•Representatives present• Chris DeCoro, COS • Xiaoling Ang, ECO • Adrian De Froment, EEB • Jeff Dwoskin, proxy for Ilias Tagkopoulos, ELE • Anita Adhitya, GEO • Megan Ewing, GER • Robert Harron, MAT • Shin-Yi Lin, MOL • Matthew Kuglar, proxy for Brookes Brown, POL • Daniel Raburn, PPL • Kim Montgomery, proxy for Susan Robison, PSY • Harvey Stark, REL • Cori Anderson, SLA •
•Delegates present• Dante Ricci, BUT ••Councilors present• Chair Shin-Yi Lin, CPUC, CPUC Executive Committee • Parliamentary Secretary Dan Raburn • Treasurer Jeff Dwoskin, proxy for Alex Ntelekos • Medini Pedmanabhan, CPUC • Fatema Gunja, CPUC, CPUC Priorities Committee • Ian Parrish, CPUC, CPUC Priorities Committee • Jeff Dwoskin, Facilities •
•Others present• Dean Lisa Schreyer, Graduate School • Tara Kitley, CPC • Johannes Enders, QGC
•Representatives absent• Katherine Bold, ACM • Ricky Martin, ANT • Neven Fuckar, AOS • Marion Riggs, ART • Alexandros Ntelekos, CEE • Swaroop Chatterjee, CHE • Adam Dunn, CHM • Jake Mackey, CLA • Clara Tuan, EAS • Jesse Salazar, HIS • Lindy Baldwin, HOS • Samir Soneji, OPR • Steve Hassani, PHY • Kenneth Jamison, SOC • Frankki Bevins, WWS •
•Delegates absent• Tian Xia, ACSS • Weining Man, CIGS • Bernice Rosenzweig, BGC • Neven Fuckar, GCO • Marcelline Block, HIB • Jennifer Jordan, LAW • Steve Hassani, MIL • Meredith Safran, OFF •
•Councilors absent• Kellam Conover, CPUC • Leslie Hinkson, CPUC • Luke MacDonald, CPUC • Guillaume Sabouret, CPUC, CPUC Executive Committee • Karin Sigloch, CPUC, CPUC Rights and Rules Committee, Health and Life • Sara Nephew, CPUC Governance Committee • Diana Hill, CPUC Judicial Committee • Josh Friess, CPUC Resources Committee • James Bickford, CPUC Rights and Rules Committee • Canturk Isci, Academic Affairs • Steve Hassani, Academic Affairs •
•Representative seats vacant• ARC• AST• COM• ENG• FIT• MAE• MUS• NES• ORF• PHI• SPO•
•Delegate seats vacant• Women's Center •
The meeting commenced at 6:09 pm.
Dan Raburn announced that the new Butler representative was Dante Ricci. He thanked the former representative, Josh Friess, for his service.
Shin-Yi Lin moved on to the CPUC Priorities Committee Report and then returned to the Approval of the Minutes afterwards.
Ms. Lin said that no corrections were sent in. She had re-ordered minutes to reflect the order of the meeting. Assembly approved both sets of minutes with corrections.
Fatema Gunja and Ian Parrish, the two graduate student representatives to the 2005-2006 CPUC Priorities Committee, gave a presentation on their work (PDF file). In summary: they gave an overview of the composition of and process behind the Priorities Committee. The committee sets the entire university budget ($950 million) and determines how much money should be directed to particular university projects. Their proposal is then sent to the Trustees for approval. The graduate students on the committee get full voting rights.
This year, the committee was faced with a $3-4 million budget deficit, largely because of rising energy costs. They decided to address this issue by slowing major maintenance and construction projects and by relying on unrestricted capital funds to fund energy costs. The committee had a total of $500,000 to allocate for new programs.
Mr. Parrish focused on requests that were relevant to graduate students. They received $2 million in requests this year. Those funded were: Director of Disability Services, UHS Psychiatry, Flu Vaccine/FluFest, AI Hours, Library. Other non-graduate student related requests that were funded are: Strength and Conditioning Coaches, Minority Undergraduate Admission Effort, Fire Marshal, Staff/Faculty Salary Pool. Graduate student relevant requests that weren't funded: off-campus housing specialist, OIT computing staff for a 24-hour manned help desk.
Clarifications: Mr. Parrish clarified that the Director of Disability Services will help accommodate students with disabilities. Concerning AI hours, Ms. Lin asked what was meant by "support of integrated undergrad courses and graduate courses". Chris deCoro and Anita Adhitya described the undergraduate integrated science course in their departments that are interdisciplinary in nature. Mr. Parrish also confirmed that the increase in the AI budget could be used for funding AIs for both undergraduate and graduate courses. Concerning the Library Fund, Mr. deCoro asked if the libraries had a campus-wide budget. Mr. Parrish said it was campus-wide, but that the libraries might have a system for dividing the money amongst the libraries. Concerning undergraduate athletics, Ms. Gunja noted that Princeton funds their programs less than peer institutions. Mr. Parrish clarified that the Fire Marshal was needed in response to Borough and Township inspections.
Mr. Parrish made two suggestions regarding the Priorities Committee process: First, Mr Parrish emphasized the importance of the GSG's summer letter-writing campaign prior to the Priorities Committee proposal submission process. It helps bring forward more graduate student relevant requests to the Priorities Committee. Second, Mr. Parrish was surprised that the Graduate School did not submit any requests. Mr Parrish considered it a risky strategy to not submit a request and hope that this would result in funding the following year. He cited a previous situation where OIT tried this strategy and failed in securing more funding in the next year.
While the Graduate School did not make any funding proposals, they shared two cost-neutral projects with the Priorities Committee: re-packaging stipends into a 12-month package, implementation of the new DCE status.
Mr. Parrish shared his concerns about the balance among tuition, stipends, and rents. Non-Graduate College rent increases are tied to stipend increases so that graduate students can maintain their standard of living. Unfortunately, GC rates are tied to the undergraduate dorm increases. As a result, stipends for graduate students who choose to live in the GC are not going as far as they used to. Mr. Parrish has pointed out this disparity to the Priorities Committee these last two years of his service. The Priorities Committee decided to give some money back to the Graduate School this year so that they can help with some students' GC board costs. Mr. Parrish, however, still feels that this problem needs to be resolved more formally.
Ms. Gunja encouraged all students to read the final Priorites Committee report (PDF file).
Ms. Lin asked if there were any recommendations for future letter writing efforts. Ms. Gunja noted that the Housing proposal this year was poorly prepared and thought that this was a disadvantage. Jeff Dwoskin said he had heard from administrators that GC rent was low compared to peer institutions. Mr. Parrish said that this was not the case. Mr. Dwoskin asked if there was a discrepancy arising from what type of room was being compared, e.g. 1-2 room singles or doubles. Mr. Parrish said it was difficult to compare because, for example, Columbia was in the city. Harvey Stark asked about the letter writing campaign at the beginning of the year, asking if anyone can write a letter. Mr. Parrish explained that the GSG writes to administrative offices encouraging them to support graduate student relevant proposals. Mr. Stark asked if help for grad students who can't afford DCE costs would be a worthwhile proposal. Mr. Parrish said he couldn't definitively say, but suggested that it could be worth asking.
Ms. Lin thanked Mr. Parrish and Ms. Gunja for their hard work on PriComm.
Ms. Lin returned to the Approval of Minutes.
Ms. Lin said an email would be sent out soliciting assistance for shifts and publicity. She encouraged Assembly members to pass on this request to their constitutents, and to inform them of the drive. She noted that those moving out of the GC, e.g. first years, might be particularly need furniture. Mr. Raburn explained that funds and minifridges go to charity. Ms. Lin said the minifridge donations to charity were of huge benefit to local families. Mr. Raburn noted this was a cheap way to acquire furniture. Mr. deCoro re-iterated that the prices were cheap. Date is Tue/Wed June 6-7. Location TBA. More details, contact Mr. Raburn.
Adrian Froment asked if bikes were included, and asked if seniors could be encouraged to dontate those too. Mr. Raburn said that all kinds of donations would be accepted.
Ms. Lin asked if there were any candidates for the remaining seats on the Executive Committee: Corresponding Secretary, Recording Secretary, and Social Chair. There were no candidates.
There was one funding request from the QGC for a summer BBQ. Mr. Dwoskin recommended that we fund the event at $100. Johannes Enders said this was one of their bigger events through the semester and fit in nicely with what is going on at the QGC and the queer community at large. He noted increased participation and mentioned a recently held formal. He said this summer event was timed before most people would be going away and would be a nice send-off. Mr. Froment made a motion to approve for $100. The motion was seconded. The motion passed unanimously.
We continued this conversation from the March and April meetings about whether the Executive Committee abused its ability to send global emails during the last GSG election. Concerns had been raised regarding the quantity of emails, and whether it was appropriate for an official body (i.e., Executive Committee) was using the official email list (i.e., the global email list) to advance one position on the issues (i.e., encouraging students to approve the GSG fee referenda). It had been suggested that the Standing Rules be modified to address this issue - for example, a modification to prevent Exec from taking a stance one way or the other.
Mr Raburn said there were existing guidelines for how GSG should use global email sending. Mr. deCoro asked if Assembly supported the Referendum. Mr Raburn confirmed that Assembly had supported the referenda. Matthew Kuglar suggested that, if Assembly thought this was a good idea, the emails were okay. Ms. Lin asked if Assembly was interested in discussing this issue. Assembly did not want to continue discussing this issue.
Ms. Lin announced that she will make an effort to make future Executive Committees aware of this issue. Mr. Stark asked that any emails sent propound both issues and not just one. Ms. Lin agreed that time and space on emails be allocated to support all sides equally.
The April GSG meeting overlapped with Passover. We also held the CPUC and Exec by-elections during this meeting. Ms. Lin said that a constituent asked that we consider moving Assembly meetings for major holidays. But Assembly meetings have always been held on the second Wednesday of the month, so she didn't know whether we should move away from this consistent practice. Mr. Froment asked if we could avoid holding important elections (e.g., CPUC elections) during such meetings, rather than changing the meeting date. Ms. Lin said that our By-Laws specifies that CPUC elections have to be held in April. It was decided that we should address this issue again when it is actually a problem for a future meeting.
Mr. deCoro wanted to talk about DCE. He said in the Computer Science department, the only difference seemed to be the change in name. The department is still treating regularly-enrolled and DCE-enrolled students differently -- for example, regarding office assignments (i.e., all DCE students are being moved to single office in basement). He suggested this was against the spirit in which the DCE changes were made and was not equitable treatment for DCE students.
Mr. Dwoskin stated that in Electrical Engineering, regularly-enrolled students and DCE students were being treated equally. Ms. Lin wondered about departments in which office space was tight. Cori Anderson said that the Slavic department's East Pyne space was limited (e.g. students might not have AI office space in the fall) regardless of student status. She said this was also an issue in Linguistics, which has limited office space. Some students might have carrels (not secure) in the library.
Mr. deCoro said he was on the departmental Graduate Student Committee. He said that all DCE students would be assigned to one basement office, which did not seem consistent with what was intended in coming up with DCE status. Cori Anderson asked if there were extra spaces upstairs in which these students could work. Mr. deCoro admitted that there were departmental space constraints, but that DCE students were being singled out. Mr. Stark suggested that it might be a department issue, and that DCE wasn't intended to direct departments as to how to handle the issue.
Representative not present to give the report.
Mr. Stark said that everything in his department seemed okay. One of their faculty members retired. They will be having 4-6 incoming first years next year. Summer funding for their students must be approved every year, and it usually is. They are pleased with the restructuring of the stipends into a 12-month schedule. Ms. Lin asked if anyone knew whether the Graduate School's restructuring affects all departments. Someone said that it does affect all departments. Mr. Stark said that the re-enrollment process has gone relatively smoothly. Students can go away for one year during their program and hold off their Princeton funding for that year. Mr. Stark has not heard for any complaints from his constituents.
The representative was not able to give the report.
Ms. Lin announced that Chris DeCoro stepped down as Corresponding Secretary due to time constraints.
Ms. Lin said that the Annual Giving office has asked for graduate students to work during their annual campaign to encourage graduate alumni to give to the University. Students would be paid for their work.
Ms. Lin also expressed her concern about the vacancies on the Executive Committee. The GSG cannot conduct its business without a complete Executive Committee.
Regarding Annual Giving, Lingling Ang asked if there were Annual Giving efforts in other languages. Ms. Lin mentioned there might be efforts to call other countries. She noted there might be issues in payment of international students.
Regarding the incomplete Executive Committee, Mr. Dwoskin solicited ideas for soliciting volunteers for Exec and other committee work. Mr. Stark asked if there had been any information sent out about what the positions entailed and what the time commitment would be, suggesting that ignorance was part of the reason for lack of candidates. Mr. Raburn noted that the Social Chair position involved spending money for parties and that some students may be interested in controlling such a budget.
Ms. Ang noted that other committees -- e.g. Graduate College House Committee -- had incentives for joining. Ms. Ang suggested that we offer housing priority to Executive Committee members. Mr. Dwoskin noted that giving priority to some people will take it away from other graduate students, and wondered about balance. Ms. Lin stated that it would not benefit off-campus students, which may lead to a skewing of the Executive Committee towards on-campus students. Dean Lisa Schreyer noted the motivation behind housing incentives for the housing committees is that those positions required living in that particular residence. Mr. deCoro noted housing was a major incentive for graduate students. Mr. Dwoskin was concerned about accountability, where students want the housing priority but won't really work hard on the Executive Committee. Alex Ntelekos said that he didn't see this as a problem as people could also participate in the GSG just for their resume.
Mr. Raburn wondered about making GSG meetings fun. Ms. Lin noted from the Ivy Summit that peer institutions had more sociable student organizations, which helped them maintain membership. Mr. Froment suggested rotations in food arrangements for the meetings. Mr. Dwoskin noted that the funding for the food came from the GSG budget. Should we be increasing the food budget? Various examples of other meetings with food were cited. Mr. Stark noted that the budget had just doubled and asked that we increase the food budget (no more than double the current amount, $100). Motion was made to try an increased food budget ($200) for the next meeting. The motion passed.
Ms. Lin said that the letters for the Priorities Committee had to go out during the summer, due to the timing of Priorities Committee process. She suggested this was one of the more important summer items. She also suggested that summer events would be a good idea, but that the lack of a Social Chair prevents the GSG from organizing the event. Ms. Ang asked if there had ever been a post-generals summer event. Ms. Lin did not know of any such prior event. Mr. Dwoskin solicited new ideas, and re-iterated the need for a Social Chair. Ms. Ang suggested that access to the ZipCar would be an incentive for a Social Chair, noting that it was difficult to do Social Chair duties without such a device. Mr. Enders noted that the QGC was successful in running events and suggested a shared QGC/GSG event, volunteering the QGC's manpower with GSG funds and support. Ms. Lin asked that he come and discuss this possibility after the meeting.
The meeting adjourned at 7:13 pm.