General Assembly

Minutes from April 24, 2008

Topics: Student Reps to the Board of Trustees, Future of ASOC

Associated Students of Occidental College

General Assembly Minutes

April 24th, 2008

12:30-1:30 pm, Johnson 200

Minutes by Chelsey Brack

Senate Members Present: Andrew DeBlock, Santiago Mendez, Mike Myers, Xochiltl Ramos, Dominique Kirkwood, Ryan Bowen (ASOC President)

Guests Present: Anna Wilson, Ross Arias, Abe Cohen, Philip Arsenis, Aaron Mass, Spencer Jemelka, Kristin Beck, Cameron Yuen-Shore, Patrice Hall, Kether Hayden, Aron Shimeles, Chelsey Brack (12).

Noel Hollowell and Paolo Cosulich-Schwartz opened up the GA meeting at 12:08 PM. They said that the General Assembly is the official student forum of ASOC and is a place where all students are welcome to address campus policies, raise student issues, and begin the process of developing comprehensive solutions to student concerns. It is also a place that recognizes that the student body is one of many groups that help to form the community of Occidental College. In this respect the General Assembly is a tool of the entire community to begin dialogue and the collective process of working together to solve problems. In other words, it is a forum for students to communicate and work with students; it is a forum for students to communicate and work with the administration; and it is a forum for the administration to communicate and work with the student body. Finally, the General Assembly is a place that recognizes that the people who make up the Occidental community vary greatly in perspectives and ideals. For this reason the General Assembly will operate as a forum that encourages dialogue and debate, but will under no circumstances become a forum for personal attacks, hate speech or disrespectful conduct.

1. Student Representatives to the Board of Trustees

Aaron Mass explained his role on the committee. Oxy has Cambridge Associates, a manager who manages endowments for Oxy, so he could only take part in voting on how to allocate funds for the school. He voted on funding for new housing units, funding for professor's houses, and also to offer low-interest loans to the faculty. The school's endowment has actually done quite well, since 2002 has gone to about 384 million dollars. Comparing last year to this year, we've had a 19% return on our endowment, which is pretty good. We used to be invested in investment banks and things that made our endowment go down. Cambridge Associates has advised that we go with larger companies such as GE, Bowing, etc. His advice for future committee members is to liven up meetings more, they are a little stale as it is. He recommends that they should present to the investment companies new plans and ideas for investing. He said he got some experience in working with senior people, getting along with people he might disagree with, etc. Diverging opinions, working with others.

Phil Arsenis asked what percentage of the endowment comes from donations, and Aaron said it’s around 12.7%. He doesn't know what it was in the past, but that is what he thinks it was this year.

Aron Shimeles said that he was on the Honorary Degrees Committee, they were selected for the committee in November, did not meet until early March. Hasn't really done any work, there haven't been any formal meetings. Not really sure how people were selected, it was just a list of names presented. It’s been a lot of email conversations, pretty disorganized. He wishes that they had a formal meeting to begin with so everyone could be on the same page. Things haven't really happened yet. He just saw a list of people's names, their bios, and that’s about it.

Ryan Bowen said the only meeting that he went to individually this year was the Educational ... He would suggest more preparation beforehand. Everyone was given a packet about what was going to happen in the meeting, but not much more than that. He said he would suggest working together more collaboratively. Come up with a plan, some sort of guidelines. There was time opened up for him to present something, but he wasn't prepared to present. It became more of an educational experience and learning what it was about. He was a member of the board of Trustees this whole year, just had their last meeting on Tuesday, with all the executives and the vice presidents. Had opportunities to ask the members of the board for how they see the future of occidental, etc. He's been impressed with the board's passion for the school, as well as just understanding what the board of trustees is. Students don’t really know what the board is, and they're just getting paid to do it, but really they're just taking time out of their busy schedules, and serving the school honestly. Heads of companies, CEO's, who take time to help further the future of Oxy. They still hold to a large part the mission of the college, to make the school more accessible. They are increasing financial aid proportionally to the increasing tuition, and the board is interested in further the access to the college. It’s not perfect, still an incredibly expensive institution, but they are doing a very good job. He encourages people to contact them and ask their questions, i.e. about increasing tuition, etc. He said he promoted this meeting today to be able to recommend students for next year's committees, hopefully next year it will be more efficient and the GA will be utilized more.

Paolo said he has updates from other committee members:

Jessica Snyder says there is a new task force on faculty housing, attempting to create a housing-assistance program since LA is more expensive than other college towns, looking at Financial Aid, maintenance repair and renovation- they're looking at the budget i.e. library flooding

Carrie Harlow says that a new VIP of institutional advancement has just been hired, have discussed naming opportunities for buildings on campus, other meetings have been discussions bout fundraising strategies, etc.

2. Spencer Jemelka - Occidental Student Government Presentation

Spencer said he was one of the three authors of the constitution, and that he wanted to talk about the purpose of the constitution and to explain why we have this student government, some history. He gave a background to the formation of today's current student government, and discussed his opinion how the student government is not being utilized to its fullest extent and that the GA, in particular, is not being utilized as a tool to make change. Download the PowerPoint here.

3. General Assembly Bylaw Amendment – Voting

****************

General Assembly Bylaw Amendment

Presented and Voted on 4/10/08

Proposal:

To change the GA bylaws to stipulate that those seeking to present a resolution must meet with GA Co-Chairs at least 24 hours in advance of the GA meeting in which they wish to present the resolution and to modify one grammatical error changes are placed in bold.

Current Bylaw:

Article VI. - Resolutions

Section 3. Meeting with Co-Chairs.

Students are required to meet with at least one of the Co-Chairs prior to the meeting in which they will present their resolution. Should the student fail to meet with a Co-Chairs, the Co-Chairs have the right to postpone the resolution until that individual meeting has occurred.

Proposed Amendment (changes marked in bold):

Article VI. – Resolutions

Section 3. Meeting with Co-Chairs.

Students are required to meet with at least one of the Co-Chairs at least twenty-four hours prior to the meeting in which they will present their resolution. Should the student fail to meet with a Co-Chair, the Co-Chairs have the right to postpone the resolution until that individual meeting has occurred.

****************

In favor: 10

Opposed: 1

Abstention: 3

This amendment did not actually pass because it must be voted on seven days after being presented to the General Assembly.

4. Abe Cohen - Chair of Honor Board, A Proposition of Resolution to the GA on behalf of the Honor Board

****************

A Proposition of Resolution to the General Assembly on behalf of the Honor Board (drafted by Juror Danielle Siegler, revised and approved by Chair Abe Cohen):

As mandated by the Honor Board Bylaws, Section 2e reads:

Confidentiality - Due to the sensitivity of Honor Board cases, jurors must keep details about all cases confidential. A juror charged with disclosing confidential material will be reviewed by Honor Board and may also be liable to penalties from the Dean of Students and the Occidental College Judicial Council. If a juror wishes to discuss the merits or shortcomings of a case, the juror shall do so with other members of Honor Board, the Honor Board advisor, or the Dean of Students.

Honor Board is charged to review infractions of the Constitution and ASOC (ASOC Constitution: Article V, Section 3b):

The Honor Board shall review cases of alleged violations of the Honor Code and Principle and shall make recommendations to the Dean of Students in cases that the Honor Board sees fit. In cases of ASOC infractions, Honor Board decisions shall stand.

Since ASOC is an extension of the student body whose purpose is to act as a protectorate and advocate for the interests of the students, the Honor Board proposes an addition to the confidentiality clause of the Honor Board Bylaws. This addition will allow for the publicization of hearings that deal with Constitutional matters and ASOC infractions. This addition will further increase transparency within procedural matters of ASOC.

Thus, the Honor Board proposes the fallowing addition (as noted in bold) to the clause of confidentiality in the Honor Board Bylaws:

i) Honor Board cases that deal with infractions of ASOC representatives in their official capacity shall be publicized in order to preserve transparency of policy and action.

a. Honor Board reserves the right to interpret the ASOC Constitution in cases of ASOC infractions to determine whether an infraction has occurred.

ii) When issuing campus-wide notifications regarding infractions, the most general classification shall be used when addressing parties involved.

Regarding publicity, the fallowing addition (in bold) shall be made to Section 2c of the Honor Board Bylaws:

Publicity - At the end of each semester the Honor Board shall publish a confidential summary report of the findings and sanctions for that semester’s cases. The report will exclude unresolved cases and those cases still subject to appeal. 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. When issuing campus-wide notifications regarding infractions, the most general classification shall be used when addressing parties involved. To fulfill this obligation the Honor Board Chair shall:

i. Send a copy of the report to the Honor Board Advisor for approval to publish.

ii. Send a copy of the report to the editor of the Occidental Weekly.

iii. Send a copy of the report to the program director of KOXY.

iv. Post the report on the ASOC website.

v. Re-release the report at the beginning of the following semester.

****************

Ryan Bowen asked if in all cases this will always be the prerogative. Asked if/when things will be publicized, misdemeanors, felonies? Abe said that it is limited to ASOC representatives in their official capacity. Abe said that if the officers do something that is not their official role as a governmental officer, it does not apply, only if they do something in their governmental capacity.

Paolo thanked Abe for presenting and said that we would be voting on passing the resolution next week.

5. La Encina - Capital Improvement Request

Ross Arias and Anna Wilson presented their Capital Improvement Request.

****************

ASOC Capital Improvement Request Form

Name: Dawn Gruber	Department: La Encina
Date: 4/15/08	Total Amount: $3894.84

Capital Improvements allow departments to grow and develop. The Capital Improvement Fund is no more than 10% of the total Savings each year. The fund provides for purchases outside of the range of the yearly operating budget. Capital Improvement requests are to be submitted via email to the ASOC Advisor and the ASOC President.

Capital Improvement Guidelines:

§ Item must last at least 3 years without needing updates.

§ A capital improvement expense must be significant enough that it would not ordinarily be purchased within a department’s operating budget, usually at least $300.

§ Capital improvements can be individual items or systems. Systems are defined as items that do not work alone such as walkie-talkes. Additionally, items that will protect the purchase from damage, such as bags for cameras or warranties, can be included in the request.

§ Computer software is not eligible for capital improvement because it changes rapidly. Departments should purchase software using their operating budgets.

§ All requests must be reviewed by the ASOC Advisor, the ASOC Finance Manager, and the Associate Dean of Students prior to being presented to the Senate to study whether the items meet the guidelines and that the plans for protecting the investment are adequate. The ASOC advisor will offer a report to Senate on the adequacy of the request.

§ The ASOC President will forward the request to the General Assembly. An open forum in the GA for student questions and suggestions must occur prior to a vote in Senate.

§ The ASOC Senate votes on the request at the Senate meeting following the GA Meeting. The ASOC Advisor and ASOC Finance Manager are not responsible for completing purchases while school is out of session, unless previously arranged.

§ The deadline for submissions is April 18, 2008, before the second to last General Assembly meeting of the academic year.

§ Should you have any questions, please contact the ASOC Advisor.

Itemized list of purchases:

Item	Purchase From	Cost (be specific)
iMac, 24-inch, 2.4GHz Intel Core 2 Duo	Apple Store	$1,799.00
iMac, 24-inch, 2.4GHz Intel Core 2 Duo	Apple Store	$1,799.00









TOTAL		Including tax: $3,894.84

Please explain why your department needs these items, including how they serve your department’s mission, and how they will benefit students.

In accordance with our goal of producing the best possible yearbook for the Oxy community, La Encina relies heavily on modern professional graphics software. The high volume of our publication (over 150 pages) often overloads our servers. When this occurs, our two oldest computers, while functional, experience a dramatic decline in speed and performance as all computers are on a shared network. The addition of new computers to our office would allow some of the volume of our publication to be shared among more computers and allow all of our machines to function at top performance. Additionally, we have added members to our staff in the hopes of more completely covering the student body. Currently only three members of staff are able to work directly on the book at a time, and new computers would allow us to work more efficiently by better utilizing our staff.

Please explain how you will protect these investments from damage.

At La Encina, we strive always for professionalism and accuracy in our publication. Therefore, we take our office very seriously and treat all of our machines with respect. We try to refrain from personal use of office computers. Additionally, our office is in a locked room that is monitored by a camera and Campus Safety officers. The code to the room is only available to student services employees. We are also very willing to invest in computer locks for all of our machines.

****************

Ryan Bowen asked when they buy new computers, what software will come with it, what will they buy in addition, and Anna said that it would come out of their budget for software. Spencer Jemelka asked if it is a book that is published, Anna said yes, and that they currently have 1 computer with Photoshop, and all three have InDesign, shared between all three so that they can create the publication.

6. Santiago Mendez - Free Newspaper Delivery Proposal Resolution

****************

Free Newspaper Delivery Proposal

As of the beginning of the 2007-08 academic year, Residence Life and Housing Services annulled the campus wide subscription to the New York Times and Los Angeles Times which were delivered to all eleven Residence Halls, 1601 (now Berkus), and the Women’s Center. This program was successfully terminated under the pretext of a lack of readership. However, ASOC Senate underwent a trial program, delivering newspapers for four weeks in incrementing amounts to gauge the amount of readership the program would have. The trail program was different from the initial RLHS newspaper delivery program in several ways:

1) The newspapers were delivered to the Samuelson Pavilion

Upon launching the program we realized limiting newspapers to the residence halls meant some halls would have too many readers while other halls’ newspapers may have gone largely untouched. This centralization of delivery also allowed the entire student body to access the newspapers as off-campus residents were unable to read the news in the past and now had that opportunity presented to them.

2) The quantity was drastically lowered

In taking RLHS’s complaint seriously, that some newspapers were simply not being read, we decided to scale the number of papers being delivered down from approximately 130 distributed to all of the halls to 60 delivered to the Samuelson Pavilion: 30 copies of the LA Times and 30 of the NY Times. We quickly realized the LA Times was unpopular and consequently they decided to stop delivery of their newspapers. We were left with 30 newspapers the quantity of which was raised several times until we found that 60 NY Times newspapers tended to be consumed on a daily basis and were gone sometime between the early afternoon and sunset. We did note however that Monday, Wednesday and Friday newspaper went a lot quicker than Tuesday and Thursday papers, most likely due to class schedules.

3) The LA Times was dropped.

As mentioned above the LA Times found itself struggling for readers upon the first several days of its delivery. The subscription was conveniently terminated by the LA Times themselves for their own reasons. However, due to the higher popularity of the NY Times it was decided that the quantity of papers be increased to substitute the now missing LA Times. This is not to say that The LA Times is not a good newspaper nor does it not have readership, it simply was less popular and if reinstated the ratio of papers delivered should favor the NY Times because of its popularity (we suggest a 2:1 ratio).

Overall, the trial newspaper delivery program was a complete success. Not only did the end result of a delivery of 60 newspapers show wide consumption and appreciation, many students signed the petition left next to the papers. We also witnessed that many students read the papers, put them back or shared them directly with their friends. The overall success of this program was witnessed not only by its wide readership but by thank you emails I received, signatures obtained on the petition stating the program should find its home at Occidental College and the Facebook group whose numbers are still steadily growing. This shows that there is indeed an appreciation for and a desire to have the newspapers delivered to the Samuelson Pavilion.

It is proposed for all of the above reasons, that the continued termination of the newspaper delivery program, we believe would be detrimental to Occidental College’s commitment to excellence in education and service to the community as the news is an invaluable liaison to the world outside of the College. It is proposed that some branch or administrative department take up the costs of this program as this has been the precedence set in the past and because burdening ASOC with the costs would put high stress on its already very limited funds. The suggested program and its costs are as follows:

NY Times

Qty: 40/per day (Mon-Fri)

Cost: $0.45/per paper

Approximate total cost for one semester (16 weeks): $1440.00

LA Times

Qty: 20/per day (Mon-Fri)

Cost: $0.40

Approximate total cost for one semester (16 weeks): $640.00

Approximate Total Cost Per Semester: $2080.00

Thank you very much for your time, we hope this proposal shows students’ dedication and want for the newspaper program and its subsequent reestablishment. We also hope to start more dialogue with administrators about valuable programs such as these before they are completely dismissed.

Sincerely,

Santiago Mendez, ASOC Campus-wide Senator

****************

Ryan Bowen asked if it’s a proposal or a resolution, Santiago said it was a closed-action resolution. Kether Hayden asked who was paying for it before, and Santiago said it was Res Life.

Paolo said that it will go to vote next week.

Paolo said that next week's meeting has President Skotheim talking about the search for a future college president, and the ASOC budget for next year will be presented. 12:00 PM, April 29th in J200.

Meeting adjourned at 12:51 PM.