gsg-active and open
gsg-assembly to all graduate students.Officers present: Chair Bill Jordan; Parliamentary Secretary Leonard F. Pease III; Corresponding Secretaries Eric Adelizzi and Nicole Esparza; Press Secretary Meredith Safran; Recording Secretary João Pedro Boavida; Treasurer Eitan Bonderover; Social Chair Sinéad MacNamara.
Representatives present: Huiyan Yang, proxy for Anita Adhitya, AOS; Sinéad MacNamara, CEE; Eric Adelizzi, CHE; Jia Su, CHM; Jessica H. Clark, CLA; Brigitta A. Lee, EAS; Tanjim Hossain, ECO; Gregory D. O'Mullan, EEB; Fei Sun, ELE; Meredith Safran, proxy for Kerry Bystrom, ENG; Juliet O'Brien, FIT; Meredith G. Hastings, GEO; Michael K. House, GER; Karoline Cook, HIS; Brendan McAndrew, MAE; João Boavida, proxy for Lior Silberman, MAT; David Shrom, MOL; Michael Ludkovski, ORF; David R. Smith, PPL; Philippa Townsend, REL; Cole M. Crittenden, SLA; Nicole Esparza, SOC; Leslie A. Medema, WWS.
Delegates present: Huiyan Yang, Butler Apartments; João Pedro Boavida, proxy for Lior Silberman, Graduate College (GC); Radhika Wijetunge, Lawrence Apartments; Leonard F. Pease III, Off-Campus; Heather White, Women's Centre; Fei Sun, Association of Chinese Students and Scholars (ACSS).
Councilors present: Scott Miller (CHE), CPUC and CPUC Executive Committee; Brigitta Lee (EAS), CPUC and CPUC Executive Committee; Joe Valentino (ELE), CPUC; Huiyan Yang (AOS), CPUC; Meredith Galanter-Hastings (GEO), CPUC Judicial Committee; Leonard F. Pease III (CHE), CPUC Priorities Committee;
Others present: Dean William B. Russel, dean of the Graduate School; Lisa M. Sherov, GC residence life coordinator; Cemile "Blue" Guldal (MOL), Queer Graduate Caucus (QGC); Philo Juang (ELE), Graduate Football Club (GFC); Rob Sobak (CLA), Butler Committee; Ian Parrish (PPL).
Officers absent:
Representatives absent: Cynthia Rudin, ACM; Riaz Tejani, ANT; Zach Riddley, ARC; Emily Snow, MUS; Patrick Gerland, OPR; Tamar Friedmann, PHY; Andrew Erickson, POL; Cara Talaska, PSY.
Delegates absent: Aderemi Artis, Black Graduate Caucus (BGC); Rahul Deshpande, Council of International Graduate Students (CIGS).
The following representative seats were vacant: ART; AST; COM; COS; NES; PHI; SPO.
The following delegate seats were vacant: Hibben/Magie Apartments; Millstone Apartments.
GSG Chair Bill Jordan called the meeting to order at about 6:05pm.
Recording Secretary João Pedro Boavida noted that there were two spelling mistakes in the draft minutes. Eric Adelizzi and Brigitta A. Lee moved to approve the minutes with this correction. The motion passed unanimously.
Parliamentary Secretary Leonard F. Pease III introduced two new representatives: Jia Su (CHM) and Fei Sun (ELE).
Mr. Pease used the occasion to point that members of the Assembly can raise points of parliamentary inquiry, that meaning they have a question about how the parliamentary process works.
Mr. Jordan explained that the Dean of the Graduate School had asked to address the Assembly on the Lockhart/Lawrence Addition. Mr. Jordan introduced Dean William B. Russel.
The Dean started his presentation on the additional Lawrence Apartments by stating they were larger and of better quality. The downside of that was a delayed construction, and that only 74 beds will be available next year. Even those will be available only in January, and so in the meantime people will have to live in Lockhart. Then, they will be moved at the University's expense. It was, he agreed, clearly inconvenient for the students. That's why he had asked to come tell us what the rents for Lockhart/Lawrence would be next year, and what they would have been if it was not for the delays.
Dean Russel then projected a first slide, and observed that 75% of the graduate student population was living in University housing. The slide included a lot more information about the current students living in University Housing, and statistics about last year's draws:
GRADUATE STUDENT HOUSING 2002-03
Percentages of Enrolled Draw Results Total Successful
Students Housed 2002-03 2002-03 Applicants initial wait list
1st Year 82.6% Family Apartment 358 302 43
2nd Year 80.4% Single Student Apt 198 166 13
3rd Year 77.0% GC/Annex 334 271 30
4th Year 67.5% Hibben Magie (groups)
5th Year 42.0% 3 bdrm 71 55 1
2 bdrm 26 17 1
4 bdrm 12 8 1
A significant number of students are displaced from
graduate housing at the end of their third year.
The Dean stated that in the future this kind of information will be made available. He also observed that the Graduate School of Princeton is in a way unfortunate, for it provides a lot of housing, and still there is much dissatisfaction about housing.
Dean Russel then continued to a second slide, with a comparison of rents across University apartments:
Tentative Graduate Housing Rental Rate Comparison FY04
2 bdrm area base base utilities total rent direct total total costs
sq ft rent /sq ft in rent charged utilities costs per student
----- ----- ------ --------- ---------- --------- ----- -----------
Butler 640 $675 $1.05 $0 $675 $130 $805 $403
Millstone $964 $0 $964 $130 $1094 $547
Hibben Magie $1072 $55 $1127 $66 $1193 $597
Lawrence
existing 690 $891 $1.29 $59 $950 $66 $1016 $508
new 920 $1284 $1.40 $126 $1410 $0 $1410 $705
1 bdrm area base base utilities total rent direct total
sq ft rent /sq ft in rent charged utilities costs
----- ----- ------ --------- ---------- --------- -----
Millstone $763 $0 $763 $130 $1094
Lawrence
existing 570 $743 $1.30 $30 $773 $83 $846
new 560 $1033 $1.70 $83 $1033 $0 $1034
studio 360 $682 $1.89 $83 $765 $0 $765
Tentative Monthly Rents for Lockhart-Lawrence 2003-2004
Unit Lockhart Lawrence average
[Sept-Dec] [Jan-June]
single $339 single $818 $617
double-small $290 double $576 $462
double-large $442 $623 $551
low end high end
He explained that the pricing of the new apartments had been decided by the Trustees, and that when the entire complex is open it will be decided how much of the apartments will be reserved for graduate students (all the units to open this year are for graduate students). In fact, some faculty and staff currently living in Hibben-Magie may be interested in the new Lawrence apartments. He suggested that maybe it's wiser to let the market (that is, the draw system), decide that.
Having concluded his presentation, the Dean invited questions.
Scott Miller asked what is the monthly rent in three-room apartments at Hibben-Magie. Eitan Bonderover stated it was $411.
Mr. Pease estimated the lower stipends at $12,000/year, before taxes, and compared that with the new Lawrence units' rents of $8,400/year. The Dean admitted that some students wouldn't be able to afford the new units.
Sinéad MacNamara observed that, in a 10 month period, those students would get $1,200/month, and the lowest rent (in the new units) single students could afford was $765 for a studio. She wondered how they would manage to eat. She suggested that maybe more units in Hibben-Magie should be reserved for graduate students, to avoid that problem. And she asked about the rents for the future.
The Dean observed that all stipends this year were higher than $12,000. Ms. MacNamara agreed with that for first-year students, but some stipends (e.g., third and fourth year students in the English department) were far less.
Dean Russel stated that in the future all departments will increase stipends equally for all their students. So, they will have to care only about rates of increase. He further stated that he considered that an important point, and would care about it. He thought that 40% (of their income) was the most most people would pay for housing. These prices were about 25%–30% (of a student's income). Stipends will continue to increase. But now, the problem to be solved is availability of housing. In the future, the options will be more flexible.
Mr. Miller asked for a comparison (of prices per square foot) with off-campus housing, including amenities (the possibility of having a dish-washer, a washing machine, ...). The Dean only knew what the Treasurer had told him. Mr. Miller explained his point: if off-campus housing is qualitatively better, maybe we are paying comparatively more.
Mr. Miller also asked about future housing. Indeed, Butler apartments are the cheapest option now; if it will be replaced by something more expensive, that will only make things worse. The Dean reminded that, when the discussion on the new Lawrence construction started, then Provost Ostriker pushed for cheaper construction, but the Trustees wanted more expensive. On the other hand, several sites for future construction are being studied now.
Radhika Wijetunge expressed concern about people with families: would they be forced to live in Lockhart too? The Dean saw no alternative, although that one was clearly not appropriate.
Mr. Jordan then asked when the allocation of the new units for students and faculty would be decided. Dean Russel stated that the new 74 beds would be allocated to graduate students for this coming year. Next year, when the construction is completed, that allocation will be revisited. Meredith Safran asked if we could lose housing in the future, to what the Dean answered that it might be possible to trade for units in Hibben-Magie, and that he was not aware of any effort by the administration to reduce graduate student housing. He also clarified the situation with the apartments was different from the one with undergraduate dormitories, for the University pays a lot in taxes for the apartments.
Dean Russel added that the Provost had stated that subsidizing housing will take money from the stipends. The Dean would rather try to negotiate housing prices at other levels than lose money for the stipends. He also thought that Butler must be preserved as an option. Mr. Miller reminded him that the quality of Butler is not acceptable. The Dean agreed, indeed, Lawrence apartments were an improvement, with costs. Mr. Miller observed that reasonable rents ought to be enough to pay all costs in a few years.
There being no more questions, Dean Russel thanked the Assembly for the comments. Mr. Jordan thanked the Dean for coming tell us the news, the Assembly subscribed with a round of applause.
After the meeting, Dean Russel sent a copy of the slides to the Recording Secretary, so that they could be included in the minutes.
In the interest of shortening the meeting, Mr. Jordan skipped his Chair Report, and proceeded into the CPUC Elections.
Mr. Pease first asked all candidates to the CPUC to introduce themselves. All had submitted statements in advance, which had been sent to Assembly before the meeting.
Joseph Valentino emphasized that he was currently serving in the CPUC, and would inform the Assembly about the issues in discussion in the CPUC. His statement read:
As a veteran representative of the Council of the Princeton
University Community, I believe I am best suited to once again serve the
Princeton graduate community and speak out for their interests. From
topics of post-enrollment to the housing crunch to equal representation of
graduate student concerns and more, I intend on keeping the university
council well aware of the issues that are of importance to the Princeton
graduate population. In addition, I will ensure that the graduate student
government is up to date on matters raised in council sessions, which are
of importance to the entire university. Thank you and I look forward to
another year participating in council sessions.
Ms. Lee mentioned that she was currently serving in the CPUC, and was a representative of the graduate students on the CPUC Executive Committee. So, she could provide for continuity in the CPUC. Her statement read:
I would like to nominate myself as a candidate for CPUC representative and for representation on the Priorities committee for the coming academic year, 2003-2004. I have served this past year as CPUC representative and have been a member of the Executive Committee of the CPUC for the same period. I am now quite familiar with the role of the CPUC in university governance. Having been involved with both GSG and CPUC, I am also well aware of issues of concern to both graduate students and to the larger university community. Were I to be elected, I would be able to provide continuity in representation for the graduate student body.
Rob Sobak stated he was a fourth-year CLA student, and also a member of the Butler Committee. He added that he was active in the social life of his department, had owned a small bookstore, and wanted to learn how the University is ran. His statement was:
My name is Rob Sobak. I am a rising 5th-year student in the Dept. of Classics and the Program in the Ancient World. Before coming to Princeton I owned and managed a small second-hand bookstore in Albuquerque, New Mexico. This experience taught me the importance of delegating responsibility to my employees and the value of operating in representative committtees for the benefit of a larger community. I was an active participant in both the Harvard Street Cooperative and the University Heights Small Business Association, both of which dealt with the environmental, zoning, safety, and publicity issues of the neighborhood in which I lived and ran my business. While at Princeton I have been very active in the life of my department, and in the Butler Apartment complex. I have served as the departmental librarian for two years, as the student coordinator for prospective graduate students for 3 years, and as student representative for the department's computing committee for 2 years. During this past year I have been the coordinator of the Program in the Ancient World's graduate colloquia, and this spring I founded and have since coordinated the interdisciplinary graduate group in the Center for Human Values. Finally, I have also served as the Housing Representative for the Butler Committee for the past year. I have become involved in the extra-curricular life of my department out of a firm commitment to the ideals and maintenance of what can be a fragile academic community. As housing representative I have worked to ensure the continued vibrancy of the Butler community, as well as initiating the programming and physical improvements upon which our residents depend. I am especially interested in serving on the CPUC in order to become more familiar with University policies regarding graduate housing, healthcare, and the post-enrollment. I would hope that as a member of this committee I would be in a position both to report back to the graduate student body as a whole, and act as an advocate on their behalf while in committee. Thank you for your consideration.
Leslie Medema stated she was a first-year student, and the WWS Representative in the Assembly. She was eager to get involved, wanted to work with the administration and the undergraduates, and (having talked with current CPUC members) was aware of the responsibilities.
I would like to represent the Graduate Student Government (GSG) on the Council of the Princeton University Community (CPUC) on the Priorities Subcommittee as well as on the Executive Board. I have consulted GSG members serving in both positions, and I feel that both fit well within my intellectual and employment interests and abilities. Additionally, I understand fully the time commitment that these positions entail, and I can be counted on to attend each meeting. Most importantly, I recognize that my priority is to represent the GSG and will do so to the best of my abilities. The Priorities Subcommittee of the CPUC is responsible for balancing the budget of the University and requires a large time commitment during the fall. I am both experienced in budget issues through past employment positions and academic experiences and also understand and accept the time commitment required. It is important to have the GSG voice on that committee - one that will be vocal and engaged. The CPUC Executive Board positions require representatives to be actively engaged in representing the agenda of the GSG, particularly with regard to housing, health care, and post-enrollment issues. This position calls for people who are organized, reliable, interested in working with the greater Princeton Community, open to all suggestions from the GSG, and care about the above mentioned issues, and I certainly fit that description. I would be happy and excited to take on these responsibilities on behalf of the GSG.
Mr. Sun stated he was a third-year ELE student, and was running for the CPUC, the Priorities Committee, the Governance Committee, and also for Corresponding Secretary. He was surprised that is name was systematically the last one in the ballots; Mr. Pease explained that the names were listed in the order that the statements had been submitted. Mr. Sun continued: he had come to Assembly meetings since August, was involved with the GSG and its Housing and International Students' Concerns committees. His statement:
My name is Fei Sun. I would like to run for the CPUC and its committee positions. I'm actively involved in the GSG activities since I joined the assembly last Aug. I attended every GSG assembly meeting except last Nov. which I sent a proxy. I know GSG's several current main projects. I'm already in the the international students concern committee and the house committe, and did some work for international students. I'm quite familar with GSG and would like to represent graduate students in CPUC. As the president of the Association of Chinese Students and Scholars, I organized and supervised various activities and projects, including last Moon Festival celebration and Spring Festival celebration. I was the conference manager of last year's Emerging Information Technology Conference (EITC 2002), and I'm the conference coordinator of EITC 2003. As the president of Princeton's largest minority group, I clearly know the feelings and special difficulties of being an international student. I'd like to present graduate students', especially international graduate students' concerns in front of CPUC. I'm also interested in the committee on governance, the executive committee and the committee on priorities, with the preference listed above. I would like to run for one of the positions above. If I'm successful in one election, I'd withdraw the candidacy for other positions. I'd appreciate your vote.
Mr. Pease reminded all that representation in the CPUC is very important.
Ian Parrish stated he was a first-year PPL student. He thought graduate student housing is an issue, and compared our rents with the $900/month that students at Berkeley pay to live in a studio. He also thought it was important to promote the integration of undergraduate and graduate students, and stated that President Tilghman agreed. He added that he had been involved in student governance at MIT. His statement:
I am motivated to request the nomination for the CPUC by the continuing
need for strong advocacy for graduate students at all level of university
governance. There are a number of important issues currently facing
graduate students that have been addressed previously by the GSG as well
as new ones that remain to be addressed. Some of the most important
issues in my opinion are as follows:
· Continued improvement of graduate student housing.
· Creation of a long-term maintenance and improvement schedule for the
Graduate College.
· Integration of the new residences into the social structure of
already existing graduate housing and development of residential
governments.
· Continued improvements in housing policy regarding room draw, post
enrollment, and other issues.
· Integration of undergraduate and graduate students.
· Creation of additional informal and formal interaction opportunities
for graduate students through fellow positions in residential colleges and
eating clubs.
· Study creation of a mentorship program.
· Joint social activities.
· Continued improvement in the situation for post-enrolled students
· Lobby for extension of health, housing, library and other
privileges.
· Explore means to encourage departments to either set realistic
program lengths or find ways to permit graduate students to graduate
within the allotted time.
I have a number of experiences during my undergraduate education
which have prepared me for a role in university governance. My primary
experience at MIT came in the form of "Institute Committees," faculty
committees that included students and administrators and had both
decision-making and advisory roles. For three years I served as an
undergraduate student member of the Committee on Student Life, dealing
with a multitude of issues including housing, undergraduate-graduate
interaction, and the reorganization of the fraternity system to name a
few. Last year I served as a member of the Committee on the Undergraduate
Program, the most important of these committees as it has purview over all
of undergraduate education. Through these experiences I was a successful
advocate for student needs and became skilled at communicating these needs
to faculty that were often strikingly unaware of student opinion. Other
leadership experience includes serving as vice-president of my fraternity
and an officer of Tau Beta Pi, as well as serving for three years as a
freshman academic advisor and orientation leader.
I ask for the nomination to the CPUC so that I may effectively
represent the GSG and graduate students as a whole during the 2003-2004
academic year.
Finally, Mr. Boavida, as proxy for Lior Silberman, asked to read Mr. Silberman's statement:
As an active student representative, one that is familiar with the structure and functioning of the university and that represents two distinct constituencies in the GSG assembly, I consider myself an appropriate candidate for a CPUC representative. I am running this year for my third term as U-councillor, trying to address both the concerns of all graduate students, and GC residents in particular. I have been active on the GSG Housing, Parking and Transportation, and International Student Concerns Committees, as well as on the Executive Committee as the Parliamentary Secretary until quite recently. I also continue as the GC House Commitee's Assistant Chair, where my main responsibility is representing the committee to the university at large. I personally know many members of the administration, which has allowed me to work in various ways to improve graduate student life in Princeton. I hope you will allow me continue doing this work on the CPUC.
Mr. Pease explained how the election would proceed [details in By-Laws V.1]. He also reminded that there had to be at least one member from each of the four divisions of the University. Cole M. Crittenden asked if there was any incompatibility between being a member of the CPUC and being a member of any other body. Mr. Adelizzi explained that there were no such incompatibilities, except for the CPUC Judicial Committee representative, who couldn't be a member of the CPUC and the CPUC's other committees. He added that that was not an issue for the only candidate for the CPUC Judicial Committee. Heather White was not sure if she could vote in this matter; Mr. Pease assured her that she could.
The ballots were distributed, filled, and returned to the Parliamentary Secretary. He and Mr. Jordan left the room to count the votes, and Mr. Adelizzi, being the next in the line of succession, took the chair.
Mr. Bonderover had sent his report in advance, by email. On the GSG's finances, he had reported:
III. Current Balance Cash Balance, 04/07/03: 6,739.96 Liabilites: 660.00 Cash Balance: 7,399.36 Liabilities represent funding requests that the GSG has granted, but the receiving organization has yet to submit receipts for reimbursements. The cash balance consists of $ 4,673.54 of 2002-2003 (current fiscal year) budgeted expenditures that have yet to be spent; $ 4,791.82 in prior year surplus; and, $ 465.00 of graduate student fee income over the budgeted (expected) amount. IV. Reconciled Financial Position The GSG financial statements were last reconciled to the University bank statement date ending January 31, 2003. A budget to actual income report for the GSG was last completed for transactions as of April 7, 2003. All of these reconciliations may be reviewed by any GSG assembly member. Interested parties should contact the GSG treasurer to make an appointment. V. Acknowledgements I'd like to thank the previous Treasurer, Mr. Donnell Butler, for doing such a fine job organizing the GSG Treasury. Without him the GSG would not run nearly as smoothly. The GSG Treasury needs to be maintained at the same high standards and my aim as Treasurer is to do just that.
Mr. Bonderover had also sent information regarding the funding requests. His report will be quoted as appropriate.
The first request was for the Butler Earth Day Party. The treasurer's report read thusly:
Butler Committee - Butler Earh Day Party (food and bev.) Request: 1_Organization_Name: Butler Committee 2a_Contact_Person_Name: Huiyan Yang [contact email removed by recording secretary] 3_Event_to_be_funded: Butler Earth Day Party 4_Date_of_event: around April 21 5_Expected_GS_Attendance: 1100-150 6_Requested_Amount: $300.00 [PU account number removed by recording secretary] 9_Event_description: Butler Earth Day Party is one of the most popular social events in our community. The theme is to arouse awareness of environmental protection, and students also meet old and new friends at the party. The total budget of the Butler Earth Day Party is $600.00, and as usual, we expect to be funded half by GSG, $300.00. We anticipate 100-150 students will come to the party, based on the experiences in the past years. Burgers and vege- bergers will be served freely. Beer will also be served freely, but we will encourage people to donate when they take alcohol, and thus to reduce the total budget. Recommendation: Approve. The butler committee holds this event on an annual basis and based on pervious experience the cost and expected attendance are reasonable.
Huiyan Yang spoke for the Butler Committee. Because many people would be celebrating Easter, they had decided to move the event to May 4. Also, they had initially thought of doing a barbecue, but in the meantime had decided otherwise. Sandwiches and hoagies would be served as food. Beer, drinks, and iced tea would be served as drinks. They would spend $300 to $400 with food, and $200 with drinks. They were also planning to distribute flowers; the budget for that was $100. They would collect donations, and expected that the donations would pay for the flowers. They were expecting about 200 people, and were asking for $300.
Ms. MacNamara started a long sequence of motions, to be seconded by Ms. Safran, and approved unanimously. Mr. Bonderover recommended funding. There being no debate, the chair put the matter to a vote.
MOTION: to fund the "Butler Earth Day Party" with $300. PASSED unanimously.
Mr. Bonderover introduced the second request. His advance report read:
Graduate Football Club (GFC) - Weekly Games (sports equipment) Request: 1_Organization_Name: Graduate Football Club (GFC) 2a_Contact_Person_Name: Philo Juang [contact email removed by the recording secretary] 3_Event_to_be_funded: Equipment for weekly soccer games 4_Date_of_event: every Sunday (and sometime Wednesday and Friday) 5_Expected_GS_Attendance: 40 6_Requested_Amount: $130 [PU account number removed by the recording secretary] 7b_Approved_GradSchool: Yes and Approved 9_Event_description: The Graduate Football Club (GFC) is a group of graduate students as well as a few graduate students' spouses and post-docs who play soccer on a regular basis, at least once a week. We let anyone who wants to play join the game and usually play at the GC though in the summer we play at Poe Field. We have about 40 members. We'd like to purchase some equipment to help organize our games. The balls and vests are for improving the game and the water cooler and bottles for making sure we survive New Jersey's harsh summers. Brief budget: 2 balls -- $40 12 vests -- $50 water cooler and bottles -- $40 TOTAL -- $130 Recommendation: Neutral. I am also the treasurer of the GFC and therefore cannot make any recommendations at this time. A representative from the GFC will be present at the Assembly meeting to answer any questions.
Philo Juang, president of the Graduate Football Club (GFC), explained that the GFC had been founded about 2 years ago. The email list had grown from 6 to 50 members, and about 100 different people had shown to different games. They try to schedule two soccer games per week (or one per week in the Summer), and sometimes also run social events (e.g., they organized viewings of the World Cup). Now they needed to buy equipment, which will be used over and over again, and will be an welcome addition. They have people from every department, including undergraduates, and even outsiders. Both men and women are well represented, and all are welcome to join.
Ms. MacNamara moved to fund them, and Ms. Safran seconded. Mr. Adelizzi asked if they had storage space. Mr. Juang stated they were planning to store the equipment in the Porter's Lodge. That way, it could be passed from one generation to the next.
MOTION: to fund the Graduate Football Club with $120. PASSED unanimously.
Then, Mr. Bonderover recalled that a request had been tabled [Minutes 3.12.2003, III.B] in the previous meeting. It was a request by the Queer Graduate Caucus, who asked for funding for their Fabulous Dance Party. Now they had more information. The treasurer's report read:
Queer Graduate Caucus (QGC) - The QGC Fabulous Dance Party (alcohol and food) Request: 1_Organization_Name: Queer Graduate Caucus 2a_Contact_Person_Name: Blue [contact email removed by recording secretary] 3_Event_to_be_funded: The QGC Fabulous Dance Party 4_Date_of_event: May 2, 2003 5_Expected_GS_Attendance: 200 6_Requested_Amount: $175 [PU account number removed by recording secretary] 7b_Approved_GradSchool: Not_Yet 9_Event_description: QGC is committed to providing a comfortable social environment for the LGBTQ students and their allies. The Fabulous Dance Party is the year-end event where LGBTQ students and friends can celebrate the end of the school year. This event will be open to all members of the Princeton University community and alumni who are 21 or older. In accordance with our communications with the GSG, we have determined the final date of the party to be May 2 at the D-Bar 10pm-2am. The recent 1st Annual QGC Valentine's Day Party was a huge success and the attendance exceeded the expected 100 and reached almost 200. The format of this party will be similar to the V-Day party. The GC House Committee has kindly granted us funds to cover the proctor charges ($224). We will have free alcoholic beverages as well as food and non-alcoholic drinks at the party. The system will be the same as the one used in the V-Day party. Each attendee will receive a ticket that they can use for a free alcoholic beverage. The Women's Center has granted us $75 towards non-alcoholic beverages and food. We are currently asking the FFR/btGALA (outside source) for $100 towards alcoholic beverages. Due to the high number of expected attendees, we would like to ask the GSG for $100 towards alcoholic beverages. We are waiting to hear if the $200 for alcohol and $75 for food/soda breakdown of the funds is in agreement with the alcohol policy of the Graduate School. We hope to have a confirmation by the GSG Assembly meeting on April 9. Once we receive this confirmation we will register the event with the Graduate Student Life Office. We also would like to ask the GSG for $75 for decorations. Total Proposed Budget: $475 Expected Attendance: 200 Amount Requested: $175 (37% of total proposed budget, 88cents/attendee) Please note that this proposal is different than the one proposed by the QGC previously under the same event title. The Assembly had decided, on March 12, 2003, for that proposal to be discussed as new business at the April 9 meeting. Since then many detials have been worked out. We wish for this updated proposal to be considered on April 9 instead of the old one. We apologize for the inconvenience. Blue Guldal (QGC President) Recommendation: Approve. The QGC has approached the GSG about this event at the last meeting. It was decided then that the QGC should reconsider its budget since the Graduate School has a policy of funding alcoholic beverages and food equally. This new budget has yet to be cleared with Dean Montero but it is more likely to get approval, being more reasonable than the previous proposal.
Blue Guldal explained that it was the same party discussed in the previous meeting [Minutes 3.12.2002, III.B], but the QGC had followed the GSG advice on the budget. They had also talked with Lisa Sherov and the Graduate School, and the new budget respected Graduate School policies. The event date had been May 2, but due to a new scheduling conflict, they were trying to move it to either May 1 or May 3. Ms. MacNamara added that she still didn't know the date for the APGA event, but she thought there would be no conflict. Mr. Boavida asked why the total funding was more than the total proposed budget. Ms. Guldal was surprised and checked the numbers. She concluded there was a mistake only in the total, but all the other values were the correct ones.
Do you guess? Ms. MacNamara moved to fund, Ms. Safran seconded, and...
MOTION: to fund "The QGC Fabulous Dance Party" by $175. PASSED unanimously.
Mr. Adelizzi started his report by saying that the Graduate School had approved the creation of email lists for the GSG standing committees. This had been requested in an attempt to give more substance to the committees, by providing a stable means of communication, as well as an archive of the committees' activity. He added that he had already contacted all members of the committees to enroll them in the lists, and asked every committee member who had not received an email from him to contact him.
Mr. Adelizzi then explained that a few years ago the Graduate School had
agreed to give GSG a copy of pugrads. We had now asked for
mailing lists of DCC and ETDCC students. The Graduate School agreed with
the first, and (in principle) with the second too. The practical problem
with the second was that the Graduate School didn't have a list of ETDCC
students yet: they were working on it, and would prefer to discuss that
later.
After checking there were no questions about the previous points, Mr.
Adelizzi continued with a proposal by the Executive Committee. He
observed that the GSG kept two lists for Assembly: gsg-list
(for agendas and minutes) and gsg-assembly (for votes and
information). There was also a third list, gsg-active, which
was to be used for discussion. But he further observed that nowadays most
discussion was held in gsg-assembly or, worse, in both
gsg-assembly and gsg-active. So, the question
was: is gsg-active useful? He observed that there was a
footnote: any student can sign for gsg-active, which is not
the case for gsg-assembly.
Ms. Lee thought the last one was an important point. Mr. Adelizzi added
that the list had been dormant for long, with very few messages. Michael
Ludkovski asked if it would be possible to have an archive of messages, or
if some digest of gsg-active could be compiled, for the
benefit of Assembly members who are not in gsg-active and
don't want to receive lots of email.
Ms. Safran suggested that discussion could start always in
gsg-assembly, and replies sent only to
gsg-active; That way, all would know what is being
discussed. Mr. Adelizzi pointed that recently most debate happens in
gsg-assembly. Ms. Lee observed again that the fact that
gsg-active is open to all members of the Graduate Student
Body should be held in mind.
Mr. Adelizzi thought there was a consensus to leave things as they were,
and prepare digests of gsg-active.
Mr. Sun pointed that only 15 to 20 people were in gsg-active.
Mr. Miller observed that debate has been held only in
gsg-assembly. Mr. Crittenden suggested that
gsg-assembly could be open for all students. Mr. Adelizzi
thought there might be the need to discuss some internal Assembly
business. Mr. Crittenden was not convinced; in fact, Assembly meetings
are open to all students, and gsg-active is not useful at
all.
Ms. Safran summarized the current situation as an unnecessary split of
discussion between gsg-assembly and gsg-active.
In the other hand, students can only join gsg-active.
Brendan McAndrew observed that, even if gsg-assembly be open
to all students, few will join. Mr. Crittenden added that if
gsg-active is inactive, there's no point letting anyone join
it. Mr. McAndrew suggested having only one list. Jessica H. Clark
suggested that some forward mechanism could be instituted.
Ms. MacNamara asked if people were suggesting to have a Blackboard site. Mr. Miller thought that would make debate more difficult. Ms. Safran suggested that people only had to check-in. Mr. Miller thought that was unnecessary, for the mailing list server already keeps archives of the email exchanges, and people can just check-in to see the whole archives. Mr. Adelizzi added that one can ask to receive the messages in digest form.
Mr. McAndrew moved that we have only one list. Mr. Miller asked that the list be open to all students. Mr. McAndrew agreed. Mr. Crittenden seconded.
MOTION: to deactivate gsg-active and to open
gsg-assembly to all graduate students. PASSED
unanimously.
Ms. MacNamara stated she still had no date for the APGA event [see Minutes 3.12.2003, IV.B]. She will send any new information by email, and will need all possible help. Mr. Miller added that the APGA had made contacts about the reunions.
At this moment, Mr. Jordan and Mr. Pease returned with the results of the CPUC Elections.
Upon the return of Messrs. Jordan and Pease, Mr. Pease announced the results. The final list of candidates, in order, was: Bill Jordan (ex-officio), Leonard Pease (ex-officio), Lior Silberman, Ian Parrish, Leslie Medema, Rob Sobak, Brigitta Lee. They met after the Assembly meeting to decide who will serve in the CPUC Executive Committee along with Bill Jordan (ex-officio).
Before proceeding with the vote for the CPUC committees, Mr. Pease clarified that the GSG would only nominate members for the CPUC, and that the CPUC Executive Committee would actually choose the committees' members. However, there was no precedent for not choosing the nominees.
Mr. Pease then introduced the candidates for the Rights and Rules Committee.
David Smith stated he had no previous experience in Princeton University, bad had served in a similar capacity in Northwestern University. His statement:
Please consider my candidacy for the CPUC Right, Rules, and Regulations Committee. The committee addresses issues regarding the rules of conduct for resident members of the University community. I will consider all issues with a critical eye.
Mr. Boavida stated that Mr. Silberman's statement for this committee was the same as before.
There being as many candidates as positions, and there being no objections, their approval/disapproval was decided by a voice vote. Both were unanimously APPROVED.
Mr. Pease then introduced the only candidate for the Judicial Committee. Meredith Hastings stated she was a fourth-year GEO student. She had volunteered at the last meeting to complete the current term [Minutes 3.12.2003, V.B], and was currently working on a case. Although it was hard work, it was also enjoyable, and a useful contribution. She would be happy to continue next year. Her statement:
My name is Meredith Hastings and I am currently the GSG representative for the Department of Geosciences. I plan to stand for election to the Judicial Committee position of the CPUC at the April meeting. I recently joined the Judicial Committee (to stand in for the previous representative for this year) and am currently reviewing a case. I am well aware of the seriousness of Judicial Committee decisions, as well as the need for confidentiality in reviewing cases that are presented to the committee. I am gaining experience with the case we are currently reviewing that will serve me if elected to this position for next year. Thanks for your consideration.
No one objecting, Mr. Pease put her approval to a voice vote. She was unanimously APPROVED.
Mr. Pease proceeded to the Governance Committee. Mr. Sun added to his previous statement that he would like to serve the Graduate Student Body. Calvin K. Chan, the other candidate, was not present and had not sent a proxy. His statement:
I am a first year graduate student in Electrical Engineering as well as a Princeton alumni of the Class of 2002. Being a graduate student with an undergraduate experience, I feel that I can offer a unique and balanced perspective on graduate student concerns. Since the Governance Committee involves the interaction between its members, the Executive Committee, and the University Trustees about issues concerning the governing of the University, I feel that my experiences would allow me to effectively represent graduate students on the Governance Committee.
Mr. Smith objecting to a voice vote (for he wouldn't be comfortable with a non-secret vote for a contested position), Mr. Pease distributed ballots for this election. After all had returned the ballots, he left the room to count the votes.
The chair continued running the elections. The next committee to be discussed was the Resources Committee. Juliet O'Brien asked what was the mission of this committee. Mr. Adelizzi explained that it was an advisory committee. It had been created when there was debate about University investments in South Africa, related with apartheid practices. The committee provided ethical guidance, especially for investments. It handles questions from the University community, and makes recommendations to PRINCO (Princeton University Investment Co.).
Aderemi Artis was the only candidate. He was not present, had sent no proxy, and had submitted no statement. His nomination was put to a voice vote. It was APPROVED, with the four abstentions of Ms. Hastings, Mr. Ludkovski, Gregory O'Mullan, and Ms. Safran. They all wished to be recorded.
Mr. Jordan proceeded to the nominations for the Priorities Committee.
Ms. Lee withdrew her candidacy.
Ms. Medema stated she was really interested in the position. She thinks people who work well with both the undergraduates and the administration are needed. She also understands the time commitment that it represents. She further stated that she would be open to suggestions and would like to work with the GSG and the Dean.
Mr. Pease was already back to the room. He stated he was currently serving in the Priorities Committee. He added that it's a busy activity, which may require 20 hours of work per week in December. However, that work can have a wonderful impact. This year, it was possible to get increased stipends in the humanities and the social sciences, improvements for health care, electronic access to the library. He would appreciate support. His statement:
Last year the Priorities Committee established an operating budget that included: · increased stipends to graduate students in the Social Sciences and the Humanities · provided for a residence life coordinator, similar to Lisa Sherov, for the Butler and Lawrence Apartment · made a massive infusion into the McCosh Health Center in hopes of improving summer hours and responsiveness of the urgent care · funded efforts of the library to support to increase access to on-line publications · allocated funds for increased internet security. I was honored to serve last year with Tony Fiori and would like to do so again. I believe that we can be more effective in the coming year as relationships have been built with the administration and we now understand the rather complex budgeting process. I look forward to your support.
Before making any comments, Mr. Sun asked the results of the election for the Governance Committee. Mr. Pease stated Mr. Sun had received the most votes, and was therefore nominated for the committee. Mr. Sun then withdrew is candidacy.
There being as many candidates as positions, and there being no objections, Mr. Jordan (for Mr. Pease had excused himself) ran a voice vote. Both Ms. Medema and Mr. Pease were unanimously APPROVED.
Given the late hour (7:30pm), Mr. Jordan suggested that the election for Corresponding Secretary be held immediately. No one objecting...
Mr. Pease introduced the candidates.
Nicole Esparza stated she was a second-year SOC student. She got involved with the GSG (as a Representative) because she was interested in graduate student life. She was also active in her department's recruitment, and also in recruitment of minority students. Also, if elected, she would be the only officer from the division of Social Sciences. Her statement:
My name is Nicole Esparza and I am a 2nd year student in the Sociology department. For the past school year I have been my department's rep in the GSG assembly and am excited to be nominated as Corresponding Secretary. My initial interest in the GSG was to get involved with the graduate student community in a positive and meaningful way. Participation in the GSG has given me the opportunity to work with others interested in that same goal and address graduate student concerns, such as health care and post-enrollment. As Corresponding Secretary, I plan to fulfill all my responsibilities as well as work together with the executive committee and assembly to improve graduate student life.
Ms. Safran asked if Ms. Esparza was aware that participation in the Executive Committee was a time-consuming activity; did Ms. Esparza had other commitments? Ms. Esparza stated that she had no other commitments, and that she likes to read email.
Mr. Sun distributed his statement:
My name is Fei Sun. I would like to run for the corresponding secretary. In early Feb. I was busy fulfilling ACSS responsibilities and didn't really have a chance to think about the GSG election. I'm actively involved in the GSG activities since I joined the assembly last Aug. I attended every GSG assembly meeting except last Nov. which I sent a proxy. I know GSG's several current main projects. I'm already in the the international students concern committee and the house committe, and did some work for international students. I'm especially like Bill Jordan's idea in his campaign statement to cooperate more with the undergraduate students, organize some campus wide activities together with undergraduate students. In last Monday's dinner with President Tilghman, I also raised this issue. This is exactly what I want to improve, and I'd put some effort on it. As the president of the Association of Chinese Students and Scholars, I handle the correspondence, edit and send newsletter, and maintain the website of ACSS, which is exactly the corresponding secretary's duty. I organized several big events on campus last year like the Moon Festival celebration and Spring Festival celebration. I also supervised various other activities organized by ACSS. I was the conference manager of last year's Emerging Information Technology Conference (EITC 2002), and I'm the conference coordinator of EITC 2003. Having such experience I'm confident that I can fulfill the responsibility of the corresponding secretary. I know there will be a lot of work if I'm elected. I'm glad to face the challenge and work for the fellow students. I'd appreciate your vote.
He then stated that his term in the ACSS was coming to the end. Also he had been involved with the GSG (and its committees) since August. He stated that he liked Mr. Jordan's idea of having joint activities with the undergraduates, for there was indeed a separation. Indeed, in a recent dinner with President Tilghman, she agreed that that was an important issue. And he thought the undergraduates would support the idea too. He mentioned he had helped organize the Moon Festival and the Spring Festival, which had been quite succesful. He had also helped organize the Emerging Information Technology Conference last year, and was doing it again this year. He concluded remarking that, although it's a lot of work, he can do that.
The ballots were distributed, votes were cast, the ballots were returned to Mr. Pease. He left the room to count the votes. He returned after Ms. MacNamara's report. Upon his return, he thanked both candidates for running, and announced that Ms. Esparza had been elected Corresponding Secretary. He also used that occasion to report that the alternates for the CPUC were Mr. Valentino, and Mr. Sun, in that order. Also at that time, Mr. Adelizzi reminded those elected for the CPUC that they were to meet after the Assembly meeting to elect a second representative for the Executive Committee.
There were 17 votes for Ms. Esparza and 4 for Mr. Sun.
Ms. MacNamara started her report by announcing the new schedule: shuttles will be running from 7:55pm to 10pm, every 20 minutes at peak time. The service will continue till July 31st. One of the goals of the shuttle was to encourage drivers not to drive. However, the University had done a survey, and there was no significant decrease in parking. If that continues, the shuttle won't.
So, she continued, we'll need to fight for the shuttle. She asked all representatives to tell everyone in their departments what's happening. We have two goals: convince more drivers to use the shuttle, and convince the administration that the shuttle is very important for students' life quality. She knows of drivers who have switched to the shuttle, but one of the problems is that parking was never sufficient, so that switch was not visible. However, she had been told that Western Way doesn't fill up as early as before. In any event, any parking spots will always be used if available. So, we will need to convince the administration that the shuttle is an important quality-of-life issue, especially for those living in Lawrence.
Her suggestion therefore was: send a global email to all students, asking
all drivers and everyone's friends to write to the President, the Provost,
the Dean of the Graduate School, and shuttle@. It's
important that students say they like and want the shuttle. Student
groups should also get involved.
Ms. Safran added that it was one of the things for which we could actually mobilize people. The GSG had worked really hard to get the shuttle in the first place, and it would be a crime and a shame to lose it.
In answer to a question by Ms. Clark, about the parking survey conducted by the University, Ms. MacNamara explained that the parking permits state where the students live. It's thus possible to know if they live off-campus or on-campus.
Ms. Hastings asked Ms. MacNamara if she thought email would be more effective than a petition. Ms. MacNamara said so, but suggested that student organizations could send letters.
At this point, Ms. MacNamara sought to know if the Assembly was supportive of the idea. It was clearly the case. So Ms. MacNamara summed up: no one alone can do it, but it's not difficult he all participate. A global would be sent asking for student participation. Ms. O'Brien asked about people who live off-campus, and also use the shuttle. Ms. MacNamara explained that some people do indeed need parking space and the shuttle, so they should say so in their messages. She also suggested that people recruit faculty and staff.
Mr. Smith stated his opinion that sending a global was a great idea, and suggested that the residential committees be recruited for this campaign.
Ms. Sherov suggested that it would be more effective to formulate the messages in the positive (why people like the shuttle, and why it's important). Ms. MacNamara agreed, and added that it's important to be polite. And she concluded with a warning: all members would receive an email from her, recruiting their active collaboration.
Mr. Jordan recalled some background for the discussion to follow. In January [Minutes 1.9.2003, 5.2], the Assembly had voted to fund a "Sex-positive workshop" organized by the QGC. On March 14, the Executive Committee had been contacted by Dean F. Joy Montero, associate dean for graduate student life, who wanted to know if the GSG was funding the QGC event "Joys and Toys of Sex... Fetishes, too". The description of the event seemed sufficiently different for the Executive Committee to decide to ask the Assembly for guidance. And so, on March 19, the Executive Committee put the matter to a vote: are we funding this event? The result of the vote, as had been disclosed to Assembly a few hours before the meeting, was 11 no, 3 yes, and 2 abstentions. Mr. Jordan concluded his remarks, and yielded the floor to Ms. Guldal, president of the QGC, who had asked a few minutes to explain the QGC viewpoint.
Ms. Guldal stated that, despite the result of the vote, they were still considering the GSG a cosponsor. She clarified that the QGC had no misleading intent. In fact, they were proud to provide a forum for discussion of sex toys. As not all details had been available in January, they sent them to Dean Montero as soon as they were available. It was their intention to send them to the GSG too, but they were newly elected officers, and, while coordinating all the details, they forgot to email us.
Then, has they had already told the GSG, Dean Montero didn't approve the event, on the grounds that it was inappropriate and not within the mission of the Graduate School. Dean Russel agreed. They then talked with President Shirley Tilghman, who supported the idea, and directed them to Dr. Daniel Silverman, head of University Health Services, who was also supportive. So, they are now working with Janet Neglia from the Health Services, and with the sex educator they had invited. The event will happen in the next semester, the content will be the same has had been described to Dean Montero, and Health Services will certify it. They will come in the Summer to ask the GSG for funding.
She used the occasion to report that the QGC had followed the GSG's advice on trying to get a discount at BevLab, for the "Milkshake Social" [Minutes 3.12.2003, III.B]. They had indeed gotten a discount, and so GSG's funding was not needed.
On behalf of the Executive Committee, Ms. MacNamara reintroduced the By-Law amendments discussed the month before [Minutes 3.12.2003, V.A].
The first amendment recognized de jure two programs which the GSG had always recognized de facto: Applied and Computational Mathematics, and Population Research. It was recalled that the program in History of Science had been stricken from the original text of the amendment. Ms. MacNamara moved its approval, Ms. Medema seconded.
MOTION: to approve "AMENDMENT IX. Recognition of Programs". PASSED unanimously.
The second amendment proposed a mechanism to deal with the growing surplus: at the close of each fiscal year, the treasurer would tell the Assembly if the surplus was more than 25% of the total budget, and, unless Assembly decides otherwise, would transfer half of that surplus to the endowment. So, it was essentially a reminder to use the money, or otherwise decide what to do with it. [A similar action (but for this year only) had been approved in the previous meeting; see Minutes 3.12.2003, III.B]
Mr. Ludkovski asked what was the current surplus, and what it had been in previous years. Mr. Bonderover couldn't locate that information immediately, and further discussion of this topic was postponed till he found it. In the interim, the agenda was shuffled in an attempt to maximize time-efficiency, and the T-shirts were discussed. After that, the treasurer stated that the current surplus is $690, but that no information was available for the previous years: in fact, former treasurer Donnell Butler had to reconcile the books from before his tenure. Mr. Ludkovski concluded that this was well under the limit. Mr. Bonderover agreed, but added that this amendment would provide a solution whenever that problem came again.
Mr. Crittenden asked if there were any penalties for withdrawing money from the investment. He added that he had tried to get an answer in the previous meeting, but was not satisfied. Mr. Adelizzi stated that only in an emergency the money could be withdrawn, and the Graduate School would decide what was an emergency. As far as he recalled from the discussions of the time, there were no penalties involved.
Ms. MacNamara noted that Assembly would always be asked to approve the transfer. Mr. Sobak asked if it was possible to put only half (of the default amount) in the endowment; Mr. Bonderover underlined that the Assembly always decides how much to invest. Mr. Adelizzi stated that the idea was for this to be an annual reminder for Assembly to use the money; however, if no use is found, there's always the choice of investing in the endowment. Mr. Pease added that PRINCO runs the endowment, and that last year it got an interest of 1.5%.
Mr. Crittenden observed that if the money is only available for emergencies, there's not much use of it having a good interest. Ms. MacNamara clarified that we always get back 4.5% every year. In time, this will be an important source of income, which shouldn't be neglected if we consider that the dues were set at $5 in 1989, and a constitutional referendum is needed to raise dues. Everyone had forgotten about inflation. So, she moved to approve the amendment, and was seconded.
MOTION: to approve "AMENDMENT X. Movement of Surplus Funds to the Endowment". PASSED unanimously.
On behalf of the Executive Committee, Mr. Adelizzi suggested that we should start planning how to advertise the GSG to incoming first-years. We still have some pencils (saying "Graduate Student Union") and bottle-openers from previous years. These initiatives, besides helping us use the surplus, are important for raising awareness of the GSG.
Mr. Adelizzi continued, suggesting that GSG T-shirts would be a nice choice. Indeed, pencils or bottle-openers are only seen by their users, while T-shirts are seen by everyone. The GCHC runs a contest, and we could do the same. The cost has to be investigated. Even if Assembly doesn't like the idea of T-shirts, now is the time to decide what we want to do.
Ms. MacNamara suggested that it might be possible to get a price as low as $1/unit, and if we had an attractive design we could print large quantities. Ms. Sherov stated that the GCHC usually pays about $3.80/unit (1 color) to $4.50/unit (2 colors). She added that she had a catalog with all products by that company.
Ms. Hastings suggested that we should still distribute the key-chain bottle-openers, for they were very popular. We should also do T-shirts, even if in a small quantity. And all members of Assembly should have T-shirts to, and wear them. Ms. Esparza suggested that there was no need to convince people to wear the T-shirts, the "laundry effect" would take care of that.
Ms. Medema suggested that if we pay $50 to the winner of a design contest, she could well imagine some students creating excellent designs in a few minutes. And she moved that we do a design contest. Ms. MacNamara seconded.
Ms. Clark asked if we had exact figures, to what Ms. MacNamara answered that there would be about 500 incoming students. And we could look for sponsorship. Mr. Smith suggested a friendly amendment, to the effect that, for the time being, we only approve the contest and the prize. Ms. Medema accepted.
MOTION: that we hold a T-shirt design contest, with a $50 prize for the winner. PASSED unanimously.
Mr. Jordan then introduced the next topic. The Ombuds Office was conducting a search of an ombuds officer, and had contacted him to ask for a graduate student for the search committee. They wanted to hold the first meeting in mid April, so there was not a lot of time.
Mr. Crittenden asked if there were any specific dates. There were none, but Ms. MacNamara noted that they had specifically asked for student input. Indeed, Mr. Jordan added, the Ombuds Office is a third party in conflicts.
Ms. Wijetunge volunteered. Mr. Crittenden volunteered, in case they need more than one student. Mr. Boavida recalled that they had suggested that more than one volunteer could be helpful if there were scheduling conflicts with the first one. Mr. Jordan closed, saying that he would contact the Ombuds Office to tell them who were the volunteers.
Ms. MacNamara introduced the next topic. The Executive Committee, she said, wanted to remind Assembly about the GSLI. She stated that all new administrators get a copy, and so the GSLI was an important document. She asked that each committee look at last year's report, and start thinking about what will be different in this year's report.
Mr. Pease added that the committees do actually negotiate with administrators, and Mr. Adelizzi concurred that the GSLI had really help getting things done. Many suggestions (like Dormnet in the Annexes, in Lawrence, etc.) had been followed, and according to the calendar proposed by the GSG.
Ms. MacNamara continued into the next topic in the agenda. She stated that Executive Committee members have keys to the office. We thought, however, that committee chairs should also have keys, so that the committees can hold meetings in the office. Moreover, the USG is trying to take our space, and there's no point not using it when we do need it. Currently, the Executive Committee holds office hours and executive meetings in the office. We will meet with Paul Breitman, Frist Center director, and ask for keys for the committee chairs, but we need Assembly's permission to do that. Mr. Jordan moved to approve, and Mr. Smith seconded.
MOTION: to approve that committee chairs have keys to the GSG office. PASSED unanimously.
Ms. MacNamara then introduced another measure: buying GSG banners. A large one, which can be used at events, would cost $96. A smaller one, to have over the office door and "mark the territory", would cost $70. She stated this would be a good investment, which would increase visibility, and put us on a more equal footing with the USG. The Executive Committee was seeking Assembly's permission to buy these banners.
Mr. Ludkovski asked what were the dimensions; Ms. MacNamara stated the large banner was 6ft by 2.5ft, and the small was 3ft by 2ft. She moved to authorize the use of $170 for this buy, and Ms. Medema seconded.
MOTION: to authorize the use of $170 to buy GSG banners. PASSED, with Mr. Adelizzi abstaining.
Mr. Adelizzi introduced the next topic. He issued a call for committee members: let everyone choose their favorite issue; be it Housing, Post-Enrollment, Campus Relations (Ms. Lee would be coordinating this committee), Parking & Transportation, Library, or Health Care. Committee members help write the GSLI, and are the ones who actually meet with administration and help shape University policy.
Ms. MacNamara insisted that committee members don't need to be Assembly members. Mr. Adelizzi agreed: representatives can look for volunteers among their constituents. Mr. Jordan suggested pointing people to the GSG page, to see in what projects they can get involved. Mr. Pease added that administrators are well aware of GSG activities, and they do listen to us (although they don't necessarily admit to doing it).
Mr. Adelizzi asked to report succinctly on the Housing Committee activities. The committee held a meeting on March 31, housing for post-enrolled students was the main topic. The fact is [Assembly Minutes 3.12.2003, IV.E] that what's happening now doesn't correspond to the GSG's understanding in the Fall. Post-enrolled students are not being allowed to participate in the draws, but only in a wait-list. It's sure that there is a wait list for DCC students, but the situation of ETDCC students is not clear.
Not allowing post-enrolled students to enter the draws will make it impossible to have an accurate tally of how many of these students want University housing. Moreover, hardship applications are not being considered. The situation also affects members of residential housing committees.
The Housing Committee had appointed a subcommittee to talk with Dean Russel, and propose corrective measures.
Mr. Jordan tentatively scheduled the next meeting for May 14, in Frist 309. The date is not definitive because he had invited President Tilghman for the next meeting, and it might be convenient to move the meeting to accommodate her schedule. The intention of the invitation is twofold: we can tell her where we are now, and she can answer questions and tell us what to expect in the future. He also thought it was a good idea to invite her once a year, or once a semester.
Mr. Jordan adjourned the meeting at about 8:20pm.