitely. By a hand vote of 5 yes to 8 no, the motion fails.

M. Heinz asked if there even is a flag for all the meetings as well as if they are displaced for meetings, will a flag be brought. Vice-President Miller responded that not unless a flag is present, and the Memorial Room does have one. We would say it if it was present.

E. Diakow asked if there was any other thing such as a Cornell tradition instead. Vice-President Miller said that he thought about that but the only other thing is alma mater. Singing isn’t really good for everyone. E. Diakow replied that there might be something older. Vice-President Miller said he will look into it.

Vice-President Mezey asked if Vice-President Miller would be opposed to amending the wording to make it more international friendly. Vice-President Miller said he would be for that.

N. Diaz suggested that perhaps the oath be recited, especially as all students who come to meetings are ex officio members of the SA. Vice-President Miller replied that it is pretty long. The pledge is quick and more symbolic. He never thought saying the pledge would be controversial.

R. Salem asked that given that Cornell is an international institution. Why is this absolutely necessary? Vice-President Miller said that it is not absolutely necessary, but a good idea to do something traditional. R. Salem asked if people would be required to stand. R. Lavin replied no.

M. McDermott asked Vice-President Miller to comment on the fact that it is a very vague meaning and the correct wording is that “there MAY be” and “It is an example SUCH AS.” It is not something Robert himself may have even said. It is a suggestion on a suggestion. Please comment on how far and loose it is to be put into the meeting. Vice-President Miller responded that he broadly interpreted this.

As chair, R. Lavin tabled this until next week.

R.6 Compliance with University Policy 4.10 — Nikhil Kumar

R. Salem is co-sponsoring along with Nicole Rivera. N. Rivera was here to discuss the use of “Cornell” in the “Cornell Review”. The Review wrote an article entitled “What to Expect” and they wrote very offensive terms, called program houses “ethnic ghettos” and claimed that minorities could only study here because of affirmative action. This is not what we stand for as Cornellians and is offensive, ignorant and completely against Cornell’s policy of open minds, open hearts, open doors. It is an embarrassment to community. The language used is hostile, uncomfortable, and unwelcoming. This is not an issue of freedom of speech but of respect for Cornell’s brand. She does agree that the Cornell Review has the right to freedom of speech, but they are abusing their privilege to use Cornell’s name. She proposes to not let this mockery of Cornell’s brand continue. N. Kumar said that Cornell should step in and revoke the authorization from the Review from using the name Cornell. He wanted to explain why this was brought up at the SA meeting. This a narrow sense of the body of the resolution. The SA did adopt a standard of diversity. As student leaders, it is our responsibility to use our voices to shape Cornell to reflect our values. By passing resolutions, it will send a strong message to the community at Cornell. They want to do what they can to include everyone on campus.

R. Salem added that although we understand that the administration doesn’t necessarily support what’s been said, by allowing them to continue to use “Cornell,” it implies that they do. If taking name out requires them to be off funding, he says so be it.

R. Lavin opened the speakers list while reminding everyone that this is just for questions to the sponsors.

V. Andrews asked if there was a copy of what was written. N. Rivera replied that not with her, but she an bring a copy for next week. V. Andrews asked if it was possible to get a member of Cornell Review to explain the actions. Eddie Herron, editor of the Review, was present.

M. Heinz also wanted a copy of the full article if possible for next time.

A. Craig wanted to know if the Dean of Students’ Office has been contacted and if they have made a statement on their feelings. N. Kumar did the read quote from administration members in the Sun, and it was very supportive and echoes what we feel about the offensive articles and were inconsistent with values of Cornell. A. Craig asked if they receive money from our office. E. Herron said they have not received SA funding.

Vice-President Miller said that you mentioned by removing their name they could be revoked funding or fined. R. Salem responded that did receive SAFC funding. And if so, they do have permission to use name. R. Lavin added a point of information that SA does in turn fund the SAFC. Vice-President Miller asked if they are asking to revoke funding as well. R. Salem responded that if revoking funding is necessary, then yes. E. Herron added that there is no funding to be revoked.

Community Member Slicklen asked if they are asking to remove the name Cornell University used together or does it just refer to Cornell? N. Kumar said to ensure use the use of Cornell. Community Member Slicklen said that it is called the Cornell Review not the Cornell University Review Dean Hubbell stated that in his opinion, Cornell and Cornell University are synonymous in this respect.

N. Rivera added that this is not and isolated incident. There have been similar offenses.

E. Diakow wants to know if the Cornell Daily Sun uses Cornell but they aren’t affiliated with the university. Is this true? N. Kumar says that to his knowledge, they have to have permission to use the name Cornell. E. Diakow was confused and wished for clarification. R. Salem said that to his knowledge, no matter which organization is used, Cornell has control over who uses the name. E. Diakow asked if the Cornell Review asked if they were allowed to use the name Cornell before they started. Dean Hubbell responded that the administration works in a consultative way. They may have the Dean of Students as a point person, but he wouldn’t make decisions without consulting people and is looking forward to the discussion next week. Eddie Herron noted that people should feel free to email him at EH254@cornell.edu

R.10 Addition to the Responsibilities of the Vice-President of Finance- Greg Mezey

He started saying that this is just more work for himself. It calls for more accountability. He is asking the following be added in the charter under sections responsibility of Vice-President of Finance: “It is the responsibility of the Vice-President of Finance to submit a budget to the assembly for approval within 1 month (30 days) of the start of the fall semester and also report a midterm financial report within two weeks (14 days) of the start of the spring semester.”

O. Sandoval agreed. We are required to hand in annual report to president. How feasible would it be to put the operating budget on the report. Vice-President Mezey says he can do that. R. Lavin added that he asks for everyone to contribute to that but this can be part of the finance department.

E. Diakow asked how different is this from adding to the charter. R. Lavin added that none of that is implemented. This is to amend the current charter. Vice-President Basil added that they could have done it with the charter, but Vice-President Mezey wanted to go ahead and start it now.

IX. Adjournment

Attachments to this Agenda Slope Day Programming Board Charter Changes R.5 SA Pledge of Allegiance R.6 Compliance with University Policy 4.10 R.7 Reprinting of Resolutions and Other Documents R.8 Creation of an ad-hoc Gorge Safety Committee R.9 Student Assembly Budget R.10 Addition to the Responsibilities of the Vice-President of Finance Charter Change Review

Respectfully Submitted,
Brittany Rosen