Minutes
University Assembly
Wednesday, February 25, 1998
Uris Hall, Room 153

I. Call to Order

The meeting was called to order at 4:39 p.m. by M. Esposito

II. Roll Call

Present: H. Chung, L. Clougherty, C. Cole, M. Esposito, D. Grubb, J. Kozlow, B. Lewis, A. Mathois, D. Marsh, L. Yannone, J. Johnson

Excused: A. P. Pirondi

Absent: J. Austin, S. Caldwell, J. Cisine, D. Geohring, M. Hartill, J. Kang, D. Levitsky, E. Loew, J .Sherry, M. Travis

Others Present: Cris Gardner, Mark Frontera, M. Hodges, W. Lynn, K. Hubble

III. Additions to the Agenda

No additions were made to the agenda.

IV. Open Forum

No comments were made during Open Forum.

V. Report from the Chair/Announcements

M. Esposito reported the events of the past Assemblies Leadership Meeting that took place on the previous day. He stated that two of the Assemblies presented questions to the administration. He commented that the University Assembly posed the question as to how the Assemblies can assist in the Slope Day festivities and end of the year activities, in order to make them as safe as possible. The solution presented was to contact Catherine Holmes, Student Services Associate, should the assemblies be willing to volunteer. These volunteer options could consist of committee representation, cleaning assistance, etc. M. Esposito announced he was planning to invite C. Holmes to the upcoming UA meeting to further illustrate the options of volunteer support. It was also suggested that the UA create a resolution stressing the safety of Slope Day. L. Clougherty, along with assistance from C. Gardner, offered to create such a resolution.

M. Esposito describe the three questions posed by the SA:

First, the SA questioned if the data of the university investments could be accessed by interested parties and if the the interested parties have an affect on the investments. M. Esposito stated that F. Rodgers declared that all this information is presently available, and should be distributed to interested parties. He also stated that the students or other interested parties do not currently have an influence on the decisions of University investments and this present system is not subject to change.

M. Esposito then reviewed the second question posed concerning the number of student-elected trustees. The concern was that the students create 33% of the revenue on campus and only have 5% of the Trustee seats. F. Rodgers had replied that this situation will not likely change due to the fact that the Cornell University Board of Trustees is charted by the State of New York and the membership of the Board was recently reduced. Any changes must be approved by the State of New York. Therefore, he stated, they are not willing to undertake this process again. An alternate solution presented was to create Student Trustee Fellows that would have certain privileges but no vote on the Board. The SA replied they would look into that possibility.

The SA also questioned the overcrowded situation of the dining facilities. They stated there is a definite need for a new dining facility on campus. The dining halls have tried every conceivable solution to reduce the crowds. S. Murphy stated that more solutions would have to be addressed and that the possibility of a new dining facility was inconceivable.

M. Esposito encouraged any member to e-mail any questions for future Leadership meetings.

VI. Approval of the Minutes

The Minutes of January 28, 1998 were passed by acclimation with two corrections.

• L. Yannone was present NOT absent.
• L. Clougherty was excused NOT absent.

VII. Constituent Assemblies’ Reports

Faculty Senate

D. Grubb reported that the Faculty Senate made several decisions at their last meeting. He stated that the Faculty Senate voted in favor of the availability of a professional masters degree in Applied Statistics. He remarked that the Senate also voted in favor of Data Access Policy Option 1. D. Grubb noted that a proposal to form a committee to decide on the division of research funding was rejected. This debate of how money should be divided and who should receive research funding was intently argued. He also announced that a forum had been held recently concerning the vote of the Dean of Faculty and that a vote would take place on March 6, 1998.

Employee Assembly

M. Esposito announced that only four candidates applied for the seven open positions on the EA. He speculated that this turnout was because supervisors discouraging their employees from running.

C. Cole expressed his concerns.

M. Esposito replied that many supervisors discourage employees from joining the EA based on the fact that they did not want them to vacate their desks to assume EA responsibilities. He announced that they are presently pursuing solutions to this problem.

He explained that the EA had divided itself into two groups, one concerning internal goals, and the other concerning exterior goals. An example of these goals is the creation of a budget for the EA. The exterior planning group is dealing with communication with their constituent.

L. Yannone questioned if the EA had any correspondence with the union and if this avenue could provide greater communication with the public.

M. Esposito responded that the EA did have some communication with the union, however, the EA does not have any influence or voice in issues covered under contract negotiations.

D. Grubb suggested that the UA take some action in correcting the problem of supervisor discouragement of their employees serving on the EA.

M. Esposito stated that he had already brought this problem up with M. Opperman and F. Rogers. He reported that there are already means in place to relieve the stress of an employee serving on the EA, however these means are not in practice and exist only in theory.

This topic will be added to the agenda of the President’s Council and the administration is trying to encourage participation. A letter will be sent to the Dean’s, Directors, Department Head mailing list to encourage participation in the EA. It is also planned to initiate EA support in the supervisor training sessions.

D. Grubb announced he would draft a resolution concerning this issue.

Student Assembly

J. Kozlow announced that the SA has completed the Student Activity Fee process. He reported that the SA is attempting to receive days off for selected holidays, such as Martin Luther King Day.

C. Cole questioned if the students were pursuing this issue as a way to gain extra days off or if the holidays were so students could celebrate the meaning of the day.

J. Kozlow remarked that the students were pursing these days off so they would be able to participate in all the festivities that correspond with the holiday. He stated that due to the responsibilities of classes, students are not able to fully celebrate the meaning of the day.

M. Esposito added that these holidays would be for all students, faculty, and staff.

J. Kozlow announced that the SA resolution on the direct election of student UA representatives faced a Presidential Veto. It was decided that the UA should address the issue and decide what path to take.

M. Esposito noted that the UA leadership will meet to re-evaluate this issue.

VIII. Business of the Day

K. Hubble presented the recent projects of the Campus Planning Committee(CPC). He expressed that the CPC consists of faculty, students, and staff members appointed by the President in order to review the rising concerns of building and landscape issues. He announced that the Committee also consists of various sub-committees. For instance, the Design Review Subcommittee meets to deal with day to day issues. One of the recent issues the sub-committee is dealing with is the proposal for differing signage for Cornell Plantations. He explained the reason behind this proposal was the Plantations felt their signs should distinguish them from the rest of the campus, due to the size and variance of the activities of the Plantations. He described the ruling of the sub-committee was to allow for a small image of a tree to be placed in the corner of the Plantation signs and to keep the signs otherwise similar to the Cornell sign format.

K. Hubble then began a general overview of the pressing current projects under review by the Campus Planning Committee. He noted that presently a master plan for the Plantations was being formatted.

K. Hubbell announced the plans for a major project on campus, the Bell Tower. He stated that the plans for the tower were to perform masonry repair to the tower and also clean and add additional bells. The plans allow for the bells to remain operational for 1998 Graduation and be in place for 1999 Graduation. Following graduation this semester, the bells will be removed and renovated and additional bells will be added to enhance the sound of the bells. The present scaffolding will be in place for graduation. He explained that it would take the full year to renovate the bells.

K. Hubble added that the Lake Source Cooling Project will commence in 1999 with the prospects of finishing the project in 2000. He also announced the renovation plans of the MVR - Bailey Hall Plaza Project. Presently, design workshops are being held to create plans to improve this exterior area. Also, the landscape next to MVR will be renovated to improve the look of the surrounding area.

K. Hubble explained that the golf course will be experiencing an addition, including the relocation of the pro-shop.

He announced the opening of Tjaden Hall which is presently open to faculty and students in the Department of Arts.

K. Hubble also speculated that Sage Hall will be opened in early April. He stated that the west tower will be raised into place sometime during March.

He added that concerns have been raised regarding the development of zoning laws for the Cornell community.

K. Hubble then noted the major long term development of Cornell�the North Campus housing solution. He stated that the campus is planning to create 550 new accommodations for N. Campus. The goal of this project is to connect N. Campus more to Central campus. He commented that the executive officers are extremely involved and committed to this renovation plan. Presently, he explained, the architect committee is being formed.

Due to the importance of this project, the plans for the date of completion is set at 2000 - 2001.

A. Mathios questioned the need to renovate the present housing.

K. Hubble responded by explaining the overall plans for this housing change includes the renovation of the present rooms and facilities. He added that West Campus housing will be renovated to accommodate upper classmen that will reside in the dorm.

J. Kozlow questioned the placement of the new dorm that will be built on North Campus.

K. Hubble replied that the goal of the project is to keep an open atmosphere on campus. This will be preserved by creating a residential quadrangle. Therefore, the dorm will be placed in the most optimum place to preserve the open space of the campus.

J. Kozlow questioned if any specific locations for the new dorm had been discussed. K. Hubble remarked that no specific locations have been identified by the architects and the discussion had only been general to date.

Referring to the new Microelectronics Fabrication Building, K. Hubble stated the major concern with this project was the placement of the new building. He emphasized the main concern was maintaining the open atmosphere of the engineering quadrangle. by placing the building in a location that will not crowd the quad. Architects are planning to place the building next to Phillips Hall, but are unsure how this will effect the over all appearance of the Engineering Quad. He commented the architects are working hard to find the right solution. The square footage for the building has not been finalized.

J. Kozlow questioned the status of the Rand Hall renovations.

K. Hubble remarked that the Provost has supplied funding for basic renovations of Rand Hall. The goal of this renovation process is to create a safer and cleaner building. He reported that included in these renovations is the creation of a ventilation system and spray booth to improve the quality of air circulation in the building. Included in these renovations is the improvement of the present shop. As far as classroom improvements, K. Hubble commented that the classrooms will be upgraded and multimedia audio/visual equipment will be added.

L. Clougherty questioned the number of committee members on the Campus Planning Committee.

K. Hubble reported that 20 people presently sit on the committee. He added that the student support and representation is not as good as is expected.

He added that all projects presented must be kept within the budget and money demands of the university. The committee must look to the future and determine the long term effect of each project developed.

C. Gardner added that the CPC is directly associated with the UA. She commented that the committee is made up of representatives from each constituency as well as other appointments, both position & Presidential appointments. This allows the committee to be diverse and broadly educated and knowledgeable of subjects that will be under review. Each assembly has the opportunity to select representatives’ to this committee. She mentioned that the CPC has been in existence the same amount of time as the UA. This committee does report to both the President and the Provost.

C. Gardner demonstrated the influence of the CPC in the example of the Theory Center. This center had been planned and decided upon without the review of the CPC. The CPC was upset over the original design of the building and the possible effect the building could have on the ecology. Because the CPC held concerns regarding this project, the plans were pulled back and given to the CPC for review. She added that many experts in the field sit on the Campus Planning Committee.

J. Kozlow inquired about the dates of the upcoming CPC meetings.

K. Hubble announced the meetings take place every third Friday of the month. He then distributed a calendar that displayed upcoming meetings.

L. Clougherty questioned what extent of building planning the CPC had a voice in.

K. Hubble responded by stating that the CPC influenced building size, building placement and other aspects of the planning. Presently, the main concern of the CPC is to find the best location for the new engineering building. To do so they must way the pro’s and con’s of the situation. This is an example of the influence the CPC holds.

L. Yannone commended the CPC by stating that the changing of the campus has always been beautiful.

K. Hubble left his e-mail with the UA as klh4@cornell.edu.

IX. Old Business

M. Esposito announced that the approval of the University Ombudsman Appointment and the Judicial Codes Counselor appointment would be the subject of Old Business. Present at the meeting was the Ombudsman appointee Walter Lynn, Professor Emeritus. W. Lynn explained that he recently retired from Cornell and received a call from the President to serve as the new University Ombudsman. He remarked that he was very honored to be chosen for this position. He noted that the length of appointment is for the next two years.

D. Marsh stated that she served on the Ombudsman Selection Committee as a UA representative. She commented that the committee, of 6 to 7 people, began the process by collecting nominations of faculty across campus for the position. Following that time period, a list of 50 possible candidates was formed and researched. D. Marsh added that several final candidates of exceptional caliber were then presented to the President for his final selection.

W. Lynn remarked that he was contacted as a reference for another possible candidate without being aware of his own nomination. He also questioned the length of time it took to appoint a new Ombudsman.

D. Marsh stated that once the committee was up and running, the appointment process moved very quickly. The main delay in the process was organizing the committee to act on this appointment procedure.

The University Assembly unanimously concurred with the Presidents appointment of Professor Walter Lynn as the University Ombudsman for a two year term.

W. Lynn expressed his gratification for the appointment by the UA.

M. Esposito also announced that the JCC position was offered to J. Murtagh pending the UA approval. He reminded the UA that J. Murtagh had recently attended the UA meeting and was well introduced to the UA through the presentation he gave on <DATE>.

J. Murtagh was unanimously approved to fill the Judicial Codes Counselor position.

X. New Business

M. Hodges presented the final preliminary Data Access Policies.

C. Cole questioned the differences between the three options. His main concern was the creation of the functional policy application.

M. Hodges responded that the functional policy plan was no longer in effect in any of the new drafts. She indicated the main differences in the options are contained in the restricted data. She noted that the determination of what is restricted and what is not is made by the committee that created the options. Regardless of the option, confidential data is constant. The general differences in the three options is that Option One allows and requires a distinction between university and unit wide data, Option Two only contains university wide data, and Option Three only contains university wide data available at query access.

C. Cole reviewed his impression of what each policy consisted of. He was unclear as to the distinction between each option. He addressed his concern as to how an option could be supported without understanding clearly the differences in the options.

M. Esposito questioned the difference in the query access of Option 3.

M. Hodges explained the query access of Option 3 created more restricted data. She then outlined each of the three options to clear up any questions about the general operations of the option choices.

Option 1

The decision of who is considered to be a legitimate user is decided in advance. The designated role gives the distinction of data available to that individual. Example: President has salary access to everyone on campus. A college dean is restricted to the data that is relevant to his college. This is an example of unit access.

A. Mathois questioned if as a department chair he would have access to the data that is relevant to his position as chair.

M. Hodges stated that it depends on the definition of the unit and the data will be based on necessity. The university will determine if there is a legitimate need for the request of data by a unit. This policy does allow for intercollege data distinction. The diversity of the units and number of role definitions will determine the cost of implementation of the policy. Option 1 is the most flexible policy concerning the diversity of data access and control.

Option 2

This policy does not make a distinction between a unit and university status. In the example used in Option 1, there is no unit restriction on salary data. Anyone with the access to data for salary information will have access to the entire university. C. Cole questioned the distinction of unit and university status between Option 1 and 2.

M. Hodges remarked that Option 1 and 2 are similar based on the role of an individual. For example a person dealing with salary information will be restricted to salary information but will have access to all data at the university concerning salary information. As in Option 1, the distinction will be made on the role assigned to the individual as to what as to is accessible.

Option 3

Option 3 makes no unit distinction. The person distinguished as a head has access to all data. Access is then distributed to the people by the head. A person must request the data from the head who then decides if the person is given access. This decision is made at the college level. This allows for extreme flexibility in the data access policy. Accompanying this policy must be additional information and restrictions by the university to prevent an extreme inconsistency in the data access policy. An example of this policy would be a person requiring information would need to request permission from a head in order to gain access to this data. The head would then decide the validity of the request and the decision would be made at their discretion.

C. Cole reviewed his impressions of the three options. He remarked that option 1 allows a large amount of people to have access to data. Option 2 allows some people to have access to more data. Concerning Option 3, he stated that the head will decide who has access to the data on campus.

M. Esposito questioned if the newly revised draft is different than the one presented to the UA.

M. Hodges stated that the concept is identical to the document presented to the UA. She stated that once the policy is chosen another process will be instigated to finalize the chosen policy. Generally the policy is issued as an Interim Policy for six months to allow for further comment and review.

The UA support of the Data Access Policy Option was performed by a role call vote.

H. Chung: Option 2
C. Cole: Option 1
D. Grubb: Option 1
J. Kozlow: Option 1
B. Lewis: Option 1
A. Mathois: Option 1
D. Marsh: Option 1
J. Johnson: Option 1
L. Yannone: Option 3
L. Clougherty: Option 1

Final Results - Option 1 - 8 votes, Option 2 - 1 vote, Option 3 - 1 vote. Option 1 was supported by a majority of the University Assembly members.

XI. UA Committee Reports

Health Services

Joy Johnson reported that the sub-committee of the Health Services Committee reported at the past meeting. She commented that the Finance sub-committee was concerned with how to raise funds for students who cannot afford to pay their bills at Gannett. The Transportation sub-committee is presently concerned with improving the transportation availability during the weekdays. Due to classes, CUEMS is not operable from the hours of 7:00 am - 3:00 pm. So no on campus emergency transportation is available to the injured during this period. The only option available during the course of the day is an ambulance or taxi. She indicated that CUEMS was funded by the Student Activity Fee. Another issue brought up was the changing of the charter to create a research and advisory committee.

Codes and Judicial Committee

H. Chung announced that he was not present at the past Codes and Judicial Committee meeting. He suggested anyone interested in further committee proceedings contact Kenna Madigan at klm3. He indicated that the Committee was still dealing with the “Show Course” hearing concerning Title Four Article VIII C.I and Article IXC. He explained that B. Krause had brought up the issue that there is an inconsistency in the number of people serving on the Hearing Board for “Show Course” hearings. An amendment was proposed to create a uniform number of 12 people to sit on the hearing boards.

J. Kozlow reminded those assembled that this amendment must be approved by the UA in order to be put into effect.

H. Chung reported that Katherine Rourke, Chair of the Codes and Judicial Committee, questioned if the Campus Code of Conduct gives the JA power over groups as well as individuals.

Committee on Committees

J. Kozlow reported that three UA committees were not up and running and won’t be due to the time frame of the rest of the year. He also stressed that undergraduate and graduate students are, in general, not attending all committee meetings. He explained that e-mails will be distributed to interested groups of each committees subject area in an attempt to stir up more support for the committee system.

C. Cole questioned if a list of who is on what committee is available at the Office of Assemblies.

C. Gardner said such a list is available but may not be up-to-date. She stated that the office has been going through personnel changes and took the opportunity to introduce the name of the new employee, Bonnie Bailey, to the UA.

J. Kozlow reminded the UA that the application deadline for next years committees is March 31. He noted that the new candidates would be able to attend the final committee meetings this year in order to prepare for the following academic year.

Transportation Advisory Committee

B. Lewis reported the Transportation Advisory Committee addressed the need for implementing bus schedules at all bus stops for ease of access to the bus system and the need for increased parking on campus. L. Yannone commented that the GPSA had also recently sent a list of suggestions and recommendations to the bus service.

M. Esposito requested that any minutes of committee meetings be e-mailed to the members and also to the Office of the Assemblies. C. Gardner commented that hard copies of committee minutes are available in the Office of the Assemblies. M. Esposito announced that M. Cameron resigned from the UA due to a work commitment.

He added that Joseph Kang replaced J. Zern as a UA representative.

It was also announced that a UA member, J. Kozlow, is a candidate for student-elected Trustee.

XII. Adjournment

The meeting was adjourned at 6:06 p.m. by M. Esposito

Respectfully Submitted,
Mark. A Frontera