• Representatives present • Katherine Bold, ACM • Neven Fuckar, AOS • Alexandros Ntelekos, CEE • Sasha Meyers, CHE • Kellam Conover, CLA • Christopher DeCoro, COS • Kevin Amonlirdviman, ECO • Guillaume Sabouret, proxy for Ying Wang, ELE • Lisa Wilde, proxy for James Bickford, ENG • Anita Adhitya, proxy for Tarje Nissen-Meyer, GEO • Jeris Yruma, HIS • Weifeng Chen, MAE • Wei Ho, MAT • Shin-Yi Lin, MOL • Annika Peter, PHY • Daniel Raburn, PPL • Susan Robison, proxy for Louis Lee, PSY • Holger Zellentin, proxy for Levi McLaughlin, REL • Julia Belopolsky, proxy for Cori Anderson, SLA •
• Delegates present • Josh Friess, BUT • Neven Fuckar, GCO • Meredith Safran, OFF •
• Councilors present • Chair Shin-Yi Lin • Parliamentary Secretary Medini Padmanabhan • Recording Secretary Annika Peter, CPUC • Press Secretary Susan Robison • Treasurer Jeff Dwoskin • Social Chair Megan Sullivan • Guillaume Sabouret, CPUC • Meredith Safran, CPUC, CPUC Executive Committee & Academic Affairs • Jack Tinsley, CPUC •
• Others present • Kumi Cherenack, ELE • Jimmy Chui, The Game • Assistant Dean Lisa Schreyer, Graduate School •
• Representatives absent • Peter Locke, ANT • Tyrel McQueen, CHM • Christiane Meyer, EEB • Peter Eubanks, FIT • Angela Holzer, GER • Sultana Banulescu, HOS • Samir Soneji, OPR • Aderemi Artis, PHI • Barbara Buckinx, POL • Steven Shafer, SOC • Daniel Harris, WWS •
• Delegates absent • Chidozie Ugwumba, Black Graduate Caucus • Heather White, Women’s Center (WOC) • Chen Wei, ACSS • Weining Man, CIGS • Marcelline Block, Hibben-Magie (HIB) • Jennifer Jordan, LAW •
• Councilors absent • Corresponding Secretary Danielle Osler • James Bickford, CPUC • Newsha Dau, CPUC Priorities Committee • Nicole Esparza, CPUC, CPUC Executive Committee • Josh Friess, CPUC Resources Committee • Christiane Meyer, CPUC Rights and Rules Committee • Sara Nephew, CPUC Governance Committee • Ian Parrish, CPUC Priorities Committee • Lior Silberman, CPUC Rights and Rules Committee, Facilities • Tauna Szymanski, CPUC Judicial Committee • Karin Sigloch, Health and Life •
• Representative seats vacant • ARC• ART• AST• COM• EAS• MUS• NES• ORF• SPO•
• Delegate seats vacant • Millstone Apartments •
Chair Shin-Yi Lin called the meeting to order at 6:07 pm.
Ms. Padmanabhan welcomed Wei Ho, the new MAT representative, and thanked the previous representative, Tom Horine, for his service.
Ms. Peter stated that she had received mostly grammatical corrections for the unofficial June minutes (unofficial because a quorum was not present at the June Assembly meeting), and clarifying statements concerning Ms. Sigloch's report on her meeting with Public Safetly for the May minutes. Assembly voted unanimously to approve the May minutes.
Mr. Dwoskin made his Treasurer's Report. There were two funding requests. The first request was for co-sponsorship of the June pizza party at the Graduate College (this request was heard after the event took place only because a quorum was not present at the June meeting when this proposal was supposed to have been considered). Christopher DeCoro, representing the GC House Committee, explained that the GC holds three of these events per summer, and that the GSG has historically co-sponsored the event. In fact, the June party was advertised as being co-sponsored by the GSG, even though the funding request had been addressed by the time of the event. Mr. DeCoro thought that the June event should be considered a "very large event", as per funding guidelines, and should be funded accordingly. Mr. Dwoskin recommended funding the event by $250.
The second request was submitted by The Game Committee. Jimmy Chui, representing the committee, stated that The Game is an annual scavenger hunt held during the graduate orientation period. This year, the committee was planning on having a larger social event at the end of the scavenger hunt in order to foster more interaction among graduate students. The total budget was $1300, with $800 committed from the GC House Committee. Mr. Dwoskin recommended funding the event by $225.
It was moved and seconded to hear a late funding request from the GC House Committee for the July pizza party. It was voted (7-5-5) not to hear the request because in order to waive standing rules, a majority of ALL representatives present needed to vote to waive the relevant standing rule (in this case, the standing rule that prevents Assembly from hearing late funding requests). It was moved and seconded to fund both events by $300. An amendment to fund the June pizza party by $550 and The Game by $400 was not accepted by the person who made the motion. Dan Raburn asked about the demographics of The Game. Katy Bold stated that historically, 70% of participants were incoming students. Jeris Yruma accepted as a friendly amendment to fund the June pizza party by $450 and The Game by $500. Ms. Safran stated that many groups would come for funding in September for orientation events and that it was unwise to fund these events at such a high level. Assembly voted 10-6-2 to fund the June pizza party by $450 and The Game by $500.
Ms. Lin made the following statement:
As I explained to Assembly, the GSG has written letters to administrators during the past two summers. In these letters, we detail specific issues that require budgetary support to remedy. We hope that our letters will firstly, bring graduate student issues to their attention, and secondly, provide them with reference information so that they can make budgetary requests of the university-level Priorities Committee if needed. While the GSG cannot make requests directly to PriComm, these letters which are written by your Executive Committee are given to administrators who do have that authority. Since our last Assembly meeting, students have been submitting possible Letter Writing topics to us. I sent out an email to Assembly summarizing each of these proposals. Today, as Assembly, we will either approve or disapprove a given topic. Assembly is not voting on the wording of each proposal, but only on the substance of each proposal. Please note that we can approve or disapprove an unlimited amount of proposals. The factors that should guide our voting are: 1) Whether the issue truly has broad student body support 2) Whether this proposal will actually address the issue in an adequate way. Finally, we should all be aware that the university is under serious budgetary constraints, largely due to current energy costs. As such, PriComm, which in the recent past (2003-2004) funded $2 million worth of budgetary items, only funded $500,000 worth last year.
We will conduct the voting in the following way: We will first do a vote of each of these requests. Any requests that receive 75% yes or no will be either approved or disapproved as is. Any requests that either need revision or require more discussion for a consensus will then be discussed one by one.
The format for deciding for which proposals the Executive Committee should write letters was as following: if on the first vote a proposal received >=75% of Assembly votes, it would automatically pass. If a proposal received <=25% of votes, it would automatically be discarded. For any other approval percentage, Assembly would discuss the proposal and hold another vote, this time any proposal passing that received at least a simple majority of votes. The discussion of the proposals will proceed in a topical, not chronological manner.
Many graduate students stay on campus during the summer months to conduct research and continue with their academic work. As the University is on break during this time, there are few outdoor activity resources available for students' use. Carnegie Lake is one outdoor location that is underutilized by students in the summer. Our proposal is to provide 3 canoes and 4 kayaks to the Princeton University community available for free use on Carnegie Lake and the canal during the summer. The one-time budget for this PUID-based program would be minimal, as the canoes and kayaks (and associated paddles and life vests) could be purchased for under $3,500. The canoes and kayaks would last for many years to come and would provide a venue for spending quality time outside during the summer months.
In the initial round of voting, Assembly voted to approve the proposal by 13-3-2. During the discussion period, several logistical issues emerged. Mr. Raburn asked if PriComm was the appropriate venue for this request. Megan Sullivan asked where the canoes and kayaks would be stored, and who would be responsible for overseeing rentals. Mr. Friess made an amendment, accepted as friendly, that Assembly ask for more outdoor activities and facilities in general (such as more field space, more basketball courts, etc.). The proposal with this amendment passed 10-7-1.
Since its inception, the graduate student shuttle has helped graduate students commute to and from main campus. Graduate students, however, encounter problems traveling to and from campus during the weekends, especially during days of inclement weather. These problems are exacerbated when the campus is hosting weekend events and on-campus parking becomes limited. Similar hardships arise for students who work late on weeknights, either in the labs or libraries. We would like to put forward a request to expand shuttle service during the weekends and until midnight (both services can be less frequent than the weekday daytime service).
During the initial round of voting, Assembly voted 14-1-3 on the proposal. It passed without further discussion.
While recycling bins are present in graduate residences, there are some small steps we can take to encourage students to participate in the recycling program. For one, containers for paper recycling in Hibben and Magie lobbies do not have slotted tops to discourage individuals from placing other refuse into them. These tops can be purchased at less than $25 each. For another, plastic bottle recycling containers could be purchased for laundry rooms to encourage individuals to recycle empty detergent/fabric softener containers. These two proposals should cost only a few hundred dollars each and would require minimal custodial staff time to empty recycling containers on a regular basis.
During the inital round of voting, Assembly voted 3-7-7 on the proposal. Jack Tinsley suggested that Assembly should address the substance of the proposal but not submit the request to PriComm. It was voted unanimously for the Executive Committee to address this issue through channels other than PriComm.
Currently, there is no sidewalk connecting Hibben-Magie to Alexander Road. Getting to the Wawa, train station, or some university offices (most notably, visa services) is a rather haphazard and even dangerous affair. Last year, we proposed that a safe and well-lit sidewalk along Faculty Road from Alexander Road to the entrance Hibben-Magie. We also suggested a similar sidewalk from Hibben-Magie to Butler Apartments. We were told that parts would be paved in 2004 and other segments would be under consideration later. We also request a lighted crosswalk (akin to those located on Washington Road by Fine Tower and by McCarter Theater on University Place) on Alexander Road at the intersection with College Road to increase the safety of Graduate College residents.
During the initial round of voting, Assembly voted 15-0-3 on the proposal. This proposal passed without further discussion, except for a comment from Mr. Tinsley, who stated that the Executive Committee should double-check which roads actually need sidewalks and lights.
During summer and winter breaks, on-campus University Health Services are greatly limited. McCosh is open Monday through Friday (8:45 a.m. to 4:45 p.m.) only with no weekend or inpatient services after hours. Students seeking medical care after-hours must often go to the emergency room at local hospitals, which is extremely expensive even with insurance covering 80% of the cost. The Taskforce for Health and Well-being recommended that summer hours at McCosh be extended; however, considering the tight budget this year, we ask instead for increased coverage for emergency care.
A vote on this issue was postponed due to lively debate on the substance of the proposal. Mr. DeCoro asked that the proposal should be narrowed to request the lowering of the $200 deductible for off-campus care. Ms. Peter asked if this was really more important than lowering the maximum annual out-of-pocket expense of $5,000 or the 20% co-pay, especially given the cost of emergency room care. Weifeng Chen said that students were statistically more likely to have smaller, cheaper accidents. There was some discussion over how narrowly or broadly Assembly should charge the Executive Committee with writing letters. The amendment to specifically address the lower deductible was defeated 4-9-5. Mr. Tinsley proposed an amendment to allow the Executive Committee to broadly address the concern of the cost of healthcare during summers and breaks. This proposal was accepted as friendly, and the motion was unanimously passed.
There is a shortage of secure storage space in Firestone. The graduate study rooms in Firestone can be opened with a single key and can be accessed by non-students. Numerous students have complained that books have been removed from their carrels and that they do not have secure areas to store valuables and computers. The report issued by Shipley, Bulfinch as part of the Library renovation project confirmed that this is a matter of serious concern for graduate students of departments that use Firestone as their primary library. The renovation of Marquand Library addressed this problem. However, since the actual implementation of the Firestone renovation project is likely to be a long time coming, we request that a temporary solution be found for this persistent problem. We request that the University install small lockable personal storage areas, comparable to those available at Columbia or NYU, inside or near the library for either extended or short-term use. If such secure storage exists in the library, we request that its availability be advertised and expanded. If these spaces are not universally available because they belong to a specific department, we request that the library work with the Graduate School or with departments to make this option available more widely, at least until such time as the Firestone renovation solves this problem.
During the inital round of voting, Assembly voted 7-2-5 to approve the proposal. Mr. Raburn asked if it was likely that PriComm would approve this proposal, and asked how much it would cost. Ms. Lin stated that the GSG had asked for secure storage every year for the past three years and had been unsuccessful, but that it was important to keep the issue on the minds of administrators. Ms. Safran stated that the GSG does not usually make cost estimates because the GSG cannot make funding requests, it can only ask administrators to make requests on our behalf. The proposal passed 16-0-1.
Graduate students, no matter their school affiliation or individual quality, cannot all be assured of securing full-time, tenured jobs in academia. Preparation for this reality varies widely across departments, and expectations for such a career path are also different between divisions. The Graduate Engineering Council, in conjunction with the APGA, has held several networking mixers where Graduate School alumni and current degree candidates can engage in professional advising and networking; this spring, the GSG Academic Affairs Committee and the APGA/Alumni Council organized the first such non-academic professional networking event for the Humanities, to great success. Departmental representatives from all four divisions -- Humanities, Social Sciences, Natural Sciences, and Engineering -- have expressed interest in such non-academic networking opportunities. We therefore request that the Graduate School, in conjunction with Career Services and the APGA/Alumni Council, request funds to support four such annual events, one for each division. The costs for each event will likely be no more than $1500 each, inclusive of food/drink, publicity, and facilities expenses. The GSG (or the GEC, in the case of Engineering) will work with departments through Assembly members and with the University administration to plan and execute these events.
Assembly voted 8-2-5 on the proposal in the initial round of voting. Ms. Yruma was involved in planning the humanities mixer and thought that funds would be available for future events even if PriComm declined to fund the events. Ms. Safran thought that the GSG should not count on continuous funding for the mixers from the offices that funded the first humanities mixer. She thought that the Graduate School should know that these events are important to graduate students. Mr. Tinsley proxied for Ms. Bold. Assembly voted 8-4-6 on this proposal. There was a long discussion over whether abstentions should count essentially as no-votes, or if they should be removed from the final tally. It was agreed that the Parliamentary Secretary would consult Roberts Rules and the GSG Constitution on this matter and make a report to Assembly. The outcome of this vote was tabled until the issue of abstentions was cleared up.
Dining Services has made progress towards providing more healthy food options on-campus. For example, the Healthy Eating Lab was opened this year in Frist. We request that Dining Services provide more organic food options and make more environmentally friendly choices so that we can continue to make progress towards our goal of encouraging healthier eating at Princeton. We request more organic, locally grown and in-season food options in residential colleges and Frist. In addition, we support the use of reduced packaging of Frist items, more environmentally conscious utensils in catering, environmentally friendly options when ordering from off-campus catering vendors, and the promotion of food wastage reduction.
Assembly voted 5-7-7 on the proposal during the initial round of voting. During the discussion, Mr. Raburn suggested that this issue should be kept in the minds of administrators. Mr. Conover said that Dining Services is working on precisely these issues. It was stated by Anita Adhitya that Dining Services was not making progress on food options because of insufficient funds, and suggested that PriComm would be the appropriate venue for getting more money to address these issues. Mr. DeCoro stated that he thought there were a lot of places in Princeton to get organic food and that Dining Services instead should focus on making the food at Frist cheaper. Several people stated that there was a population of graduate students that would appreciate healthier food options on campus because Nassau Street was fairly far from their workplaces. This proposal was rejected 4-9-4.
Frist Campus Center has been a boon to campus and student life since its construction five years ago. However, due to constraints in its original design, individual floors of Frist cannot be easily kept open without the entire building being open. Given that Frist is expensive to run -- both in terms of energy costs and personnel salaries, it has been difficult to keep Frist open normal hours during the summer. This has severely limited, amongst other things, summer dining options for students and staff who remain on campus. We request that an outside door to Cafe Vivian be built so that it can remain operational in isolation from the rest of the building. This renovation would provide a central campus social and dining space open for expanded hours during the summers, which could be maintained at a lower cost relative to keeping all of Frist Campus Center open. While we realize we are requesting a large expenditure item, we believe these improvements will significantly enhance our ability to utilize the Frist Campus Center throughout the year.
During the initial round of voting, Assembly voted 1-8-8 on the proposal. During the discussion period, Mr. Tinsley pointed out that the director of Frist, Tom Myers, had suggested remodeling Cafe Vivian, and that the GSG had been pushing for extended summer hours at Frist, both of which were good reason to support the proposal. Assembly voted 10-0-7 to approve the proposal.
Historically, Princeton had a ban on AIs for graduate classes. This ban was revoked last year, but no additional university funds were allocated to fund AIs for graduate courses. We are requesting that AIs be funded for courses with significant graduate enrollment.
During the initial round of voting, Assembly voted 17-0-2 to approve the proposal. This proposal passed without further discussion.
Marquand is a non-circulating library for which one can only buy copy cards before 4:30 pm on weekdays. It is proposed that copy card machines be installed at Marquand Library.
During the initial round of voting, Assembly voted 0-8-10 on the proposal. Mr. Dwoskin stated that this issue could be pursued through other channels. Ms. Yruma suggested that we ask the librarians directly because they have large budgets. Mr. Tinsley made an amendment, accepted as friendly, that Assembly should charge the Executive Committee with somehow addressing this issue, although not necessarily through PriComm. This proposal passed 16-1-1.
Ms. Myers said that the graduate students in her department have many of the same concerns as graduate students in other departments, namely housing, time to degree, etc. The major change in her department was a restructuring of generals. The old generals were quite onerous and contributed to the average time-to-degree being six years, compared to the program length of five years. Another major concern was that students defending their theses in the summer were not granted extensions for summer housing from the university.
Mr. Nissen-Meyer submitted the following report, which Ms. Adhitya delivered to Assembly:
General facts about the Department (based on 2004/2005):*_
Overall happiness level: General feeling is positive, friendly, and
well-treated within the Dept. There is informal interaction (a few
social activities), but also not enough given the small size (need more
between faculty & students). While interdisciplinary exchange exists
(more than average Depts), there is a large divide into 2 halves (solid
earth & environmental science.
*_Recurring departmental issues (based on survey): _*
General issues raised in single replies (based on survey):
_*Note: *_Above statements are based on a rather small number of replies to an email encouraging comments about the Dept. and Princeton, and on discussions with various students (including those recently dismissed). General impressions range from "things are great" to "really don't like it here". A recurring tenor is that negative comments are mainly about things that could rather easily be changed for the better if only known by the right people.
Mr. Tinsley asked about the demographics of the students who left. Ms. Lin asked if the department knew that the students were so unhappy, and if the department had a graduate student committee. Ms. Adhitya said that she didn't think there was a committee, and stated that some students thought there was not enough interaction between faculty and students. Ms. Lin asked which departments had recent changes to their generals structures, since it seemed to be a recurring theme. Representatives reported that CLA, CHE, CSE, ELE, MAE, MOL, PHY, and PSY had experienced change in generals structures in the past 5 years. All departments except CLA and PHY reported that the generals changes were not detrimental, with Ms. Safran stating that the CLA changes were detrimental and PHY reporting that changes had yet to take effect.
No one from the Philosophy Department was present to make a report.
Ms. Lin made the following report:
The Executive Committee has met three times since the last Assembly meeting. Weve focused mainly on preparations for the Frolic at Frist and the Priorities Committee Letter Writing Proposals. We have had separate meetings with Dean Russel and with the Committee Chairs to discuss long-term issues for which we will need to coordinate our efforts.
For your information, we will be having a special guest to Assembly in August. Yesim Tozan, a former graduate student in the Woodrow Wilson School, will be coming as a representative of the Association of Princeton Graduate Alumni. She would like to discuss ways to promote the APGA amongst current graduate students.
Ms. Sullivan reported that the Frolic at Frist was an enormous success. More than 1,000 meat products were served, as well as 500 bags of chips, and 400 ice cream bars. In addition, she stated that the event came in well under budget, in large part due to reduced entertainment expenses. Alex Ntelekos suggested that for the next Frolic, more or larger grills should be ordered. Ms. Sullivan concurred, and stated that attendance was far above expectations.
Mr. Dwoskin stated that the Executive Committee was planning on ordering mugs for graduate student orientation and would be coming in August to ask for approval of funds for the mugs.
Mr. Raburn asked about the logistics of email voting if a quorum did not show up at the August meeting. Mr. Tinsley said that Assembly would have to vote on allowing email voting one meeting prior to the meeting for which votes would be held by email. Furthermore, for an email vote, a motion would need a simple majority of active and inactive seats in order to pass, instead of a simple majority of representatives present during a vote during an Assembly meeting. Assembly voted 13-1-1 to allow email voting for time-sensitive matters if a quorum did not attend the August meeting.
Mr. Raburn asked Ms. Padmanabhan to look into the meeting of an abstaining vote.