University Assembly Meeting
Wednesday, October 24, 2007
4:30 — 6:00 p.m.
701 Clark Hall

I. Call To Order

M. Hatch called the meeting to order at 4:38 p.m. He introduced Alex James and Roger Rodriguez to the Assembly as new representatives.

II. Roll Call

Roll was taken by sign-in sheet.

Present: C. Basil, M. Fontana, A. James, D. Kurczewski, J. Marwell, T. Parado, R. Rodriguez, B. Liddick, R. Orme, D. Brown, M. Hatch, E. Loew, D. Rosen, E. Sanders, R. Wayne.

Not Present: S. Matthews, J. Glenn, P. Mahoney, A. Stroock.

III. Call for Late Additions to the Agenda

M. Hatch said that J. Glenn had requested to add Resolution 7 to Increase Graduate Student Representation on Campus Planning Committee to the agenda. He asked the assembly to read it so they could take action on it this evening. R. Wayne moved to call to question Resolution 7. D. Rosen seconded the motion. There was a brief discussion about the resolution.

The UA unanimously voted to pass Resolution 7 by a raise of hands.

M. Hatch said there was a second resolution, Resolution 6 in Support of Transportation Mitigation Strategies, but that this would be discussed at a later point in the meeting.

IV. Approval of Minutes

� August 22, 2007 Minutes

M. Hatch asked if there were any additions or corrections to the August 22, 2007 minutes. E. Sanders asked for a change on a comment she made on page two.

R. Orme moved to approve the minutes, with the minor edit exception. T. Parado seconded the motion. The minutes were unanimously approved by a raise of hands.

� September 5, 2007 Minutes

M. Hatch asked if there were any additions or correction to the September 5, 2007 minutes.

D. Rosen moved to approve the minutes. R. Orme seconded the motion. The minutes were unanimously approved by a raise of hands.

V. Reports from Standing Committees

� Campus Planning Committee (UA member, Randy Wayne-faculty)

R. Wayne said he wasn’t sure what the difference between a Standing and Associate committee was. M. Hatch said they had determined the difference at the last meeting; all committees were Standing. A. Epstein said all of the committees were Standing committees, but some were also Associate committees, some were also Campus Life committees and so on.

R. Wayne said that there is a Campus Planning Committee meeting tomorrow that A. Epstein and E. Sanders will be attending. He then introduced M. Amundsen.

M. Amundsen gave a presentation on the Master Plan and the factors that were considered in its development, such as transportation and housing needs, the landscape and the importance of maintaining a “pedestrian friendly” campus.

There was a brief question and answer session.

There was a discussion about the necessity of newly proposed buildings and the persons responsible for determining when new buildings were needed. E. Sanders said the constant construction had a negative impact on the campus and that she didn’t see the need for all of these new buildings especially since many of them do not correspond with the architecture of other buildings and do not contribute to sustainability initiatives. M. Amundsen said the people developing the Master plan focused on physical planning; they had no say in whether the buildings were actually needed. M. Hatch said that some program needed to be considered to restrict construction on campus until input on both the physical and conceptual planning of the campus could be obtained across all disciplines and from all groups who would be affected. Dean Walcott said that the administration’s decision to add more buildings was being fueled by requests from various deans who are being asked by their respective departments to provide them with more space. He suggested the assembly invite the Provost to a meeting to discuss who makes these decisions and whose input is considered. R. Wayne said he thought the Master Plan was very proactive in sustainability. He said some of the older buildings did not contribute to sustainable practices and that’s why some of them were being torn down and new ones were being constructed. E. Sanders said that if buildings are not considered sustainable or useful, then they should be renovated to make them so. M. Amundsen said it was not practical to renovate some of these buildings. M. Hatch said the UA members needed to consider what their role might be in these decisions and develop a resolution outlining their role once it has been decided. Dean Walcott said it was encouraging the UA had some level of agreement regarding how the planning process should be conducted and what factors should be considered in planning.

M. Amundsen reminded the assembly they could provide input on the Master Plan at any time.

� Transportation (UA Member, Dan Brown, faculty)

D. Brown said D. Leib, from Transportation had asked them to look at the Transportation Impact Mitigation Strategy that they’ve been discussing. He said that Resolution 6 to support the TIMS had good goals and he asked the assembly to look at it and decide if they agree. He said the resolution is meant to show support to the TIMS and also to ensure that the UA, with advice from Transportation and with consideration of what their constituencies would want, continued to be responsible for the projects implemented under the TIMS.

D. Brown made a motion to call to question resolution 6. T. Parado seconded it. M. Hatch called for discussion. D. Rosen said the resolution should probably refer to “graduate students” as “graduate and professional students.”

B. Liddick asked for clarification as to whether the UA had ‘yes/no’ authority in the decisions affecting the TIMS. D. Brown said they have authority subject to the administration’s approval. A. Epstein added that any legislative activity by the assembly is subject to the approval of the President. M. Hatch said that he understood that their actions were subject to the President’s approval but that the resolution didn’t state that they would have final say in decisions; rather, the it stated that the UA would be responsible for whichever initiatives could be implemented.

M. Hatch asked for undergraduate and graduate student input. T. Parado said the GPSA had just passed a resolution in support of the TIMS on Monday, October 22. C. Basil said one SA member is currently working on a resolution to support the TIMS

By a raise of hands, the vote was 14–0−1, and the resolution passed.

� Codes and Judicial Committee (UA Member, Martin Hatch, faculty)

M. Hatch said the CJC almost has the new Campus Code ready; the committee is just making the final changes and it should be ready by November 1, 2007. The UA was asked to read it in depth when they receive it so that they can fully discuss it at their November 14th meeting. He said they needed to have a recommendation for the President by December 1st.

D. Rosen said if they want the Provost to come to a UA meeting to discuss the Master Plan, they needed to set that up now because she is very busy. M. Hatch asked if anyone would like to be responsible for contacting the Provost about attending the meeting. D. Rosen volunteered to contact the Provost. He said the UA should meet beforehand to determine their position. M. Hatch asked how they should handle bringing the Provost in for a meeting and meeting on their own prior to that. J. Marwell said they should see if the Provost is available for the November 28th or the December 5th meeting.

M. Hatch said Professor Kevin Clermont, the author of the revised Campus Code, would be at the meeting when they discuss the revised code. He asked if there was any other business they needed to address. There was no other business.

VI. Adjournment

R. Orme made a motion to adjourn. J. Marwell seconded the motion. M. Hatch adjourned the meeting at 6:03 p.m.