The fifth meeting of the Student Senate for 2001-02 was convened in 25 Mondale Hall, Minneapolis campus, on Thursday, April 25, 2002, at 11:34 a.m. Coordinate campuses were linked by telephone. Checking or signing the roll as present were 27 voting student members. Chair Christina Frazier presided.

Christina Frazier welcomed the 2002-03 student senators to the meeting.

MOTION:

To approve the Student Senate minutes, which are available on the Web at the following URL. A simple majority is required for approval.

http://www1.umn.edu/usenate/student_senate/020328stu.html

DISCUSSION:

With no discussion a vote was taken and the motion was approved.

COMMENT:

This statement was approved by the Student Senate Consultative Committee on Thursday, April 5, 2001, was presented at the Board of Regents meeting on the same date, and was then approved by the Student Senate on April 19, 2001.

Shawn Lavelle, Student Senate Vice Chair, welcomed the new senators and thanked the outgoing senators for their work this year. There were many issues this year that the Student Senate was able to address. He then thanked Khaled Dajani and Christina Frazier for their hard work this year.

Khaled Dajani, Student Senate Consultative Committee (SSCC) Chair, said that Judy Berning and Kari Lindeman were re-elected to SSCC for next year. He noted that there is one Twin Cities undergraduate position still available, which will be filled at the MSA meeting next week.

He said that he had a meeting with Vice President Pfutzenreuter from Budget and Finance regarding the proposed stadium. At the meeting he was told that there will be a stadium on campus in the current Huron parking lots. When asked about the student issues from last year, Vice President Pfutzenreuter said that these issues are still premature because financing is the main concern at this point. The Vikings want to build a stadium as soon as possible because the NFL is offering them a deal on financing. Once the financing is approved, an implementation plan will be created, at which time the student input will be needed.

There are several issues for the Student Senate next year. Withdrawals was raised again by the Educational Policy Committee (SCEP). A subcommittee has been established to deal with the issue. The implementation of the 13 credit minimum policy will be watched next year to see the effect on students. Athletics will continue to be an issue next year as well.

Khaled Dajani closed by thanking everyone for a great year.

Crookston – Steve Brandt said that CSA reworked the criteria for grant eligibility for campus clubs. Elections and appointments have been created. He noted that next year’s executive committee is comprised entirely of females.

Duluth – Nick Cecconi reported that the new Duluth student senators are present at today’s meeting. UMDSA has been involved in the annual change of leadership. During this year’s elections, a UMDSA constitution was passed, along with a referendum to investigate building a new Rec Sports facility on campus for $4.5 million paid by student funds.

Morris – Reid LeBeau stated that elections have been completed and welcomed the new senators to today’s meeting. He noted that the MCSA executive committee is comprised of only males. The last meeting for this year will be held next Monday. He thanked the Student Senate for their work this year.

Graduate and Professional Student Association – Patrick Pederson noted that new president is Christina Frazier and the new SSCC representatives are Yev Garif and Tom Walsh. At a recent Tuition Advisory Committee meeting it was stated that tuition will increase for all units on the Twin Cities, for some units at Duluth and Morris, and there will not be an increase at Crookston. Next year, based on the legislative projections, the University will need to prepare for up to a $50 million decrease in the next biennium.

Minnesota Student Association - Judy Berning said that the new president, vice president, and speaker were recently elected. Members look forward to a productive year next year.

Undergraduate Full-time Policy - Shawn Lavelle reported that his committee determined that this is a Twin Cities specific issue. The Educational Policy Committee (SCEP) made the same determination and asked the Council of Undergraduate Deans (CUD) to make the final decision.

Curricular Civic Engagement – Christina Frazier said that her committee had a few meetings with administrators to discuss this issue. A list of recommendations will be made, some of which will be for the Senate to revisit the issue of civic engagement, to consider curricular civic engagement be started on a smaller campus, and for the Senate to collaborate with already established committees.

Financial Aid Advising – Brittny McCarthy Barnes stated that information was collected from each campus regarding their current and future financial aid system. Crookston believed that the internet and paperless financial aid would be of great benefit to its students. Duluth currently has a paperless system, although paper copies are still available. Duluth students like the current system because it is easy and quick to use and saves times. Their recommendations include revising the process to make it clearer for freshmen and transfer students. For the Twin Cities, students like the paperless system, although there are less opportunities to talk to people and the service is not individualized when everything is done over the internet. The committee did not receive any feedback from Morris. She noted that further detail and comments are available in the full report.

Khaled Dajani, Student Senate Consultative Committee (SSCC) Chair, said that each committee will be providing the Student Senate a report of what they have done this year. He emphasized that the committees are where the main work of the Senate is done and encouraged all senators, including those from the coordinate campuses, to join a committee.

Educational Policy (SCEP) – Josh LaBau said that SCEP is debating three options regarding withdrawals: two withdrawals anytime during a students career, a maximum number of credits that a student can withdraw from, or a minimum credit requirement for each student. SCEP also discussed new software to track students and compared first-year experiences among campuses.

Information Technologies (SCIT) – Ryan Osero said that this committee discusses computers, libraries, phones, and the ethernet. Items this year were the opening of Walter Library, the integration of technology and the libraries on campus, and the phone upgrade on the Twin Cities. Issues for next year are data privacy on technology owned by the institution and bandwidth monitoring. Currently, the University shares bandwidth with the state, and the dorms take an excessive amount of the bandwidth at times which could lead to the state cutting off the University. Each of the coordinate campuses shares bandwidth through the Twin Cities.

Social Concerns – Kari Lindeman said that the committee discussed the Mount Graham issue and the Worker’s Rights Code this year. Each year, the committee also votes on proxy resolutions which are connected to the University’s stock holdings. She noted that the President has not made a final decision yet regarding Mount Graham.

Research – Christina Frazier stated that an ad hoc committee has been established to review the Secrecy in Research Policy.

Finance and Planning (SCFP) – Brittny McCarthy Barnes said that SCFP is a consulting body to the President and the Vice Presidents on all major issues of budget and planning. The committee has discussed the budget shortfall and its implications for students. The tuition increase for next year will be 16%, although coupled with the tuition banding for 13 credits and more, the increase will only be 10%. The University was assessed a $23.6 million rescission from the state with an additional $9 million in new expenses. The University was responsible for 77% of this total while students were responsible for 23% or $7.6 million. Other measures to reduce the budget include faculty increases being held to 4%, staff increases held to 3%, and administration will cut 3%. SCFP also discussed the financial implication of the 13 credit minimum.

Another topic this year has been parking and transportation costs, and what these costs cover. In the past, parking and transportation has been responsible for paying for other expenses on campus, such as the Child Care Center, curbs, sidewalks, and tunnels. This means that people who park on campus are subsidizing these other costs. SCFP wants to look at parking policies and how they might influence usage. A related issue is replacing surface lots with ramps and garages which are costlier to build and make less money for the University. If funds are approved for an on-campus stadium, then SCFP will also discuss the effects from building two additional parking structures on campus.

Lastly, she said that the charge for ethernet connections is changing for next year.

Q: Some college technology fees are changing into technology and administrative fees. Was SCFP involved in these discussions?

A: SCFP did not discuss this issue, but each college determines its own fee.

Q: Since student commuters are only 40% of the total student population, why does this segment subsidize items that benefits all students, and staff, on campus?

A: This is an issue that SCFP will investigate next year.

Q: What is the difference in tuition increases between undergraduate and graduate students?

A: Undergraduate and graduate students will have a 16% tuition increase; professional student tuition increases are set by each college based on market rates.

Student Affairs (SCSA) – Jason Stingl, SCSA Chair, said that issues for next year will include: full year health coverage for students, required health care coverage for international students, student riots, tuition increases, junior year experience, and a landlord library for off-campus housing.

Khaled Dajani, Student Senate Consultative Committee (SSCC) Chair, said that the Student Legislative Coalition (SLC) is an independent body with representatives from each campus and the Student Senate Chair. SLC will be voting this week on whether the Student Senate Chair position should be removed from the SLC Executive Board. This item is being discussed here so that all senators can comment on the Student Senate’s involvement in SLC.

A motion was made and seconded to move the discussion to a committee of the whole. The floor was then opened for discussion.

Q: What does it mean to move to a committee of the whole?

A: The Student Senate would function as a committee, with less restrictive rules regarding who can speak and time limits. A chair can also be appointed so that current chair can speak on the motion.

Q: Is there a time limit for a meeting of the committee of the whole?

A: The time limit is set by the initial motion.

Q: Can SLC overturn the decision of the Student Senate?

A: The Student Senate has no governing power over SLC. Any decision made today will just be a recommendation to SLC.

A senator commented that some people want to speak on this issue but cannot because of their position. By moving into a committee of the whole, these people will be able to speak on a topic which does need discussion by the Student Senate.

A vote was taken and the motion was approved with 15 in favor and 12 opposed.

Ryan Osero was then appointed as chair of the committee of the whole.

A motion was made and seconded to limit the discussion to five minutes. The motion was approved.

A senator commented that this discussion should focus on what is the role of the Student Senate in SLC. The motion to remove the Student Senate Chair from SLC was introduced by the Student Senate Chair two weeks ago, and then removed after it was tabled, and has now been reintroduced by the MSA president. The Student Senate has a vital role in SLC. Most of SLC’s representation is campus presidents, so the Student Senate Chair serves as an at-large representative. The Student Senate also provides SLC with a connection to the administration that is closer than what any of the separate campus associations has.

Q: What were the pros and cons for the decision? How was the decision to remove the Student Senate Chair reached?

A: There was a discussion regarding the role of the Student Senate and the separate assemblies on campus. The question was asked whether the Student Senate Chair is a redundancy in SLC. Does the Student Senate represent someone which the collective student assemblies do not? This is the basis for this issue.

A motion was then made and seconded to extend the discussion 10 minutes. The motion was approved with 14 in favor and 13 opposed.

A senator then noted that the Student Senate is not a redundancy and representation at-large is a valuable addition to any body.

Another senator commented that although the Student Senate is a redundancy in terms of who they represent, there is a difference is how they represent the students.

Christina Frazier, Student Senate Chair, then said that SLC will be discussing and voting on this issue tomorrow, and she will bring the Student Senate concerns to SLC for consideration.

A motion was then made and seconded to recommend to SLC to delay their vote until such a time as more discussions can be held with the Student Senate, such as September.

Christina Frazier said that SLC is a non-profit organization that is separate from the University and does not report to the Student Senate. In the past, the Student Senate has endorsed SLC’s intent to be a separate entity.

A senator then noted that if SLC postpones its vote until September, the entire executive committee will be new by that time and new year’s representatives might not have the same background information as this year’s representatives.

A motion was made to modify the resolution to remove the time constraint for when SLC needs to make a decision. This was accepted as a friendly amendment.

A vote was then taken on the motion to recommend to SLC to delay their vote until such a time as more discussions can be held with the Student Senate. The motion was approved with 10 in favor, 8 opposed, and 10 in abstention.

The meeting of the committee of the whole was then adjourned.

The motion from the committee of the whole was moved and seconded. A vote was taken and the motion was approved with 17 in favor, 5 opposed, and 7 abstentions.

Kari Lindeman said that she serves on the Student Conduct code Review Committee which was formed by Vice President Jones. The committee is discussing the jurisdiction of the Code. Currently the language is ambiguous, and most charges are just for on campus activities although there has been pressure to extend the policy past University property. She distributed a sheet detailing seven choices for jurisdiction. She brought these same choices to MSA, where members expressed interest in numbers 2, 5, and 7. She then asked student senators for their thoughts on these choices.

One senator commented that the University cannot accommodate all classes on its own property, so there is an issue defining property and distance education. A good policy should lay out the principles but not include any specifics, such as buildings.

Another student senator said that the Code does not prevent students from doing their daily activities, but whenever a student is in the community they are representing the University. Therefore, he favored options 3 or 7.

A senator noted that this could be seen as a response to the recent riot on campus and a way for the University to limit its liability. When a student commits a crime, it reflects poorly on the University and the other students here.

A student senator then disagreed that students should be held responsible by the University wherever they commit a crime. Each student is an individual and of age and they should be held responsible to the larger community. The University should only address crimes that occur on campus.

Christina Frazier, Student Senate Chair, said that this item was tabled at the March meeting. The discussion at that meeting was to change the Student Senate Consultative Committee (SSCC) membership to include two representatives from each campus. The Student Senate endorsed this change. A second topic of discussion was the inclusion of the student body president as one of the SSCC representatives.

Josh Colburn, newly-elected MSA President, said that MSA as a whole has not taken any action of this issue.

Steve Brandt, CSA President, said that CSA is in favor of this change since the CSA will be the second representative whether or not this language is included.

A senator then said that each student body president represents the individual campuses whereas SSCC represents the University as a whole. To allow the student body presidents on SSCC would create a conflict of interest.

Christina Frazier, Student Senate Chair, said that this year the Student Senate took risks to challenges the status quo and make a stronger and more functional body. She noted that the graduate student, professional student, and coordinate campus student voice has been minimized over the past years and the needs from these groups have to be dealt with as well. Throughout the past several months, procedural issues have made her work harder to remove the barriers to conduct business. Incoming senators are encouraged to communicate openly with and respectfully consider all student groups. Student senators have a responsibility to work on key student issues. Her experience has been a challenging and educating leadership endeavor. At the University, change will occur in time but only if students accept that change can occur for the better of the University and the organization.

Ryan Osero, a student senator from the Institute of Technology, was elected Student Senate Chair.

Eric Steinhoff, a student senator from Morris, was elected Student Senate/Student Senate Consultative Committee Vice Chair.

Judy Berning, Zeina Dajani, and Leah Stritesky were elected 2002-03 Twin Cities undergraduate Committee on Committee members.

Reid LeBeau, MCSA President and a student senator from Morris, said that this is his last Student Senate meeting after serving for four years. He thanked Becky Hippert and the other senators for their work over the years.

Khaled Dajani stated that the Student Senate Consultative Committee (SSCC) usually selects a student to be elected as the Vice Chair of the Twin Cities Campus Assembly (TCCA), but since student elections were not completed until after the last SSCC meeting, no student has been selected for this position. He made a motion to have the Twin Cities 2001-02 student senators nominate and elect a student for this position. The motion was approved.

Yev Garif, a senator from the Graduate School, was nominated and elected Vice Chair of the Twin Cities Campus Assembly.

The meeting was adjourned at 1:42 p.m.