Minutes
University Assembly
Tuesday, March 26, 2013
4:30 — 6:00 p.m.
401 Physical Science Building

I. Call to Order

J. Cai called the meeting to order at 4:36 p.m.

Attendance:

Present: J. Blair, R. Booker, J. Burns, J. Cai, R. Kay, N. La Celle, J. Il Lee, E. Loew, G. Mezey, E. Newbury, M. Paine, P. Scelfo, B. Schaffner, R. Wayne

Absent: K. Albert, A. Gitlin, T. Grove, E. McNelis

Others Present: President David Skorton, VP Tommy Bruce, A. Bores, E. Cortens, K. Zoner (Chief, CUPD), A. O’Donnell

II. Approval of the Minutes

The minutes from the February 26, 2013 and March 12, 2013 UA meetings were approved unanimously without changes.

III. Reports from Assemblies

Executive Board

E. Newbury reported there was no meeting last week due to spring break, but work has continued on outstanding items. The board also worked to prepare ideas for today’s discussion with President Skorton.

Student Assembly

P. Scelfo reported there was no meeting last week, but one of the current topics of discussion is the creation of a student “supreme court.” This would require a change of the SA charter and bylaws. He also gave a recap of the proposed powers of the court.

GPSA

M. Paine reported the GPSA held a meeting yesterday. The GCI was passed. He noted the GPSA has worked on this comprehensive document all year. He also asked to present the document to each of the assemblies. Separately, he reported a resolution on divestment was indefinitely postponed.

Employee Assembly

B. Schaffner reported the EA held the final open forum on survey results and would be moving forward with subsequent recommendations soon. She also stated the EA is working on a couple of resolutions as well as considering a new award to be given to HR and management to recognize their work. G. Mezey added the EA continues to look for a way to endow the Employee Care Fund.

Faculty Senate

R. Kay reported the last meeting was on March 13. Main agenda items included committee reports and a presentation from chief IT officer Ted Dodds. Provost Fuchs gave a presentation on MOOCs, which indicated that work on developing these courses would move ahead. J. Burns added there was some discussion about whether the faculty was adequately consulted regarding this topic.

IV. Reports from Committees

Codes and Judicial Committee

G. Mezey reported, aside from working on the resolution up for discussion at this meeting, the committee had a discussion about freedom of speech and expression. He also stated a minor code change would be ready by the next UA meeting. In addition, the committee discussed the Hearing and Review Board recruitment process. A departure from the interview process is being considered in favor of a more robust online application process. He stated the recruiting procedures for the Board need to be added to the code.

Campus Welfare Committee

J. Cai reported a resolution regarding security and other related concerns has been postponed but may be ready for discussion at the next UA meeting.

Campus Infrastructure Committee

B. Schaffner had no updates.

V. Business of the Day

R. 5�Resolution to Modify Campus Code to Disclose Misconduct of University Registered Organizations

G. Mezey introduced the resolution, stating it attempts to increase fairness across organizations with regard to reporting of misconduct. A. Bores stated he was under the impression the website was already posting this information. G. Mezey and J. Blair clarified. They stated the resolution would serve to clarify the difference between people protected as individuals and information should be published.

Discussion with President David J. Skorton and Tommy Bruce, VP University Communications

President Skorton stated he had carried out the investigation regarding the Ho Plaza incident. He found conflicts do exist between code and administrative documents, at least under certain interpretations. He realized the FS report might not be finished with their investigation for months and is glad the UA is working without this report. He added he would consider acting on the UA recommendations before the FS report is released. Additionally, he noted he agreed with University Counsel Mingle’s finding that no rights were encroached upon during the handling of the incident. He does see a need to resolve the conflicts in the code.

G. Mezey asked whether it was reasonable to assume the FS investigation will focus on the incident itself, while the UA and CJC ought to investigate the code using the incident only as a catalyst for discussion. President Skorton responded the CJC and UA should do whatever they believe to be the right course of action. Separately, he reiterated he has seen no evidence to suggest any employee or other personnel did anything wrong.

R. Wayne stated he tried to determine if either of the groups involved in the incident designated anyone to communicate with the opposition. He was disappointed to find none had taken such a responsibility. He wondered if there is anyone in the upper levels of the administration who could act in situations like this, even if their proactive role is not explicitly described in the code.

President Skorton responded by stating CUPD and event managers exist to manage unforeseen circumstances and ensure public safety, but ultimately, an increase in the reliance of organizations on the administration yields only a decline in the campus climate. Instead, he suggested organizations be encouraged to work together and he expressed skepticism that administrative intervention can deal with any issues that arise between groups aside from violence.

M. Paine asked about IMT reports. He noted the reports were released well after the discussions and wondered whether there had been further discussion. President Skorton responded the cause for delay was the academic break. The administration decided against releasing reports over the break. He assured the UA people were actively working on the reports to make them as clear as possible. He also reminded the UA the administration is operating with many fewer staff than in the past.

E. Cortens stated he has worked in prison education and appreciated President Skorton’s op ed on the topic. He added such programs make a great difference in many lives and help to reduce recidivism. Regarding this, Skorton reflected on the value of publishing his statements and other information on the Internet, represented by the deluge of public comments that follow shortly after release.

President Skorton also briefly addressed immigration issues. He stated this is a problem that has been worked on for a long time mostly to no avail. However, he noted it is currently a popular issue. He told the UA he had sent a letter to 1200 presidents and leaders on these issues. He asks that schools around the nation have meaningful discussions and debates about immigration policies. Specifically, April 19 has been selected as a day for these activities.

G. Mezey asked if there was an online repository of all of President Skorton’s writings. Tommy Bruce stated, indeed, all such writings, along with speeches and other publications, could be found on the leadership page of the Cornell website.

President Skorton and VP Tommy Bruce departed and the assembly moved back to a discussion of Resolution 5.

M. Paine wondered about the status of unregistered organizations under this resolution. He stated he knows many organizations are unregistered.

G. Mezey advised those organizations should get registered as soon as possible. Otherwise, they are seen as nothing more than a group of individuals. M. Paine also asked if this resolution would lead to the public disclosure of individual actions within organizations, especially among the leadership. G. Mezey and K. Zoner clarified the leaders would be treated as individuals and privacy would be recognized accordingly except in a case where the group was involved or otherwise complicit.

A. Bores said the website that would publish the information already states that it includes other organizations. Given this, he questioned the need for a resolution.

K. Zoner responded the site is stating their willingness and ability to post information they receive about other organizations. This resolution serves as a clarification that explicitly defines the entities whose privacy is protected as an individual.

J. Blair summarized the resolution does no harm and clarifies an important point. He proceeded to call the question. M. Paine seconded this.

Seeing no opposition, the assembly voted on the resolution.

Resolution 5 passed with a vote of 11–0−0.

VI. Open Discussion

No comments were made during the open discussion.

VII. Adjournment

J. Cai adjourned the meeting at 5:47 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Noah Wegener
Assemblies Clerk