Fall 2009 PLENARY AGENDA

I) Moment of Silence

II) Welcome to Plenary!

III) Rules of Order and Agenda

  1. Three minutes to look over Rules of Order and examine Agenda.
  2. Five minutes for questions concerning agenda or Rules of Order.
  3. Call for amendments to change Agenda or Rules of Order.
  4. A vote to accept any amendments to the agenda must have 2/3 majority vote.

IV) Presidential Announcements

V) Resolution #1 (Clearness Committee Process Modification) – majority vote

  1. Presenters have five minutes to introduce resolution.
  2. Question and Answer session: ten minutes to be extended no more than twice.
  3. Pro-Con presentations: fifteen minutes with motion to extend by ten minutes no more than three times.
  4. Response to Pro-Con debate by resolution presenters: three minutes.
  5. Call for Unfriendly Amendments: 75 signatures needed – Seven minutes allowed to turn in Unfriendly Amendments with a motion to extend by seven minutes no more than once.
  6. Presentations of recognized Unfriendly Amendments
  7. Question and Answer: five minutes
  8. Pro-Con debate: ten minutes
  9. Vote on Unfriendly Amendment, Majority rules
  10. Moment of Silence
  11. Vote on Final Resolution

VI) Resolution #2 (Creation of an HCA Cafe) – majority vote required

Procedures a.-g. same as above.

VII) Resolution #3 (Revisions to the Alcohol Policy) – 2/3 majority vote

Procedures a.-g. same as above.

VIII) Alcohol Policy Ratification

  1. JSAAPP Co-Chairs Present Alcohol Policy.
  2. Question and Answer session: ten minutes to be extended no more than twice.
  3. Pro-Con presentations: fifteen minutes with motion to extend by ten minutes no more than three times.
  4. Response to Pro-Con debate by JSAPP Co-Chairs: three minutes.
  5. Vote on ratification of Alcohol Policy – 2/3 majority vote

IX) Resolution #4 (Expanding the Mandate of the Council of 12) – majority vote

Procedures a.-g. same as above.

X) Resolution #5 (Alleviating Academic Burdens During the High Holidays) – majority vote

Procedures a.-g. same as above.

XI) Resolution #6 (Bi-Co Exchange Leadership Reforms) – majority vote

Procedures a.-g. same as above.

XII) Resolution #7 (Moving Haverford’s Polling Place) – majority vote

Procedures a.-g. same as above.

XIII) Resolution #8 (The Constitutional Clarity Resolution of 2009) – 2/3 majority vote

Procedures a.-g. same as above.

XIV) Resolution #9 (To Provide Guidelines on General Dining Center Etiquette, with a Nod to the Exemplars of Aisle Passing, and Also Taco Day Olive-Taking Procedure) – majority vote

Procedures a.-g. same as above.

XV) Final Moment of Silence

RULES OF ORDER

  1. In order for quorum to be reached, at least 50% of the students living at Haverford must be present at Plenary. If quorum is lost at any point during Plenary, the meeting will be suspended until quorum is again reached. After 30 minutes without quorum, the chairs may evaluate the situation going forward.
  1. An amendment to the agenda will follow the rules for “Unfriendly Amendments” except that the final vote will pass with a 2/3 majority. Any portion of the agenda may be changed.
  1. During any given pro-con debate a person will not speak for longer than two minutes at any given interval, nor shall they be recognized by the chair more than two times. Upon each extension of a pro-con debate, a person may be recognized by the chair one additional time.
  1. Plenary may add “Unfriendly Amendments” to a resolution by a vote of the majority. All unfriendly amendments must pertain to the current resolution as seen in the eyes of the chair. Once an amendment has been approved it may not be reversed, nor the resolution be withdrawn. “Friendly Amendments” will only be accepted for clarification, organizational or grammatical purposes, as judged by the chair. Friendly amendments must also be approved by the original resolution presenter(s).
  1. The chair shall call for a paper vote on all items deemed necessary by the chair. When so requested, the vote will be taken by secret ballot. Quorum (50 %) must be reached on all paper votes.
  1. If the chair (or one member of the chair) wishes to speak to the content of the resolution, he or she must step down until the proposal is resolved. The Vice President shall then preside for the remainder of that resolution.
  1. The time limit for Plenary shall be three hours. If this time limit expires, the assembled Plenary shall vote to extend the time limit half an hour no more than three times. If the assembled Plenary fails to extend the time limit by majority vote, the pending resolution (if any) will be voted on immediately, without further discussion.
  1. Once a resolution is passed by Plenary while quorum is present, the resolution is an action taken by the assembled Plenary. The passed resolution will be in effect at the close of Plenary unless it is subject to other procedural regulations. All resolutions will be presented to the President of the College within seven (7) days of the close of Plenary.

PLENARY PEOPLE

Will Harrison and Harrison Haas
Franklyn Cantor and Dylan Lazovik
Sydney Keough and Hilary Schwartz
Gabe Schwartz and Inez Suhardjo
Emily Dix and Silas Altheimer
Jen Zelnick and Ryan Fackler / Plenary Chairs and SC Co-Presidents
Plenary Vice-Chairs, SC Co-Vice Presidents
Plenary Co-Secretaries, SC Co-Secretaries
Honor Council Co-Chairs
Plenary Co-Secretaries, HC Co-Secretaries
JSAAPP Co-Chairs

Students’ Council

Will Harrison and Harrison Haas, SC Co-Presidents

Franklyn Cantor and Dylan Lazovik, SC Co-Vice Presidents

Julien Menko and Edin Fako, SC Co-Treasurers

Sydney Keough and Hilary Schwartz, SC Co-Treasurers

Julie Sieth, Officer of Academics

Sam Permutt, Officer of Athletics

Kayla Hoskinson, Officer of Campus Life

Rachel Edmonds, Officer of Multiculturalism

Charles Watanasutisas, Officer of the Arts

Council of Twelve:

2010: David Sanchez, Jacob Waters, Ben Takemoto

2011: Amanda Zheutlin, Cameron Scherer, Isobel Grad

2012: Kate Mundell, Bert Lee, Lizzie Wingfield

2013: Sydney Hyder, Hannah Turner, Mimi Fuchs

Honor Council

Gabe Schwartz and Inez Suhardjo, HC Co-Chairs

Emily Dix and Silas Altheimer, HC Co-Secretaries

2010: Hazel Scott, Carolyn Warner

2011: Dan Connochie, Dana Eiselen, Noah Lavine, Ryan Fackler

2012: Seth Kennedy, Anna Brockway

2013: Sam Gant, Susanna Sacks, Hope Hart, Joshua Mussa

JSAAPP

Jen Zelnick and Ryan Fackler, JSAAPP Co-Chairs

Becca Varon, 2010

Maggie Goddard ‘11

Howard Brown ‘12

Rachel Davis ‘13

Student Representatives to Major College Committees

Administrative Advisory Committee: Ryan Fackler '11, Sarina Schwartz ’11, Kate Mundell ‘12* (Interim Appointment)

Educational Policy Committee: Nora Graham '11, David Thorstad '12

Faculty Committee on Admissions: Zach Singer '10, Linkai Jiang '11

Long Range Planning Committee: Adam Lewis ’10, Daniel Kent ‘10

Senior Class Representative to the Board of Managers: Carolyn Warner

Junior Class Representative to the Board of Managers: Daniel Kent

Plenary Resolution #1 – Clearness Committee Process Modification Presented by Zachary Dutton ’11 and Noah Lavine ‘11

Dear Students’ Association and Haverford Community,

Currently, the Haverford Community goes through a process every four years in which we review the extent to which all the aspects of College life live up to the Honor Code—called Clearness Committee, section IX of the Constitution. However, the Honor Code itself should not be the standard by which we measure our actions because it is a reflection of our shared values, which change over time. We would like our shared values to serve as the standard by which we measure our actions. The Honor Code expresses some of the values by which we wish to live, but the core of our community consists in the values themselves.

If the clearness process were to take the Honor Code under its review, we would like there to be an independent measure of the Honor Code. As the language stands currently, an evaluation of the Honor Code would use the Honor Code as its standard of measurement. This wouldn’t reap any of the intended benefits. That is, the Honor Code reflects the values articulated within it quite nicely, but what if these values have changed, or what if the Honor Code doesn’t reflect them accurately? We can’t evaluate something on the basis of itself. Thus we would like for our shared values to serve as the independent measurement of the Honor Code, should the Honor Code ever come under review. The Honor Code is an imperfect reflection of our values, and we need a process that will bring it closer and closer to where we are.

Further, the community changes every year with the graduation of an old senior class and the matriculation of a new freshman class. Therefore, we would like clearness committees to occur every two years, rather than every four, to keep up with our changing set of shared values. This would also benefit us in that everyone would go through two clearness processes (rather than one) while at Haverford. We will therefore be able to see how one process works, watch its ideas play out, and then go into the second with experience. Following these proposals, we would be able to remain more steadily abreast of changes in our shared values and thus be able to live them out with greater integrity.

We recognize the concern that having a clearness process every two years would be a lot of work for the community. However, we are confident that the amount of work will more than make up for itself in the benefits reaped. If there is a lot to do, it will be because the community needed it. Conversely, if the community is already living out its values in the way it would like, there won’t be a lot to do.

We therefore propose the following changes in the Constitution of the Students’ Association:

The following parts of the existing section would be added (changes made in bold) or subtracted (subtractions have lines through them):

  1. Clearness Committee

Every two years, following the spring Plenary, students will convene a Clearness Committee to evaluate the quality of student life, and to evaluate the extent to which the community’s shared values are reflected in Haverford College as an institution. This committee will be composed of four students, a faculty member, a college administrator, and the Honor Council Librarian.

  1. Subjects of Evaluation
  2. Evaluation

Firstly, the Clearness Committee will endeavor to discern in a way feasible for them, involving surveys and community discussion, the set of shared values in the community. Clearness Committee will evaluate the Honor Code and its implementation and the Students' Association and its governance. In this regard the The committee will then evaluate to what extent the Student Constitution, the Honor Code, handbook policies, administrative practices, decision-making processes, and the allocation of college and student funds reflect the community’s shared values.

  1. Consensus

By consensus of its members, the committee may expand or contract the scope of its review.

  1. Queries

Students, clubs, staff, faculty, and administrators, may submit queries for the committee's consideration.

  1. Criteria of Evaluation

The committee will consider the responsiveness, sustainability, and adherence to the community’s set of shared values (as determined earlier in the process) of the subjects of evaluation.

  1. Responsiveness

Does the subject respond to student concerns in a productive, timely, and inclusive way?

  1. Sustainability

Is the subject empowered through an effective institutional memory mechanism and provided with resources necessary to executing its mission?

  1. Adherence to the Honor Code

Are the subject's policies and practices compatible with the community’s shared set of values (as determined earlier in the process)?

  1. Timeline

Starting in the spring of 2006, then in the spring of 2010, and every two years thereafter, the student government appointment process will select four students to serve on the committee. The chair of the appointments committee, in consultation with the Provost and the Dean of the College, will select the remaining committee members. The committee will select one of the students to serve as chair.

  1. Census

Before the close of the semester, the committee will conduct a census of the student association to discover the prevailing attitudes and shared values of the association. The census may include both surveys and community-wide discussions.

  1. Interviews

The committee will conduct interviews with student government officers, faculty members, administrators, and other community members as they deem necessary. In these interviews the committee will have access to confidential information necessary to fulfilling their mission. The committee should consider the records of the Honor Council Librarian.

  1. The Report
  2. December Report

By December, the committee will publish a report with the results of their inquiries. It will be published by consensus of its members. The report may contain recommendations to be considered at the following plenary session of the students' association.

  1. Archival

All reports from Clearness Committees must be archived and available in the College Library.

Plenary Resolution #2 – Creation of an HCA Cafe

Presented by Will Harrison ‘10

Whereas, residents of the Haverford College Apartments often feel removed from the campus and fellow apartment residents,

Whereas, HCA is often noted as lacking a common central space for student use,

Whereas, Lunt Cafe has served as a successful location for student refreshment and relaxation,

Whereas, the hours of the Coop and the location of Lunt Cafe are an inconvenience for HCA residents

Whereas, a cafe in HCA would help to alleviate some of the aforementioned concerns,

Noting that cafes create student jobs,
Be it resolved:

That the students of Haverford College request the creation of a cafe space in an HCA basement. The renovations of the space for this proposed cafe will be funded via the Facilities Management budget which currently includes a student improvements fund which was previously used in the renovation of Ryan Gym, the creation of a Black Box Theater in the DC basement, and the addition of Gummere basement bathrooms. The cafe will be run in a similar style to the current Lunt Cafe, with managers and student workers. Additionally collaboration will be encouraged between Lunt and the new cafe.
The student body additionally asks that Students Council work with various elements of the college to ensure the creation and implementation of the HCA Cafe. These persons include but are not limited to, Ron Tola Director of Facilities Management, Dick Wynn Vice President of Finance and Administration, John Francone, Director of Dining Services, Lunt Cafe Managers, and interested students/student groups. Details of the menu and amenities of the space are to be discussed and agreed upon over the course of the fall semester with Students' Council through these discussions.

Plenary Resolution #3 – Revisions to the Alcohol Policy

Presented by Jen Zelnick ’12 and Ryan Fackler ‘11

The Alcohol Policy

Introduction:

There are numerous sections of the Crime Code of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania that deal with intoxicating liquor. An increasing public concern about alcohol abuse and alcohol-related injuries has been followed by a developing body of case law that has extended the liabilities of vendors to non-commercial or “social” hosts on whose premises alcohol is served to minors or intoxicated persons of any age. The Haverford College Policy of Drug-Free Schools, adopted in compliance with federal requirements, forbids the unlawful possession, use of, or distribution of illicit drugs or alcohol.

Goals of the Alcohol Policy:

The Alcohol Policy is designed to achieve the following goals:

1. To remind students of the laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and of the Honor Code, all of which should govern their behavior with respect to alcohol;

2. To stress moderation, safety, and individual accountability for those who choose to drink;

3. To maintain a social atmosphere that is free of coercion for those who choose not to drink and a climate in which alcohol is not the center of parties or other social events;

4. To maintain a community in which alcohol abuse and its effects are minimal;

5. To provide confidential and effective guidance for those with specific needs related to alcohol use and alcoholism; and

6. To provide information and education about the effects of alcohol for all its students.

All members of the community are expected to be familiar with and abide by the Alcohol Policy. It is the duty of all students to conduct themselves in a manner consistent with the Honor Code, in addition to helping others to do the same. With regard to the consumption of alcohol, it is recognized that students are responsible for their own well being, as well as the well-being of others. Thus, behavior that puts lives at risk, in terms of mental and physical health and legal liability, cannot be condoned.

THE POLICY:

Article I

Students have the responsibility to confront others whose behavior under the influence of alcohol is inconsistent with the welfare of themselves and others in the community [i]. When community members lose their ability to reason and control their actions due to excessive alcohol consumption, it is threatening to them, to those around them, and ultimately to the community as a whole. Students are responsible [ii] for preventing themselves and others from ever reaching that point. Inebriation shall not be seen as an acceptable or justifiable excuse for disruptive behavior and confrontation for such behavior shall be dealt with as prescribed by the Honor Code. [iii]

Article II

Any infractions of Article II will fall under the jurisdiction of Honor Council and JSAAPP [iv]. Students have the responsibility to preserve the natural integrity of the campus and therefore to maintain the good condition of the College by preventing any instances of destruction, defacement, littering, and other offenses that can occur as results of alcohol consumption. Events that involve the consumption of alcohol can often lead to the scattering of cups, broken glass, and other waste that affects the condition of the grounds and the safety of the students. In addition, excessive consumption of alcohol can lead to the defacement and vandalism of campus buildings by community members. Students have [v] the responsibility for preventing and resolving these issues in the interest of student safety and the College’s ecological and aesthetic environment.