Minutes
University Assembly
April 30, 2003
Day Hall
4:30 — 7:00 pm.

I. Greetings and Call to Order

Ken Reardon, Chair, called the meeting to order at 4:41 p.m.

Attendance:

Present: J.S. Butler, Henry Granison, Pat Haugen, Umair Khan, Ellis Loew, Alan Mathios, Timothy McConnochie, Leti McNeill, Bryan Preston, Ken Reardon, David Schmale III

Absent: Stephanie Adams, Shelley Feldman, Melissa Hines, Tammy Johnson, Carl Jones, Jr., Josh Katcher, Michael Matly, Jane Mt. Pleasant, Dena Ruebusch

Also Present: Peter Cohl, Mary Beth Grant, Rich Helms, Hope Mandeville, Katrina Nobles, Bridget Tracy, Student members of the Cornell Commitment Program

II. Introductions

K. Reardon sought unanimous consent that the Cornell Commitment Presentation and Resolution occur at the beginning of the meeting as they had another meeting with the Vice President and Provost later on. There were no objections.

P. Cohl, a Cornell Tradition Fellow, introduced himself and fellow student recipients of the Meinig Family National Scholar, Cornell Presidential Research Scholar, and Tradition Scholar fellowships. The administration recently announced plans to reconfigure funding for the Commitment programs. The members of the Commitment presented a resolution inviting the UA to participate with an ad hoc committee already approved by the SA entitled “ad hoc Committee on The Cornell Commitment.” The Commitment provides several programs including scholarships, summer earnings replacement, and support services. Many campus leaders including this year’s Rhodes Scholar are involved in Cornell Commitment. The programs are a large recruiting tool for Cornell, give it a sense of community, and encourage student involvement.

U. Khan heard about the possibility of budget cuts in February and asked whether it may be a result of the overall financial state of the University and country. He also asked whether Peter Meinig has made any comment on this?

A student stated that the Meinig family is aware of what was going on and that the University has assured students that the scholarships will remain intact. The programs and support services for students, however, are in jeopardy. The original donor agreed to fund the programs with the intent of scaling back funding and allowing the University to eventually cover the programs, but it never occurred and has been continuing to fund them. He has said that this school year was the last year for funding.

P. Cohl again stressed how important the programs are in financial aid and as a competitive edge for students.

J. S. Butler reminded the UA that they may approve of the formation of the ad hoc committee independently of approval or disapproval of the recent events with the Commitment.

L. McNeill commented that this issue affects students as well as staff involved in the programs.

K. Reardon mentioned that studies prove that the programs and not necessarily the scholarships are what make the programs worthwhile, and cutting that funding would undermine the entire operation.

J. S. Butler suggested that the resolution state that the UA appoint two of its members to the ad hoc committee and that the third “be it further resolved�” be deleted.

U. Khan motioned to have the resolution voted upon. A. Mathios seconded. The resolution was unanimously passed.

III. Approval of the Minutes

A motion was made and seconded to approve the minutes of the March 26, 2003. The minutes were approved as amended.

IV. Old Business

Campus Governance Committee Final Report

L. McNeill began discussion on the resolutions presented by the committee at last month’s meeting. The first resolution regarded charter changes and resolutions from other assemblies and was not passed by the UA.

T. McConnochie summarized the resolution which invites other assemblies to submit resolutions passed by their respective bodies to the UA for approval or disapproval.

D. Schmale asked why the UA needs this resolution if other assemblies are currently free to do this?

T. McConnochie replied that it is more to encourage interaction amongst the assemblies.

There was discussion on whether this resolution was redundant or whether it provided more clarity and structure.

K. Reardon asked for a call to question. The resolution passed unanimously.

L. McNeill stated that the next two resolutions discuss the seating for the employee and graduate student-elected trustees.

P. Haugen explained that there were originally two employee elected trustees, the board was downsized and a non-voting trustee fellow seat replaced one of the employee-elected trustees. Since, the board has increased in size and it is reasonable to assume that a second seat is justified.

H. Granison pointed out that “representative” should be changed to “trustee” where it appears in the resolution and made additional changes in the language for consistency.

There was a discussion on the language regarding the allocation of the seat.

D. Schmale asked if a date or term should be placed on the resolution?

It was suggested that the phrase “prior to the next election cycle for these elections” be used as a date for the resolution.

J.S. Butler stated that the language should say “resolve to recommend�”

K. Reardon asked for a call to question on the amended resolution regarding the employee-elected trustee. The resolution passed unanimously.

There was further discussion on the language in the resolution on the student-elected trustee.

K. Reardon asked for a call to question on the amended resolution regarding the student-elected trustee. The resolution passed unanimously.

L. McNeill asked the UA whether they thought it necessary or useful to invite the student and employee-elected trustees to their meetings.

H. Mandeville said that the trustees are on the mailing list, have the agendas, and are free to attend meetings at this point.

P. Haugen thought that the trustees should be required to report to the assemblies.

A. Mathios suggested that having the UA meet with the broader board of trustees addresses that communication.

H. Mandeville clarified that the trustees report to their respective assemblies and are non-voting members.

H. Granison suggested that the Chair invite the trustees whenever the UA wanted.

T. McConnochie mentioned that point three states that each assembly must report its actions to the President.

L. McNeill researched other assembly structures in the Ivy League and noted that Brown University’s assembly has a formal meeting with the board of trustees. This fact led to the drafting of point number six which requests an annual meeting with the Academic Affairs and Campus Life Committee.

K. Reardon asked that the Land Grant Committee be added to the list since the UA has taken an interest in public service?

J.S. Butler thought that this would detract from the meeting’s effectiveness.

U. Khan made a motion to add “as well as the Land Grant Committee.” H. Granison seconded.

T. McConnochie motioned to strike the Land Grant Committee. The motion failed.

K. Reardon asked for a call to question on the main motion. The motion passed with 9 for and 1 abstention.

H. Mandeville made the suggestion that members of the UA attend the town of Ithaca’s trustee meetings in order to establish a better relationship with the University and the City.

K. Reardon asked if the idea of requiring documentation of an agenda from the administration at leadership meetings was discussed at all, but said that it could be revisited in the fall.

V. New Business

CJC Business

K. Nobles introduced Mary Beth Grant and Rich Helms. Mary Beth is up for reappointment as the JA and the CJC’s code changes need approval.

J.S. Butler sought unanimous consent to address the CJC issues.

R. Helms presented the issues of appointments to the hearing review board. The CJC proposed to eliminate the summer review board and draw from the regular review board in order to expedite cases that may otherwise be postponed for hearings until the next fall. Additionally, the CJC would like to increase the size of the hearing review board to include more students.

U. Khan asked for the rationale behind having the summer board eliminated and if it would be difficult to find students for the board that can serve over the summer.

R. Helms explained that by expanding the applicant pool that difficulty might be circumvented.

P. Haugen motioned to accept the recommended changes for the hearing and review board. J. S. Butler seconded.

R. Helms further clarified that the specific changes include deleting all mentions of the summer board.

M. Grant explained that the summer board does not have jurisdiction over cases that occur over the course of the school year and that, as a result, cases are postponed over the summer preventing some students from returning.

K. Reardon asked for a call to question on the changes for the hearing and review board. The changes were accepted with 10 for and 1 abstention.

R. Helms brought up some substance changes to the code.

M. Grant addressed the section of the code that allows the President to take action in extremely grave cases on or off campus. The CJC would like to add that the Dean of Students be allowed to aid in handling such grave cases and in determining the gravity of a situation.

J.S. Butler sought unanimous consent to suspend the rules discussion in order to address the reappointment of the JA.

M. Grant left the room.

J.S. Butler moved to accept the reappointment of Mary Beth Grant to her third term as addressed in the attached letter. A. Mathios seconded. The motion passed with 10 for and 1 abstention.

M. Grant reentered the room.

M. Grant said that the procedures of the code apply in “grave circumstances” but that it has not been used yet.

P. Haugen motioned to accept the changes to the section of the code and the motion was seconded. The motion passed with 9 for, 1 against, and 1 abstention.

R. Helms addressed item 2 which attempted to clarify deadlines given in the code by specifying “days” as “business days.”

A. Mathios brought up the point that some business days do not apply for faculty but do for staff and therefore “business days” will not end confusion.

There was a discussion of how to define the days in order to minimize confusion.

J.S. Butler felt that if these proposed changes are improvements from the current situation, the UA should accept them and that further action could be taken based on the discussions.

A motion was made and seconded to accept the date changes in the code proposed by the CJC. The motion passed with 10 for and 1 abstention.

M. Grant explained that the changes of item 3 regarding the extension logical rights to both complainants and victims.

D. Schmale made a motion to accept the changes in item 3. U. Khan seconded. The motion passed with 10 for and 1 abstention.

M. Grant summarized the next changes as removing the language of “due process” which has an overly legal and loaded connotation. This does not affect the rights in the code at all.

D. Schmale made a motion to accept the changes. E. Loew seconded. The motion passed with 10 for and 1 abstention.

R. Helms expressed his gratitude on behalf for the hard work of Hope Mandeville, the administrative office, and particularly Mary Beth Grant as JA.

University Assembly Charter Changes

L. McNeill presented the resolution formalizing the creation of JAMIC.

K. Nobles added that this resolution was passed by the SA this year and a different version was passed last year by the UA.

L. McNeill said that JAMIC has spent the year finding itself and has setup four subcommittees to work on bias related issues.

U. Khan made a motion to accept the resolution. J.S. Butler seconded. The motion passed unanimously.

L. McNeill initiated discussion on program documents and how the UA interacts with its four program boards.

P. Haugen submitted changes and additions to the language regarding the role of the Administrative Board for the Cornell Store.

H. Granison asked why, if section 10.2 deals with the committees and boards, it is inadequate and changes are needed for the four documents?

H. Mandeville explained that the changes were made in order to have UA input on charter changes.

K. Nobles corrected that the January meetings were used for that purpose.

H. Mandeville asked if these changes were shown to the program boards yet, and they were not.

K. Reardon asked whether they should send these proposed changes to the boards and take up this issue again in the fall.

There was a discussion of the boards’ understandings of the relationship with the UA and the extent of the autonomy of each board.

Task Force Reports

D. Schmale reported for the task force on Sustainable Development. They have learned of the Capital Funding and Priorities Committee in charge of developmental issues, that is comprised of the President, Provost, and Vice Presidents. They plan and approve major projects on campus and know about what is going on at Cornell six months prior to everyone else. Their meetings are closed but they are willing to report to the UA. Additionally, the Campus Planning Committee is also presenting for the UA.

P. Haugen reminded the UA that the September and October meetings for the UA are already scheduled for administrative board reports.

D. Schmale suggested that they could meet with the Capital Funding Committee in November, then.

K. Reardon drew the attention of the UA to the summary of the Public Service discussions and asked for any comments and input via email.

B. Preston said that he received encouraging feedback about Public Service at the last leadership meeting.

L. McNeill pointed out that this investigation on public service has been done before and that several were interested in working with the Public Service Committee.

H. Mandeville stated that she was putting together a summary of the activities of the assemblies for Jeff Lieman and would discuss it with him later.

Nominations for Next Year’s Executive Committee

K. Nobles asked for nominations.

K. Reardon nominated Leti McNeill for Chair, and the nomination was seconded.

U. Khan nominated David Schmale III for Vice Chair, and the nomination was seconded.

P. Haugen asked for input for the Cornell Store on two areas via email.

K. Reardon thanked J.S. Butler and Alan Mathios for their service to the UA.

VI. Adjournment

K. Reardon, Chair, adjourned the meeting at 6:35 pm.

Respectfully submitted,

Bridget Tracy