Minutes
University Assembly Meeting
Wednesday, April 30, 2008
4:30 � 5:00 p.m.
163 Day Hall

I. Call to Order

M. Hatch called the meeting to order at 4:33 p.m.

II. Roll Call

Roll was taken via sign-in sheet.

Present: C. Basil, D. Brown, M. Fontana, J. Glenn, M. Hatch, D. Kurczewski, L. Lawrence, B. Liddick, J. Marwell, S. Matthews, R. Orme, T. Pardo, D. Rosen, E. Sanders, R. Wayne
Not Present, A. James, E. Loew, P. Mahoney, R. Rodriguez, A. Stroock
Also In Attendance: A. O’Donnell, A. Epstein, D. Arnold

III. Approval of Minutes - April 23, 2008 Minutes

M. Hatch asked the members to review the April 23, 2008 Minutes for approval. D. Rosen made a motion to approve the minutes as submitted. J. Marwell seconded the motion. The April 23, 2008 minutes were unanimously approved by voting.

IV. Appointment of University Hearing and Review Board Members

M. Hatch made a motion to approve Resolution 11 to Staff the 2008–2009 University Hearing and Review Boards. C. Basil seconded the motion.

A. Epstein added the Codes and Judicial Committee felt that everyone who was not recommended could be a good applicant in the fall. In the case of C.J. Slicklen, who couldn’t interview because he was out of town, they specifically recommended he interview with them in the fall because there will still be vacancies. In response to B. Liddick’s statement that he doesn’t know any of the nominees so he feels it’s illogical for him to be approving these people as members of the University Hearing and Review Board, M. Hatch said it’s essentially a vote of trust and acknowledgement in the committee’s work. Having been on the committee, he says he believes they have done a fair and good job. In response to B. Liddick’s statement that it just felt like they were just giving “a rubber stamp of approval”, M. Hatch said even if it does seem like a “rubber stamp” it allows them continuing authority over the process.

A. Epstein said he wouldn’t recommend declining the members, but they could provide more information or advice for the process in the future.

In response to A. O’Donnell’s question asking if the UA members would like a brief sentence about each nominee in the future, M. Hatch said he didn’t think this was necessary. He said the CJC has been very active this semester, but in subsequent semesters when they are not so busy, they could provide a report on the nomination process.

M. Hatch said they would proceed to a vote. By a hand-count vote, Resolution 11 was unanimously approved and all of the individuals selected by the Codes and Judicial Committee were appointed to the University Hearing and Review Board.

M. Hatch said he would like to send a letter of appreciation to the CJC for all of their hard work, the members agreed this would be a good idea.

V. Open Forum

i. Health Services Committee Relationship

D. Kurczewski said the Health Services committee would like to try out a liaison arrangement with one or two UA members who would have regular, direct contact with Sharon Dittman and other Gannett administrators so that issues regarding health services can be discussed in the UA and brought back to their attention. S. Dittman is interested in the idea of generalist type people, not just people who are interested in very specific issues. She thinks a liaison arrangement would be more consistent and regular than their current system. In response to M. Hatch’s statement that the old system also had a liaison, D. Kurczewski said the old system, in which a committee met around a liaison, wasn’t effective. The people from the general population who attended the committee meeting were not always the same people.

A. Epstein said the reason the committee wasn’t meeting in the past was because the UA did not convene it and because there were no volunteers to staff it.

M. Fontana said when he first met with the Cornell Store Advisory Board, they were also concerned that the same people weren’t consistently attending meetings so they would have to keep repeating information. He would be in favor of changing the system so they would have a liaison and if important issues came up they could form ad-hoc committees to address them.

M. Hatch said they have a committee that is reviewing the charter, so maybe they can do something in the next year to revive committees such as the Health Services, Campus Store and Cornell Advisory Board. There was further discussion about this and M. Hatch said they would discuss this at a later meeting.

M. Hatch called attention to the members who would be ending their terms on the UA today, and the assembly offered their appreciation for their work with a round of applause.

M. Hatch said the UA has a responsibility and opportunity to be an important part of the selection process for the Judicial Codes Counselor and the Judicial Administrator. That responsibility has not been as vigorously exercised as it should have been. The office has not been weakened in any way by being managed by the President’s office and the Law School, but in order to keep the Code and process as a part of the UA’s responsibilities, they should try to be more active in the selection of these positions in the future.

A. Epstein said this should extend to all areas in which the UA had legislative authority but hasn’t been engaged, such as Health Services, the Cornell Store, Transportation and Cornell United Religious Works.

M. Hatch said they would all be charged to do this in the future.

ii. Transportation Advisory Committee Liaison

D. Brown reminded everyone that they would need to assign another envoy to the Transportation Advisory Committee as soon as possible, since he is leaving. They should do so as soon as they reorganize next year’s UA.

In response to E. Sanders’ question asking what some of the most important issues the committee addressed were while D. Brown was their liaison, Dan said they’ve reestablished themselves and made major changes to transportation, so there shouldn’t be any additional major changes coming. They put forward a very progressive resolution to reduce the amount cars on campus beyond the t-GEIS, and their bicycle initiative is going quite well.

In response to M. Hatch’s question asking who was interested in being the committee liaison to replace D. Brown, J. Marwell recommended appointing liaisons at the next meeting when the new UA members would be present. There was further discussion about this and the assembly agreed to wait until the next meeting. C. Basil said this was important because they needed to involve new members right from the beginning.

iii Moving Meeting Locations

A. Epstein asked if the assembly members wanted to try to move meetings to a more central location such as Day Hall, instead of Clark Hall where the assembly typically meets. The assembly members expressed interest in this since construction had made the route to Clark Hall difficult. There was further discussion about this. A. O’Donnell said she would look into getting a room in Day Hall. M. Hatch reminded the members that they had discussed moving the meetings to different locations earlier in the year. J. Marwell said moving meetings to a more central location could also encourage more community members to attend.

iv. Campus Planning Committee

R. Wayne said he thinks the Campus Planning Committee is a great committee that is represented by members from all over campus with different viewpoints. They seek input from to come up with balanced decisions. He’s enjoyed being liaison to them.

E. Sanders said she thought it was great that before anything is going to be done on campus, it is brought before the Campus Planning Committee.

R. Wayne said he’s not sure this will remain true once the Master Plan has been implemented.

In response to A. Epstein’s statement that it was his understanding that the Campus Planning Committee has always had to approve every building being proposed on campus and that it has done so for many years, E. Sanders said yes, but its new responsibility is to ensure that each new building, one by one, conforms to the notion of the Master Plan.

In response to M. Hatch’s question asked R. Wayne if he would be interest in continuing as the liaison to the Campus Planning Committee, R. Wayne said yes.

M. Hatch thanked the UA members for their commitment and hard work and congratulated them on a good year. He said he looked forward to working with returning members next year.

v. President Skorton’s letter regarding his approval of the Revised Campus Code of Conduct

M. Hatch read President Skorton’s letter of appreciation to the CJC and UA for their hard work regarding the Revised Campus Code of Conduct.

In response to E. Sanders’ statement that, while the letter was nice, it was unfortunate it took almost two years to accomplish, J. Glenn said the President did mention that in hindsight he would have met with the groups earlier to provide input. In response to E. Sanders’ statement that the administration should have been offering input from the beginning, D. Rosen said he thought the President learned from this.

M. Hatch said it’s useful to have the President and Provost talk to them earlier in the year. He believes the more they talk to the UA, the more they will take the UA seriously.

In response to R. Wayne’s question asking if they could have the Hearing Board chair come and speak to them, M. Hatch said yes.

VI. Adjournment

M. Hatch made a motion to adjourn the meeting, and it was unanimously approved. M. Hatch adjourned the meeting at 5:00 p.m.