Categories
Minutes

March 24, 2013 Minutes

SGA Meeting 03/24/13

Natalie calls the meeting to order at 7:10 PM.

Absent: Kendra Kelly, Sarah Henkind, Christine Newville, Jenn Burns, Lija Geller, Makala Forster, Neha Kamran, Nitya Hajela, Cesiah Novoa Ordonez

Announcements:

Karina Siu ’14: SAAC is having the first fan appreciation game for the spring season. Tennis will be playing at 4 PM this Friday March 29th on the courts. We will be having pretzels, prizes for anyone who has the most spirit. Wear black and yellow! Come support the tennis team!

Amanda Beardall ’14: This Friday the CEO is having a pop-up café with home-made brownies, cupcakes, and treats. You can talk about how to get involved with the CEO. It’s from 2:30 to 4 PM in the CEO.

This upcoming Saturday, we have a Saturday Service Event with Urban Tree Connection and will be turning a vacant lot into a garden. It is from 9:30 to 1:30 PM. Email Amanda Beardall if you are interested.

Nora Scheland ’15: We are from the executive board for BMC Democrats. We are hosting a “Communicating with Congress” workshop this Thursday from 8 to 9 PM. It will be hosted by Mujeres, Mawrters for Immigrant Justice, NAACP, Sisterhood, BMC Greens, and Fem-Co. We will be talking about how to figure out who your representatives are, how to get in touch with them, and how to lobby on behalf of issues.

Nikki Ditto ’14: It is going to be very collaborative, and there will be snacks.

Diana Tive ’15: Newly elected members from the February elections – can you please email me a picture for the SGA board in the campus center?

Anika Ali ’14: The Pensby Center has 2 events starting this weekend. The MSA is hosting a fundraising dinner for Muslims without Borders this Saturday. Religion on Campus Week starts on Sunday and there will be a few events every day.

Natalie Zamora ’14: There will be an update on the posting policy next SGA meeting. Check your emails for a revised edition of the posting policy soon.

Iliana Dominguez ’16: Zami, Bryn Mawr’s LGBTQ people of color group is having their first annual conference on March 29th. We are also having a stand up performance by D’Lo the same night in Thomas Great Hall.

Rebecca Cook ’15: April appointments round! Up for appointments are Concert Series, Elections Committee, Financial Aid Advisory Board, Film Series, Health Center, Plenary Committee, Recycling Co-Heads, Webmistresses, Student Curriculum, and the new Constitutional Review Committee. If you know anybody who would be good for these positions, please reach out to them. Applications are open between April 1st and April 12th. Interviews will be the weeks of April 15th and April 29th. Please encourage people to apply! People who currently hold appointed positions who will be ending your terms – look for an email from me this week.

Amani Chowdhury ’14: The CDAs are having a spring festival this Friday from 5-7 in Thomas Great Hall. The theme is ‘Untold Stories’ so come out and support the groups on campus!

Natalie Kato ’14: Mae Carlson, the secretary from the 2011-2012 term is hoping to host a service day on Tuesday the 26thfrom 10 AM to 2 PM. If you would like more information, email me or Amanda Beardall.

Your 2 Cents:

Plenary Survey Report:

Natalie Kato ’14: A few weeks ago, the plenary committee sent out a survey to the student body trying to get feedback about plenary and changes we can make in future years. They are going to come and present.

Nora Scheland ’15: We had over 180 responses. The majority of responses were from the seniors. Seniors and sophomores were fairly represented. Freshmen were the least represented but it was all pretty even.

Did you come to spring plenary 2013? Most people who responded had come.

Did you stay until the end? Most people who responded had stayed until the very end.

If we changed the start time, what would work best for you? This is an issue that has come up previously. Most respondents wanted the time to stay the same, at 12:30 PM. Some respondents were okay with 11:30 AM and 1:30 PM, but nothing before 11:30 AM or after 7:30 PM. 17% of the respondents said that they would come at 7:30 PM but most would still come in the morning.

Why did you come to plenary? Most respondents said that it was their civic duty. The second reason was that self-governance is important. We realized that most people come because of plenary and SGA rather than for the resolutions themselves.

Why did you not come? Most respondents said “other”… but the two answers were either not interested in resolutions, or schoolwork.

What would have made you come? This was targeted towards people who said that they had not come. Some responses were that the resolutions could have more staying power. Some people wanted to be able to Skype in. Some people said that there was too much peer pressure, it was the wrong time, it is not good to have it at the end of Hell Week, some people said it is uncomfortable. My favorite was that someone suggested that we have a band at plenary. A lot of people wanted food. A lot of these things have been discussed at the SGA meeting.

Natalie Zamora ’14: Possible changes to plenary? Responses were actual things that we can change, not just general statements. Shutting down the rest of campus, i.e. wi-fi, kept coming up. This resulted in mixed responses. Some people want it and some people do not. We understand that this option is known and it is a very split decision.

The next response was a time limit. We set a time limit for Spring 2012 plenary. It was an estimated time limit from 12:30 to 2:30. We can do an estimated time limit as suggested, but we will not stop plenary if it goes over the time limit.

Customspeople and HAs could help with awareness amongst freshman. People had different reactions. Some people last year said that as HAs they should not be mothering the freshman and badgering them to go to plenary. We understand that, but this suggestion kept popping up in the survey this year, with no negative responses.

Fun plenary versus democratically important plenary. We had mixed suggestions. Some people want to have dance parties, more haikus, and things like that. Other people were stressing the importance of plenary. We should make sure that people know how important plenary is and that it is something that should be taken seriously.

Streaming online could logistically be a challenge.

Syona Arora ’15: Do you think plenary is relevant? Why or why not?

Yes, because self-governance is important.

No, because it is a publicity stunt. The administration does not listen to the decisions. There should be other, better means involving the entire student body.

Yes, but… not to graduation seniors; it depends on the importance of resolutions; only if the majority of students are invested; the entire campus should be aware and adjust accordingly (sports practices and rehearsals should not conflict with plenary); there should be online voting options.

Eunhae Lee ’15: Do you feel like your voice is heard at plenary? 65% responded yes, 30% responded no.

Yes, even if I don’t speak, my vote counts; appreciate that there are specific mics and that there is an option to extend time; it is the only time that the student body comes together.

No; there is peer pressure to follow the majority. People want to leave as soon as possible, especially when it takes a long time to reach quorum. People do not know much about the resolutions beforehand so they just end up voting without knowing what they are voting for. The administration does not hear from us, even when the resolutions are relevant to the administration. Resolutions get passed but not much change happens. There is a fear of judgment for speaking up, especially regarding the Perry House resolution. People remained silent. There is a lack of understanding about the plenary process in general, such as making amendments.

Yes, but… clapping and booing should be addressed. Presenters should take more time to explain the resolutions. SGA meetings are better forums for voices to be heard as opposed to plenary where many people just come to fill quorum.

Nora Scheland ’15: We want to make changes to plenary to have people come and to make it more pleasant. We want to hold a straw poll right now because we are going to send a survey.

Natalie Kato ’14: Does anyone have any questions about the survey or what was presented?

Emily Tong ’13: You said that we can’t change quorum. Why not? Is that something we could write a resolution about?

Natalie Kato ’14: That is something that we could write a resolution about, but for the next plenary we would still have 1/3rdfor quorum and then it would impact the following plenary.

Emma Rosenblum ’14: What percentage of the people who had filled out the survey had gone to plenary versus had not?

Nora Scheland ‘15: 70-80% who had filled out the survey had gone to spring plenary.

Natalie Kato ’14: We need a motion to extend time.

Time was extended to the end of speaking order.

Michelle Lee ’15: Has this information been given to the general public?

Nora Scheland ‘15: This is the first time that we are presenting it.

Michelle Lee ‘15: Could we present it?

Natalie Kato ‘14: What we could do is post it on the SGA blog. In the future, we will send out information through the Res-Co heads to dorm presidents to dorm residents.

Chloe Baumann ‘14: For the next survey could you do it in person? Otherwise the only people who respond will be SGA assembly members, people who care, etc.

Natalie Kato ’14: We will definitely take that into consideration. We are planning on sending out another survey with different options. We have 5, and want to keep it at 5. Are there any suggestions? Whatever gets the most votes we are planning on executing at the next plenary.

Emma Rosenblum ’14: I noticed a theme about advertising plenary. I think it would be valuable to ask people how to better advertise to people who do not normally attend plenary.

Anna Kalinsky ’14: I am in favor against the suggested time limit, because the suggested time limit is “show up so we can get done with it”. Having a real time limit might be a kick in the butt. That’s what happened at Haverford, when the honor code was not ratified. If plenary does not happen one semester, people might come next time. It might be a sacrifice that is worth it in the long run.

Natalie Zamora ‘14: Haverford is having their plenary tonight. They need 75%.

Chloe Baumann ‘14: Time limit is unconstitutional. If we had a suggested time limit, people would just be upset when we go over it.

Vrinda Varia ’13: I don’t understand how an electronic plenary would work, and it goes against what plenary could stand for. They should physically come together and talk about issues. It would be a logistical nightmare and it ignores the fact that students are coming together to demonstrate that they care.

Natalie Kato ’14: As of right now we will only be polling people on time, food/snacks, suggested time limit, plenary information forum, and a quiet study space in the Katharine Hepburn Room. Do we want to do a quick straw poll on whether or not we should have a suggested time limit included in the survey? After the straw poll, the suggested time limit option will not be included on the survey. That option will be removed. Are there any other comments or questions?

Elizabeth Vandenburg ’16: I think you were going to discuss switching the location.

Natalie Kato ‘14: I spoke to Lisa Zernicke. She said that when plenary was in the gym, there were 200 chairs so others had to sit on the floor. The acoustics were not good. The main question was if food would be allowed to be eaten. Dining services did cater but it is not an option for the future because the cost is too high. She recommended against doing it in the gym, but it is something we could still talk about in the future.

Karina Siu ‘14: You would not be able to hear anybody in the gym. Schwartz is new and food would probably not be allowed. There would be too many scuffs to the floor, which would impact athletic competition.

Kersti Francis ‘13: From a Conferences and Events point of view, the issue is keeping it a manageable space. In the past, at the gym, it was uncomfortable.

Chloe Baumann ‘14: Food is motivating the location change. We previously had brunch in the teaching theater. Could it be reorganized to have tabling in the atrium and then food in the teaching theater?

Natalie Kato ‘14: That’s something we can consider. Now if there are no other questions or comments, we have our survey. If anyone has more suggestions, please feel free to email the SGA board or anyone on the plenary committee.

Presidential Transition Feedback:

 

Natalie Kato ‘14: We wanted to reiterate some information from the email we received about President McAuliffe’s resignation. She will be continuing her role as president until June 30th. The Board of Trustees are currently searching for an interim president for the 2013-2014 academic year. While this is going on, they are also working to search for a longer-standing president for 2014 and on. What happened when President McAuliffe was hired as president, there was a broad range of people sitting on the committee to hire her, including an undergraduate representative, a graduate representative, members of the administration, members of the Board of Trustees, and a Haverford representative. Plans seem to incorporate a similar board for the decision of a future president.

What was conveyed to us recently was that this was a very mutual decision between President McAuliffe and the Board of Trustees as well as student input for her to be stepping down. We wanted to open up this time for questions to forward on to the administration in terms of the transition.

Lindsey Crowe ’14: When will we know when the interim president is chosen?

Natalie Kato ’14: We will ask Dean Rasmussen or Ruth Lindeborg, the secretary of the college. They are still trying to figure out a system as to how they are going to go about this. It is still in discussion and they do not know yet.

Marian Slocum ’15: Are there different qualifications for interim and long-term, or is interim trying it out for a year and could extend contract?

Natalie Kato ‘14: That is something we will ask as well. Does anybody have any other questions that we could forward to the administration? If you think of any, feel free to email the SGA board or Ruth Lindeborg or Dean Rasmussen.

Diana Tive ’15: It’s college policy that if anyone outside of the college, such as someone from the media, asks about the decision to defer to the Dean’s Office or Dean Rasmussen.

Big Cheese Questions Preparation:

Natalie Kato ‘14: The Big Cheese forum will be on April 7th. I just wanted to quickly go over the structure, formatted when Vrinda Varia was president. This included us forwarding them questions, with 2-3 minutes to answer these questions. We then have 5 minutes to ask follow ups to those questions. If anybody wants to extend time, we can do so for one minute. This would include a visual ballot from the assembly. We will break up into seven small groups and think about questions that we want to see the administration answer. This will also dictate who is coming to Big Cheese.

If we could have one representative from each group come up to the mic and present questions, that would be great. We will be voting on the top five questions and then sending them to the administration.

Karina Siu ’14: Our main topic was housing. What’s going on? Can we be updated a little bit more? What are options for students moving off-campus? Can Bryn Mawr help them find off-campus housing? Are there plans for the future? We came up with some options to explore for this coming year, maybe having Haverford sponsor more Bryn Mawr students. Helping Bryn Mawr students find off-campus housing and updates on what exactly happened with Haffner, as well as the new dorm that was mentioned in the email. How does this affect Perry House? What about McBride housing?

The second topic was academic and dealing with hiring professors. How are they hired? How does tenure work? What type of impact do students have on curriculums and professors? In some departments, students really like professors but feel like the college dropped the professors for reasons not understood.

Lindsey Crowe ’14: We started with Haffner and the problem of asbestos. Everybody could speak about their role in the housing situation and why it has come up so late. We can raise the question about if this is the only dorm this is happening in. We were wondering about problems in the fall semester with no Radnor or Haffner housing for freshman. How are we adding more housing? What is the triage system like – what is determined as important when these issues come up?

What is the Board of Trustees looking for in a new president that is similar to or different from President McAuliffe? Are they looking for an interim president internally or externally?

Are alums not donating because of what is happening with the funds that they donate? What happens with general donations that are not marked towards a specific project?

Rebecca Payne-Passmore ’14: What was the impact for students going aborad in the fall and coming back in the spring with regards to housing? What are housing restrictions of the township?
How much money is being spent on the cowpath on Merion green?

Someone in the group said that there are new rules in dining services that are countering money-saving techniques. What are those rules and why are they being implemented? What’s going on with May Day food from the budget?

A suggestion we had – it would be great to talk to the Board of Trustees and have a presentation about what they have been doing for faculty and students, and how they are choosing an interim president.

Sophia Dauria ’15: The last email we received was about acquiring apartments. We were wondering if they are just for this next year or will be kept after Haffner is back online?

We were talking about financial aid and transparency with low-income prospectice students and families. An issue was brought up with policies not being explicit before coming to Bryn Mawr and new information arises about scholarships after arrival.

We had a discussion about the post-doc that was hired and how that decision was made. How was that funding allocated?

Michelle Lee ’15: For the post-doc, what was the reasoning? Is there an opportunity for this to be renewed?

We were also wondering about Haffner. How is trying to get rid of asbestos going to affect other housing options? For the new dorm, where is the money going to come from? How is it going to affect building projects and other renovations on campus?

Amanda Beardall ’14: We had further questions about how funds are allocated. It seems like an excessive amount for Student Activities while there are cuts in dining services and housing. We were also interested in the fundraising efforts over the next year without President McAuliffe.

Stephanie Clarke ’14: We talked about dining services in general. We would like an overall update, because there have been forums but the information does not always spread.

Natalie Kato ’14: We are going to do a quick straw poll to rank some of the questions. I feel that different questions can be answered by different representatives and we will reach out to them. Everyone can vote for three topics. For this straw poll, anyone can vote.

Topics:

Housing

Academic

President search

Alum donations

Cow path

BMCDS

Board of Trustees presentation

Financial aid

Post-doc funding

The topics that will be addressed will be:

Housing

Academic

President search

BMCDS rules

Financial aid transparency

We will keep you posted about questions and who will be attending on April 7th.

Old Business:

New Business: