General Assembly

Minutes from November 16, 2006

Associated Students of Occidental College

General Assembly Minutes

November 16th, 2006

3:00-4:00 PM, J204

Minutes by Chelsey Brack

Senate Members Present: Patrick McCredie, Konstantin Chaykovskiy, Andrew DeBlock, Matt Kuzio, Jimmy Gillan, Teddy Zhou, Max Thoman-Tedford, Rozell Hodges

Guests Present: Debbie Afar, Dwight Murray, Meagan Colvin, Jessica Lobl, Will Carlson, David Martinez, Sarah Richey, Rory Harrington, Eric Roddie, Abe Cohen, Maddie Knaup, Kevin Adler, Margo Turkheimer, Kate Fedosova, Brenda McNary, Chelsey Brack (16).

Katie and Patrice opened the meeting at 3:10 PM. Katie and Patrice welcomed everyone to the official student forum. The General Assembly is a place for students to bring up issues and policy change. The General Assembly recognizes that the student body is one of many forums that form the community. This is a forum for students to work with other students and administrators. Patrice Hall read an overview of the Student Service Bylaws.

1. Honor Board - Maddie Knaup, Abe Cohen, Kevin Adler

Kevin introduced the Honor Board, saying that they wanted to talk about current formats of the Honor Board, including the Judicial Council, the Academic Judicial Hearing Panel, and other aspects of the Honor Board. Maddie explained the Academic Judicial Hearing Panel and the Judicial Council. “The Academic Judicial Hearing Panel: offenses related to academic integrity, plagiarism, etc. are dealt with by the Academic branch. Judicial Council: all other offenses go through either (1) a one-on-one Conduct Conference with an administrator or (2) a Conduct Hearing with the Judicial Council, currently consisting of 1 administrator, 1 member of faculty, and 2 students selected from a random pool of 10”

Honor Board overview: Proposed format: total of 10 jurors; 1 Specialty Academic Juror; No Diversity/Social Justice Juror. Hearings: 5 randomly rotating Jurors on each hearing along with the non-voting Honor Board Chair. 4/5 Vote for all recommendations to the Associate Dean of Students

Maddie showed the "Three Spheres Format," which includes the Honor Board, AJHP, and the JC. Abe talked about how the ASOC President used to be Chair of Honor Board, but that position is going to be removed.

Maddie summarized Mediation, saying that it is a method of conflict resolution to be utilized by the student body as a whole. “No Jurors of Honor Board or any other elected or appointed ASOC officers may serve on the mediation committee. Consists of students that have gone through the mediation training process and have been appointed capable Formal Mediators by the Associate Dean of Students. The Mediation Committee is a separate body of the Honor Board that works in conjunction with the Honor Board. This is where we really need student input.”

Kevin talked about the AJHP format from the student handbook. He said that the Honor Board feels that there is an "Honor Deficit" on campus. He asked the questions: “Do we still believe in Honor? Do we know about the Honor Code? Is the current system working? And said that the Honor Board = Spreading the Principle of Honor.”

Kevin said that in the past he has seen people cheat in academics, and hasn't felt compelled to report it. He and the Honor Board want to change that mentality. They want to invoke a sort of "Culture of Honor" beginning on Day 1, when incoming freshmen walk in the door, to invoke those values early. The Judicial Examiner here at Oxy has reported that 60% of faculty and 40% of students have reported cheating, and there should be a higher percentage of students reporting the cheating. The Honor Board feels that trust in students has changed, and that they want to restore that trust that was lost. They want people who are on the outside, who are not members of the Occidental Community, to be able to look at our community and think that it upholds honor, and is honorable.

Abe went over the Bylaws, and said that the Honor Board would like to publish something on the ASOC website about cases that they have heard. Maddie said reason to do that is because they are community infractions, and so if they are posted, people who want to make sure things are getting done can physically see that it was taken care of. Abe went over Mediation, saying that ideally they want cases to be solved outside of Honor Board, but if they must handle the case, they will. Abe and Kevin talked about how their job is not to go out and legislate student life, but that they want to be able to deal with things that come to them.

The Bylaws:

Honor Board By-laws Outline:

Article I: Name

The name of this organization shall be the Honor Board of the Associated Students of Occidental College, hereinafter referred to as the Honor Board.

Article II: Purpose

The Honor Board shall be responsible for upholding the Honor Code, which states in Article V, Section 3A of the Constitution: “No student shall take unfair advantage of another student or another member of the Occidental Community.”

Article III: Structure and Responsibility

Section 1: The Honor Board shall carry out its purpose through four methods: the Judicial Hearing Panel, the Academic Hearing Panel, Mediation and Honor Board Hearings.

• Judicial Hearing Council- The judicial hearing panel shall rule on any case related to infractions of ASOC and conduct code laws. This council will consist of one faculty member, one administrator and two students.

• Academic Hearing Panel- The Academic Hearing panel shall rule on any case related to the Academic Policies of Occidental College and Academic Honesty as defined in the Student Handbook. This panel will consist of two Honor Board jurors, serving for one year on the Academic Hearing Panel.

• Mediation…

• Mediation- Mediation is designed to provide a means to community understanding without coming before Honor Board. Mediation shall consist of informal and formal mediation.

• Informal Mediation- Parties involved in the supposed violation of the Occidental College Honor Code shall meet without administrative or ASOC intervention and attempt to come to a consensual agreement as to the infraction of the Honor Code and how this violation, should it occur, be addressed.

• Formal Mediation- Parties involved will address the supposed violation of the Honor Code through a formal mediation process in which each party will have a limited number of representatives, and a trained mediator will facilitate dialogue and discussion.

• Honor Board Hearings- Should a supposed violation of the Honor Code pass through said mediation process and fall under neither the jurisdiction of the Academic Hearing Panel or the Judicial Hearing Panel, then the case shall come before the Honor Board as a whole. The Hearing process will involve 5 Honor Board jurors who shall come to an official Honor Board decision that will be reported to the Dean of Students.

• Section 2: Power derived from Elections

• Section 3 Membership

• A. Membership-The Honor Board shall be comprised of ten generally elected members of the student body. The Honor Board, from these generally elected jurors, will designate an Honor Board Chair to head Honor Board. The voting for these members will occur in the following fashion. If the number of vacant seats on Honor Board is odd, the simple majority of the open seats will be elected in the fall of the academic year. The remained of these open seats will be decided in the spring. Members of this group shall be referred to as Jurors.

• B. Eligibility of Membership- Every prospective Juror will submit to an academic and disciplinary and check conducted by the Honor Board advisor.

• C. Term of Membership

• Jurors shall serve a single two-year academic term.

• D. Duties of Membership- …

• i. The Honor Board Chair shall:

• a. Chair all official meetings.

• b. Serve as the ex-officio Juror of all Honor Board Hearings and official meetings

• c. Uphold the mission statement of Occidental College and Honor Board by being honorable

• d. Attend all official meetings and training sessions

• e. Serve as Honor Board liaison between Associate Dean of Students by presenting all official recommendations and decisions of Honor Board

• f. Perform other relevant duties as assigned by Honor Board

• g. Take charge of setting the agenda for all official meetings

• h. Take charge of correspondence with any individuals involved in a hearing including complainant(s), respondent(s), and witness(es)

• i. Open all Honor Board hearings

• ii. Generally Elected Jurors

• a. Have the power to cast 1 vote

• b. Be eligible to serve on committees designated by Honor Board

• c. Uphold the mission statement of Occidental College and Honor Board by being honorable

• d. Attend all official Honor Board meetings and training sessions

• e. Perform other duties as assigned by Chair and/or Honor Board

• f. Be responsible of informing the Occidental Community of Honor Board actions and decisions while maintaining confidentiality.

• iii. Honor Board

• a. Publicity- The Honor Board should publish a summary report, not violating confidentiality, regarding any matter affecting the College community, excluding unresolved cases and those cases still subject to appeal, at the beginning of every semester. The report shall contain a statement by the Honor Board of the findings and sanctions for the previous semester's cases. With the exception of cases in which all parties and witnesses agree to waiver their right to confidentiality, the Honor Board shall not publish the names of the parties participating in the case. The Chair of the Honor Board shall send a copy of the report to the editor of the Occidental Weekly and post the report on the ASOC website.

• b. The Honor Board shall have the responsibility to hear, investigate, and determine the facts about every complaint referred to it from the Associate Dean of Students and to recommend appropriate action to the Dean of Students.

c. All members of the Honor Board shall meet once a year for training with the Advisor.

• E. Attendance

• Every Juror must attend all official meetings as specified in the Honor Board House Rules. Reprimands for Jurors who do not attend the required meetings shall be specified in the Honor Board House Rules.

• F. Vacancies

• Resignation- If a Juror decides that she/he cannot fulfill the duties of an Honor Board Juror, the said Juror will submit a letter of resignation to Honor Board and ASOC at large. The Juror will be relieved of responsibilities pertaining to Honor Board.

• Removal- Jurors may be removed from membership:

– If a change in academic or disciplinary status causes the Juror to no longer be eligible for membership.

– In other instances specified in the Senate House Rules.

• In any instance, the Juror in question shall have the right to speak in his or her defense prior to the removal vote.

• Jurors shall not be removed from membership by any vote less than 2/3 of the Honor Board. A Juror shall be denied the right to vote in the matter of his or her own removal.

• Filling Vacancies- Vacancies on Honor Board shall be filled according to the position’s availability. Interim Jurors shall be decided by Honor Board and shall serve for the remainder of the academic year. Interim Jurors shall have full rights and responsibilities of permanent Honor Board Jurors. The following academic year, positions will be filled by official Jurors through election and selection.

• G. Voting

• Each Juror has an equal vote in:

• Hearings- each of the Jurors present at an official hearing has one vote.

• Meetings- for all other official decisions outlined in the Honor Board House Rules, each Juror has one vote. Majority vote shall be required for implementation of decision.

• H. Excusal of Jurors

• A. Voluntary Removal of Jurors- If an Honor Board member believes that she/he has a conflict of interest in relation to the case outcome, she/he has the right to be removed from the Honor Board hearings. This Juror must submit a written removal letter explaining in detail the conflict of interest. This letter shall be kept on record for Honor Board scrutiny.

• Honor Board Requested Removal of Jurors- If any member of Honor Board believes that another member of Honor Board has a conflict of interest in the outcome of a given case, said Honor Board Juror may request to have another member of the Honor Board removed. This request must be a formal letter of removal to by scrutinized by the members of Honor Board. This letter shall be discussed, and the respondent may be removed from Honor Board hearings by a 2/3 vote.

• Student Requested Removal of Jurors- If a student involved in Honor Board proceedings (the respondent or complainant) believes that a member of Honor Board has a conflict of interest in relation to the case outcome, the student shall submit a written letter requesting said Juror’s removal from the proceedings. Honor Board shall discuss the letter and choose to remove the said member by a majority vote. The Juror in question shall abstain from voting, but still shall have the right to voluntarily remove themselves.

Article IV: Judicial Hearing Council

Section 1: Purpose- The Judicial Hearing Council will address issues of student misconduct as defined in the Occidental College student handbook.

Section 2: Operational Procedures

The operational procedures of the Judicial Council are addressed in Section VI, Sections 23- 26q of the Occidental College Student Handbook.

Article V: Academic Judicial Hearing Panel

Section 1: Purpose- The Academic Hearing Panel will address issues of academic honesty in cases including but not limited to plagiarism and cheating. These types of academic misconduct are subject to disciplinary action. The Academic Judicial Hearing is not a court of law, characterized by adversarial relationships among those involved in the proceedings. Rather, it is a fact finding body within an academic community that is guided by College regulations and a sense of fair play.

Section 2- Operational Procedures- The Academic Judicial Hearing Panel shall consist of the chair of the Academic Standing and Student Conduct Committee (herein referred to as “chair”), two members of the faculty, two Honor Board Jurors and one administrator from the Office of the Dean of Students (or designee). Panel members will be appointed as follows:

• 1. The Faculty Council will appoint the chair for a two-year term, preferably selected from among faculty members who have previously served on a Judicial Hearing Panel.

• 2. Each year the Faculty Council will randomly select 10 faculty members to serve as panelists. The random selection will proceed until 10 persons have agreed to serve.

• 3. Each year 9 Honor Board Jurors will be elected from the student body, including two specialty jurors (Academic and Diversity/Social Justice). The Academic Specialty Juror and one other Juror will serve as panelists for one year. In the event that any member of a Judicial Hearing Panel is unable to complete her/his term, an alternate will fill the vacant seat for the remainder of the term and the Faculty Council will select a new alternate.

Article VI: Mediation

Section 1: Purpose- Mediation shall serve as a method of conflict resolution to be utilized by the student body as a whole. This Mediation Committee will facilitate formal mediation. Informal mediation will occur outside the jurisdiction of Honor Board.

Section 2: Membership and Structure:

• a. Membership to the mediation committee will be decided as follows:

• No Jurors of Honor Board or any other elected or appointed ASOC officers may serve on the mediation committee

• Consists of students that have gone through the mediation training process and have been appointed capable Formal Mediators by the Associate Dean of Students.

• The Mediation Committee is a separate body of the Honor Board that works in conjunction with the Honor Board.

Section 3: Operational Procedures:

• a) Mediation sessions shall consist of the complainant, the respondent, their respective advisors, and a trained student mediator.

– Will be arranged at a date, place and time convenient to both the complainant and the respondent.

– Formal Mediation minutes will be confidential, and will be kept for Honor Board scrutiny in the case of a hearing.

Article VII: Honor Board Hearing

Section 1: Purpose- The Honor Board is a means to facilitate necessary dialogue between two parties who have found informal and formal mediation to be unsuccessful or unnecessary. The Honor Board shall rule on cases that fall outside the jurisdiction of the Judicial Hearing Panel and Academic Judicial Hearing Panel and present a formal recommendation to the Dean of Students regarding how a possible infraction of the Honor Code should be handled.

Section 2: Operational Procedures

• Initiating a Hearing

• A. A formal written complaint must be submitted to the Dean of Students before the case is eligible for a hearing. If the Dean of Students deems the case appropriate, then a hearing may proceed to Honor Board if Formal Mediation has failed or the complainant and/or respondent have chosen to waive their rights to a Mediation process.

• B. The formal complaint must consist of:

• a) The grounds on which the complainant(s) believes that a violation of the Honor Code has been committed.

• b) A brief description of the actions that the complainant(s) believes to constitute a violation

• c) The names of the persons believed to have committed a violation, if the names of such violators are known to the complainant(s)

• d) A list of witnesses with information that is pertinent to the case

• e) A statement of why informal mediation was unsuccessful or did not occur.

Venue of Jurisdiction-

ASOC: Honor Board shall hear cases involving:

• Behavior and actions of elected student officials, student service employees and club officials.

• Conduct during student Elections

– Violations of the Code of conduct: specific violations of the Student’s Code of Conduct may fall under the category of an Honor Board hearing as determined by the Associate Dean of Students. These violations may include:

• Intentionally or recklessly endangering, threatening, or causing physical harm to any person or oneself, or intentionally or recklessly causing reasonable apprehension of such harm.

• Harassment. In this Code ‘harassment’: (a) is the use, display, or other demonstration of words, gestures, imagery, or physical materials, or the engagement in any form of bodily conduct, on the basis of race, color, national or ethnic origin, alienage, sex, religion, age, sexual orientation, or physical or mental disability, that has the effect of creating a hostile and intimidating environment sufficiently severe or pervasive to substantially impair a reasonable person’s participation in College programs or activities, or use of College facilities; (b) must target a specific person or persons; and (c) must be addressed directly to that person or persons.

• Intentionally and substantially interfering with the freedom of expression of others.

• Intentionally or recklessly destroying or damaging College property or the property of others.

• Taking unfair advantage of another student.

• Refusal of Cases- With each written complaint not heard by Honor Board, Honor Board will provide a detailed response pertaining to why Honor Board felt the case was unwarranted, and this response shall be kept on record for future Honor Board scrutiny. Honor Board reserves the right to recommend informal or formal mediation.

• Quorum-Quorum of Honor Board shall consist of 5 Jurors rotating randomly in addition to the Honor Board Chair who shall be present at all hearings.

• Voting- In all hearings, decisions on a recommendation to the Associate Dean of Students must be by a 5/6 vote. The Honor Board Chair does not vote.

• Special Honor Board Meetings- Honor Board may hold special meetings and committee meetings outside of the regularly scheduled weekly time. These meetings are not official. No minutes shall be taken and no votes are binding.

• Access to Hearings- All Honor Board hearings shall be confidential.(end Bylaws)

Jimmy Gillan asked about Mediation, asking if the Honor Board gets Mediation training, and who the cases are handed off to if the Honor Board does not resolve them. He asked for details about the Honor Board, asking why 10 Honor Board jurors and an Honor Board chair are necessary. Maddie answered that issues/cases concerning hate speech are not handled by the Honor Board, but by the Judicial Hearing Panel. For many other cases, Maddie said that the Honor Board jurors and chair are necessary to mediate and uphold the values of the Honor Board. Jimmy pointed out that the Honor Board isn't trained in formal Mediation, and asked why they are trying to handle the mediation when maybe they are not the ones who should be. Abe said that he was in agreement with Jimmy, that the Honor Board is not fully qualified to handle all Mediation cases, and said that if a case goes through formal and judicial mediation and gets to the stage where it needs an Honor Board meeting, it will not be dealt with by the Honor Board, but that the Honor Board will give the issue to the Associate Dean of Students.

Rory, a member of the Honor Board, said that he feels the same way as Jimmy. He said that what we need to realize is that an Honor Board is a whole new concept to Oxy. The Honor Code was a big deal in the past at Oxy, more popular in the 60's, and now we have strayed away from it. He said its not going to be a fast process where the school is going to give students a ton of power, but that after a while when students gain the schools trust, then students will gain honor and will be held responsible, but right now students need to prove themselves. The first couple of years students won't be doing much, but maybe in 10 years, we'll be back to that honor, sticking by the Honor Code.

Kevin said that if cases come up, students will still have the option to go to Mediation, but its student regulation is the point. There is an emphasis on discussing, resolving, and figuring it out so there isn't that detriment in the community that eats away at it. For example, an email that goes around at election time that causes ill feelings toward another candidate - in that case, some type of resolve needs to come up, students should not be like little kids bickering on a public form.

Patrick McCredie wanted to know about removal of a Chair, asking if it was part of the Bylaws, or if not how it happens, and Maddie said that it will soon be put into the constitution how it will happen.

Meagan Colvin said she was looking at appointments of Mediation Committee members, which she knows are determined by the Associate Dean of Students, and is wondering how many are appointed - how the Associate Dean of Students knows who would be a good appointment. Maddie answered that the process is just starting, and that she imagines that there will be an application process, which they are just getting going with. Abe added that down the road, the Honor Board wants students to be able to train other students to do be members of the Committee.

Andrew DeBlock asked about safeguards against infringements of honor on the Honor Board by the Honor Board, saying that it would be very embarrassing for the school if such things were to happen, and asked what we are doing to avoid the infringements. Abe answered that the Honor Board is thinking about putting something in the constitution, a serious statement about how they will handle this.

Jessica Lobl asked about the election of Honor Board members, saying that she knows that Honor Board members are elected every two years, and asked if Kevin will only serve one year because he is a senior and was just elected this year. Kevin answered that yes, seniors are on the way out, and so the Honor Board is trying to re-elect ten people every year, but it is a tough job, and that it is tough to get enough applicants just to fill the ten positions on a regular basis.

Meagan Colvin asked if the Honor Board has a process for removal of an Honor Board member, if the other Honor Board members see that member as being unfit for the job. She asked if a vote is taken. Abe answered that yes, a formal student complaint can be made, and the Honor Board makes a request for the removal of a jurors known as a Student-Requested Removal (see Bylaws).

Andrew DeBlock asked about checks on the Honor Board, asking if it was more of an ASOC check, or by the student body, etc. Rory, a member of the Honor Board, said that the Honor Board doesn't really have that power, and Maddie added that the Honor Board doesn't have the power to do many things, including lack of ability to expel students, etc.

Jimmy Gillan said there has been such an immense amount of apathy toward the Honor Board, saying that special elections have taken place because no one is running, that the Honor Board is having a hard time trying to fill ten positions. He said that he knows that they don't have a lot of power, but its a very self-regulated role. He said that the Honor Board should be keeping in mind the whole feeling of the Oxy community, and asked what kind of control the Honor Board exactly has. He asked if it is meant to be like a judicial system, where the Honor Board members are like governmental officials, etc. Kevin answered that the HB has only existed for four years, and has gotten a lot of experience in that time. He used the analogy of a snowball at the top of a hill, that right now there is not too much interest in it, but this is the start of something - the start of a process, that will continue to work its way down the hill, and get bigger and bigger. He added that the HB is constantly working on it, and want recommendations and different thoughts. The reason they are meeting every Sunday night for two hours is in order to figure out ways to raise honor here at Oxy.

Katie closed the discussion, and moved the meeting on to the Resolution portion.

2. Ken Smutny, Senate Conduct Resolution

Ken talked about the meeting on October 30, 2006, saying that conversation became very hostile, people left feeling like they were being treated rudely, their conversations were being cut into, and thus this Resolution has come about.

Senate Conduct Resolution

[ Whereas on October 30, 2006, representatives from several clubs came before the A.S.O.C. Senate to speak in support of funding allocations for student events.

Be it resolved that these club leaders were met with conduct of certain elected members of A.S.O.C. that was contrary to the purpose of A.S.O.C as stated in the Constitution and contrary to the purpose of Senate as stated in the Senate By-Laws.

Furthermore, be it resolved that ASOC officials should not engage in conduct contrary to the Constitution and Senate By-Laws

Furthermore, be it resolved that A.S.O.C. officials’ conduct on October 30, 2006 was appalling.

Lastly, be it resolved that the A.S.O.C. Senate will take great effort to prevent such conduct in the future.]

Jimmy Gillan said that referring to "cutting out people's conversations," there are multiple opportunities for conversation on other matters, and wanted to say the conduct is what the problem was, not the people. He also said that when people come to a Senate meeting, they have to be as pertinent as possible, and the interruptions they are probably going to face can be interpreted as being rude, but there is also some legitimacy to the interruptions.

Rory said that was not personally there for the Resolution, but said that if his funding request was shortened because someone else had a funding request that took longer, he would be upset too. He suggested maybe saying that every funding request gets 15 minutes maximum at Senate meetings, and that there are other times to talk to senators about funding requests.

Matt Kuzio said that the guidelines and processes are formalized, and will now be emailed before the next Senate meeting. He said that the Senate recognizes that their conduct was rude, and is making an effort to change that conduct. Patrick McCredie said that the Senate, in order to mediate this problem, is setting basic standards so people understand, and is planning on mitigating problems in the future.

Ken went back to the Resolution, and opened up the floor for questions.

Matt said that he thinks the Resolution is great, and that he is in favor of it. He said that at the end of the meeting on October 30th, the Senate knew that the meeting had not gone well and that its conduct was off, that letters of apology were written, and personal apologies were made to certain students. He said that before this resolution began, it was in their heads, too. There were plans for this resolution already underway. He said that he knows that they let students down, but now they are taking steps to make it not happen again.

Jimmy Gillan said that this resolution poses an interesting issue, saying that people love to compare events, people like to play a game about being mistreated. He said that when people do that, you start getting people asking why they only got two minutes at a Senate meeting, or what have you. He said that people complain about not getting enough time right now, so having everyone get as much time as they want at Senate meetings would be a good way to resolve this.

Jessica Lobl said that she was confused, and asked what exactly the GA was voting on, and Patrice said that we would be voting to acknowledge what did happen on October 30,2006. Rory asked for people who were not there, how can they say that the conduct was inappropriate, and Ken answered that people who were there are in consensus that it was inappropriate.

Voting: 17-0-3, the resolution was passed.

2. Ken Smutny, Residence Life Compensation Resolution

[ Whereas, Resident Advisors and Hall Coordinators for the 2005-2006 academic year are receiving the same stipend that RAs and HC's received in the 2002-2003 academic year.

Whereas, at least four years have passed with out raises for these student workers who are vital to the functioning of our campus.

Be it resolved that the failure of Administration to increase compensation in amounts commensurate with tuition or the cost of living devalues the work of these students and places on them an undue economic burden.

Be it resolved that Administration should act quickly to reevaluate compensation for Resident Advisors and Hall Coordinators.

Be it resolved that Administration should provide stipend increases that will appropriately value these student workers and provide for increased tuition and living expenses. ]

More than 5 students supported resolution

Patrice and Katie thanked everyone for coming, suggested people email the GA at asocga@oxy.edu for any questions, comments, or concerns.

Meeting adjourned at 4:04 PM.