GRADUATE ASSEMBLY MEETING

September 5, 1995

SUMMARY OF THE MEETING

· Heard introductions of Officers and staff.

· Approved Round One of Grad Events Funding.

· Had a mini-orientation.

· Discussed the controversy with the ASUC Store and voted to maintain neutrality in the matter.

· Discussed a potential AGSE strike, and voted to hand a special meeting for reps of AGSE and the Grad Division to present information.

· Discussed the campus Life Safety Fee and voted to oppose its ,extension, pending more information going to students and a referendum.

This regular meeting of the Graduate Assembly, commencing Fall Semester, was called to order by Charlie Bertsch at 5:40 p.m. in the ASUC Senate Chamber.

APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA

Mr. Bertsch said he had an amendment to the agenda, hearing from Student Regent Jess Bravin earlier in the meeting since he has to go to class. The amendment to the agenda passed with no objection. THE AGENDA WAS APPROVED WITH NO OBJECTION.

PRESENTATION BY STUDENT REGENT JESS BRAVIN

Mr. Bravin said he'd like to thank them for moving him up on the agenda. The GA has a large place in his heart from his service there last year. He generally wanted to say hello and

tell them where to reach him. And instead of generic platitudes, he had an actual issue that's come; up. All students currently pay the Berkeley Campus Fee, which is used for a number of things nobody, knows about, since they're not disclosed on the term bill. But one item is a Campus Safety Fee that was imposed four years ago by the Administration, $62 per year, to pay for various structural improvements, such as plumbing and seismic safety. And there's a list of construction projects the campus has in mind.

The Safety Fee was set to expire that year, and the Administration was supposed to conduct a student referendum on whether or not to continue this charge. Administrators failed to do that, in part because of concerns on whether the ASUC would cooperate in staging the referendum, and various other issues. But the Fee is going to expire end the referendum is not set to occur. While the vote is only advisory, one is supposed to occur. When it was last voted on, not enough students turned out for it for the referendum to be valid, but of those who did vote, 80% voted in favor of the Safety Fee. The campus Administration is bringing this up at the Regents' September meeting continuing the Fee for another four years. This will occur before the GA's next meeting. Mr.. Bravin said he just found out about this on Wednesday when he received ark informational item regarding the Regents' meeting. And he contacted Mr. Sandoval about it.

Mr. Bravin said he would like the GA to consider this Fee and take a position an this, What he told the Administration that day was that the substance of the charges seemed reasonable to him, but he felt that the campus needs to make the case to the people who pay the ;Fee, and to see if they can be persuaded that this is reasonable. But he had a great amount of difficulty when administrators say that they feel this is an important expense, so students should automatically pay for it, So he would ask the GA to consider this. Mr. Sandoval has the specifics, and perhaps in his report can go into this in more detail.

Mr. Bravin said he would like to welcome Delegate back. His phone number is 642-5081, and his current office is Room 37,

at Boalt Hall. To all those anti-law student students, Mr. Bravin said he specifically sought an office on the lower campus and gave administrators a list of six buildings, all around Eshleman, But they exiled him to the Law School. So although he tried his best to be more accessible, he's in an asbestos removal zone. And people can always drop things off to him at Anthony Hall. And if people are interested in taking field trips to the Board of Regents, they are always welcomed. Mr. Bravin said he'll try to attend GA meetings when possible.

APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES

Mr. Bertsch said they had to approve the minutes from the May 2 GA meeting. Nobody got copies of the agenda packets through the mail, as usually occurs, because they didn't arrive as they were supposed to, and packets are available that evening at the front of the room.

Mr. Kathotia said that on page 4, the minutes have Dean Duggan stating that nobody said they don't have the money for a rent increase, and should read that the Dean said there was rent strike five years ago, which is why the facility is in bad shape.

A motion to approve the minutes from the May 2 meeting, as amended, was made and seconded. THE MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES, AS AMENDED, FROM THE MAY 2, 1996 MEETING, PASSED WITH NO OBJECTION.

INTRODUCTION OF OFFICERS AND STAFF

Mr. Bertsch said he would like point out some of the GA's star" and Officers. Hatem Bazian was present but had to leave, the Graduate Minority Students Project Coordinator. They'll be hearing from him under reports. Mr. Bazian said he'd like to welcome everybody there and said he hoped they have a good year ahead of them.

Mr. Bertsch said reports and other things Delegates will want to review were included in the packets, which are available at the front of the room. Charlie Bertsch introduced himself and

said he is Chair of the GA, and in charge of this imposing body. He's a Ph.D. candidate in English, entering his sixth year in that program. Last year he was Co-Chair for Academic Affairs.

Nat Lew introduced himself and said he's the Academic Affairs Co-Chair. He's a Ph.D. student in the Music Department, entering his fifth year. For the last two years he was on the Grad Council and he's served in other minor capacities in the last two or three years.

Tomas Sandoval introduced himself and said he's the Co-Chair for External Affairs. He's beginning his third year m the History Ph.D. program, and for the last: two years he was the Coordinator of the Graduate Minority Students Project.

Nzingha Dugas said she"s the only full-time staffperson .at the GA. She recognized most of the people there, except for a few new faces.

Mr. Bertsch said Carita Shanklin, the Graduate Women's Project Coordinator couldn't attend because she has a class every Thursday at the time the GA meets. So he'd encourage Delegates to stop by the GA if they have a question about this Project and to meet with her. She'll submit reports to the agenda packet and will attend the next GA meeting and skip her class.

Report from the Administrative Coordinator

Ms. Dugas said she didn't have much to report and would just highlight a few items. That fail they're going to try to get more information to Delegates about the business office and different funding guidelines, as well as different things the GA offers and events and items that are coming up. And Delegates may also get e-mail messages. There's a list going around of e-mail addresses, and if their name wasn't included or their address was wrong, they should make a note and make sure the GA has their current mailing address. The GA wants to try and stay in contact with Delegates through email. And that year Ms. Dugas said they're going to try to get the organization's balance sheets out. Many Delegates are

members in other organizations and do expenditure requests, and the GA will try to give Delegates updated information every couple of months and at the end of the semester.

Ms. Dugas said a lot of forms were going around. She wouldn't go into detail because Officers will talk about what's involved. There are a lot of positions open at the GA, and she would encourage Delegates to apply, or to ask people they know who might be interested, to consider applying. Also, sheets were going around for people to sign up for various Committees, including the Funding Committee, the Finance Committee, the EIGP Committee, and the Editorial Committee, Or people can sign up at the next meeting or via e-mail by contacting Mr. Bertsch or Mr. Sandoval. The GA really needs people, particularly for the Funding Committee, which recommends allocations for Brad Events and Projects and Services funding. She'd ask Delegates to please get people on these Committees. And being a Committee member means that groups they belong to have a greater chance of getting funding, as per GA rules and guidelines.

Ms. Dugas said that was all for her report, and if people have any questions about the GA in general, they can call 21275 speak to her or staff at the front desk.

Report from the Executive Committee (Ad Hoc Funding Committee)

Mr. Lew said a list of recommendations from the Funding Committee was at the front of the room. The GA needs a Funding Coordinator for the first round. As Academic Affairs Co-Chair, he has done this, but ideally a Coordinator and the Funding Committee have the job of going through the applications each funding round and making recommendations to the GA. The recommendations being submitted are for the first round, the summer round. The funding is for Grad Events, which is one of the GA's funding programs. The total requested was $2,593.25. The recommendation was to allocate $1,780.90. The recommended amount is about where they should be at this point of the year. He called for any questions.

Mr. Kathotia said the Math Grad Student Association asked for money for pictures for new students and was told to try Projects and Services funding, and that it was unclear hew that request applied to Grad Events funding. But they got Grad Events funding for it last year, so they re-applied. Mr. Lew said getting film and taking photos is a service at project that's not tied to a specific event. That was the Funding Committee's logic. Mr. Kathotia said they were told to go for Grad Events funding but could apply under Projects and Services. Mr. Lew said that would be better.

Mr. Bertsch noted that some groups didn't get all the funding they applied far since the GA only has a limited amount of funding per round. And groups that don't get everything they ask for are encouraged to reapply. Groups can get up to $300 per semester, and the idea is to have groups re-apply for funding, up to that limit, rather than getting it all in one round. That's the major reason the Funding Committee didn't recommend allocating groups all they asked for. They like to spread the allocations out over the course of a semester in case there are good events at the end of the semester that require funding.

Ms. Dugas noted that spending for the East Bay Worker's Rights Clinic, for the amount of people anticipated, is $103 total, not per person. Mr. Lew said they should strike "per person" on the sheet. The funding is based on the number of people predicated to show up at an event and limits the amount awarded. For the number of people the group thought would attend, the most that could be funded is

$103, and the total allocation also included money fob some supplies. He called for any other questions.

A motion to approve the allocation recommendations was made and seconded. THE MOTION TO APPROVE THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE, ACTING AS THE AD HOC FUNDING COMMITTEE, FOR ROUND ONE OF GRAD EVENTS FUNDING, TOTALING $1,780.90, PASSED WITH NO OBJECTION.

NEW BUSINESS

Debate Mini-Orientation

Mr. Bertsch said that due to the law attendance, they should probably repeat this at the next meeting. People should have received a cheat sheet on Robert's Rules. If they're excited about being involved in student government, he would strongly suggest they purchase a slim and inexpensive volume, Robert's Rules of Order, the Simplified Version. The GA will actually discuss some very controversial matters, and if they want to advocate a position on those matters, it's a good idea to familiarize themselves with the GA's By-laws, Charter, and Robert's Rules. And the cheat sheet should help if they don't want to get that involved.

Mr. Bertsch said the important thing to remember as a Delegate is that they represent a constituency.

~,r,,. Delegates were chosen because they were part of their Student Association or were selected by other means. And having been a Delegate himself, he knew it was sometimes hard to see the connections by attending GA meetings once a month and representing a constituency. But he would strongly encourage giving as much feedback as possible to people in their departments. .And when the GA discusses an issue, he would ask them to try to find out haw people in their department feel. And in this era of e-mail, Delegates might want to consider getting permission from their departments to use their e-mail list for grads, or asking for that from their grad Student Association. Or they can start a mail list themselves, if they know how to do it and one doesn't already exist. He called for any questions on what it's like to be a Delegate.

ASUC Store Controversy

Mr. Bertsch said people might find it helpful to read the relevant items in the report from the GA Chair. This became big news over the summer. There are a number of versions of the events, so it's hard to convey a linear narrative. But basically, the Store has suffered from years of

mismanagement, whether deliberate or not, and has lost money in recent years. That summer the University made a decision to try and take over Stare operations, not the student side, meaning not student government or student group functions. The ASUC has fought the University's attempt to, take over the Store. The Daily Cal ran stories and letters to the editor about this in practically every issue, and mast Daily Cal articles from the summer are available at the GA. The paper only came out twice a week, and if people are interested they could read those stories and get an update.

Mr. Bertsch said that even though the student Store might not seem significant to them, it is. This could affect the GA and the money the GA has to give out to brad groups. Officers and others on the Executive Committee have been trying to inform themselves as to what's going on. They've been reasonably out of the loop, and have officially had very little role to play in the negotiations that occurred and then broke down. People from the GA have talked to others involved since the GA wasn't present at the actual negotiations. He called for any questions.

Mr. McDonough said he read that the University claims the Store is losing a lot of money, and then through different accounting practices, the ASUC claimed the Stare was actually making money. He asked if there was any idea as to what the truth is. Mr. Sandoval skid the ASUC hasn't shown figures for either claim. The University said the Store was losing money based on last year's audit, and the ASUC claims it's making money based on calculations they used. A couple of people who work in the Store wanted to see the figures, as did his counterpart in the ASUC, the External Affairs VP, and the figures were not made available to them either.

Ms. Dugas said she could answer a little more specifically, and at the next meeting shell bring some numbers for Delegates to look at, information from people in the Employees Association who tried to gather information in an undercover manner. The ASUC initially looked money they get, including from the Store, as a sort of general fund. When viewed in that manner, the Store was losing money. So an attempt was made to charge against the student side, which includes the GA, the Office of

Student Affairs, ASUC Officers, and all the student groups. So a charge of $750,000 was applied to those groups, to pay for things like maintenance and other charges. With that money set aside, the bottom line actually shows a profit. So now the ASUC is saying the Store makes a profit because it costs aver $750,000 to run the student side, money that comes from the Store.

Mr. Bertsch said he just talked to Mr. Doyle, who vas Chair of the Finance Committee last year and was the ASUC Business Management Board. And Mr. Doyle said he discovered that the business side did fund things on the student side, and the Store actually gave more money to the student side than it took away. So there are conflicting versions. Ms. Degas said she tends to not believe that only because the numbers were changed so drastically, and were being looked at differently, after looking at them a certain way for decades. She would bring a comparison to the next GA meeting as to what the ASUC and the University are saying. Mr. Hawser said he believed Mr. Doyle graduated. Mr. Bertsch he's now working.

Mr. Hawser said he read that the buildings involved were built ,with student fees, so in some sense, the students own the buildings, but that the property was owned by the University. He asked if that was correct. Mr. Bertsch said that's not entirely clear, and is part of the controversy. Regardless of whether student fee moneys was used to construct the buildings, the ground is UC property. Mr. Sandoval said the ASUC claims to own the building and the University says it owns the area it's on, and can take over the building. Mr. Bertsch said it's extremely complicated. Mr. Lew said the University also claims a certain role in overseeing the good management of the ASUC and claims that if things go to hell with the ASUC, the University would have to step in and then take over. So it's not just a matter of property rights, but also involves a question of oversight. Mr. Bertsch said an agreement was reached between the University and representatives of the ASUC, and some of those agreements are also in dispute, since some in the ASUC say that the people who signed those agreements were not acting on behalf of students and had a selfinterest as a motivation. These

agreements were signed when Andrew Wong, who was ASUC President and is now at the Harvard Law School, and Alex Weingarten, Executive VP. There were a lot of strange financial transactions and a Watergate-style break in.

Mr. Sandoval asked why the ASUC takes two-sevenths of grad student fees if the ASUC also claims that the Store is used for such things as paying for accounting. Mr. Hawser said the ASUCs own accounting may be paid for by the Store, but not the accounting done for others. Mr. Bertsch said that according to Mr. Doyle, the GA does not benefit from the Store, and only the undergrad student side benefits.

Ms. Heitsch asked what the GA stands to lose by a University takeover of the Store. Mr. Bertsch said that was hard to say. If the ASUC changes its form, the GA's fiscal autonomy is at risk since while the GA is semi-autonomous, it is a fiscally non- autonomous part of the ASUC. So the GA is part of an unincorporated non-profit that has relative fiscal autonomy from the University. And that's not to say that the GA couldn't become more fiscally autonomous if the University were to 'run the bookstore, but that's something they'd have to deal with. Also, the GA has a large surplus it's spending against, $30,000 in their 9697 budget, as Delegates know who attended the April budget meeting of the GA. So if the money the GA is supposed to get from the surplus is not available and somehow gets lost in the process, that would be a problem and the GA would have to seriously revise its mid-year budget. And GA reps met with reps from the University who said that the ASUC`s surplus was considerably less than anticipated going into 199697, which could potentially create problems.

Ms. Kick asked if the GA should revise its budget and start looking into the possibility they may not have that money. Mr. Sandoval said he thought that would be a little premature. Mr. Bertsch said the GA has a number of unfilled positions, so they actually saved quite a bit of money over the summer, and he thought they were okay at present. And nobody said the GA is going to lose its surplus. People sometimes try to argue the

amount of the GA's surplus, but Ms. Degas shows them her records, which indicate what people previously said the figure was. He asked if Ms. Degas could add anything. Ms. Degas said he covered it.

Ms. Degas said one good thing about the ASUC is that that the ,GA is getting reports, and they go through a reconciliation the first ten days of the month and check their records. So the GA is in a pretty good position. Some issues on the amount of the surplus were raised at the last meeting she had with the ASUC, and they had to go through the records. But that's typical. But the GA is getting reports from the ASUC, so when there's an inaccuracy the GA has uses fits general log to back up their records. And the GA is able to follow the bills a little more closely. And one thing they have to keep in mind is that the ASUC has some outstanding bills, which could impact on its line of credit and profitability. They owe $2 million to the University and the new MBS computer system cost $2 million. And whoever the GA's Senate rep is that year, they need to demand access to reports and items of information. If anything happens, the surplus will probably be called into question and the GA might essentially lose about $60,000.

Mr, Bertsch said the GA needs a representative to the ASUC. Ms. Dugas said they want somebody willing to challenge them. Depending on who's compiling the reports, they can be made have the bottom line look different. She and Mr. Doyle have gone over those figures and have sometimes reached very different perspectives on what was actually happening. Mr. Hoffman sand he'd be interested in serving as GA rep to the ASUC.

Mr. Kathotia asked where the real money comes from, and if grad student fees are put into an ASUC account. Mr. Bertsch said they are. The University collects $21 a year in student fees, which is very low compared to other schools and hasn't changed since the 1950s, and turns that over to the ASUC in installments. The next installment is in October, and there are some questions as to what the University will do, as a result of the lawsuit, and if the money will be deposited in the ASUC as it always has been in the past. And the GA gets five-sevenths

of the $21 that grad students pay in fees. And the GA also gets money from the Grad Division and from the Office of Educational Development far GA projects. And that money is also put in ASUC accounts. Mr. Lew said they don't have to ,go into great detail, but when they say the GA "gets" money, they don't really get anything, and all the money is in ASUC bank accounts, and the numbers are in the accounting system, with transfers made. So it's not the most secure system.

Mr. McDonough asked if the ASUC's dispute with the University includes the bar and restaurant or just the bookstore. Mr. Bertsch said the dispute was originally aver the Store, not the bar, which is a separate operation. But the dispute has mushroomed to the point where the buildings themselves are in dispute.

Mr. Hauser asked what the dispute was over. Mr. Lew said the University in July served notice to evict the ASUC from Eshleman and the Martin Luther King, Jr, Student Union. And there was a certain date by which they had to leave. The ASUC didn't leave and actually sent people wandering around the Store during the night of the deadline because they thought the Administration might send the police to change the locks. Nothing happened, and the ASUC hasn't left. So the Administration sued the ASUC to get them out. Mr. Bertsch asked if the University was right in trying to evict the ASUC. Ms. Dugas said this deals with the Statement of Understanding, which both parties signed. It sates that if the ASUC is insolvent, the University can take aver the ASUC and appoint their own Business Management Board. So the University served notice to evict and the ASUC said the SOU wasn't followed, and that not enough notice was given before serving notice to evict. She believed the ASUC was supposed to get 45 days notice, and the ASUC is saying they didn't have that time to fight the eviction. And the ASUC is saying it's not insolvent. Mr. Bertsch said it's also more complicated since the ASUC is saying that the SOU itself could potentially be invalid. And now that there's a legal action in the works, student fee money will be used to litigate against other student fee moneys.

Mr. Kathotia said Jess Bravin offered to mediate and asked

what was happening with that. Mr. Lew said the ASUC rejected that. Ms. Dugas said the ASUC didn't find Mr. Bravin's suggested offer to be acceptable, having the University take ,aver for a certain time period until the ASUC became fiscally solvent, at which point the Store would be returned to the students. Mr. Bertsch said the University really dislikes certain government officials in the ASUC and would have been amenable in returning the Store, at least on paper, in a few years once those people graduated. And there are a variety of versions as to what happened with the attempt at mediation. They also heard that ASUC President Giant Harris, whom most of the Delegates met at the May GA meeting, did not feel empowered to sign things away when students weren't around during the summer.

Mr. Wong asked if the eviction was for the Store only, or from everything the ASUC occupies. Mr. Lew said he wasn't sure. Mr. Bertsch said he thought it was only for WK and the Store, not for Eshleman. Ms. Dugas said she thought it was for WK, but there's a question about Eshleman. Mr. Hoffman said all they have to do is pay a courier to go to the courthouse and copy the papers for the suit, or ask ASUC President Harris to give them a copy.

Ms. Dugas said one of the concerns that's looming is the management of the ASUC, which was one of the issues the University brought up. In the original agreement, they said they would keep all of the staff, and any staff that couldn't find a position in the ASUC would be found a position as a UC employee. She believed the University has had a problem with ASUC management staff and how they've handled the Store. And there was also a question as to the salary of the Executive Director and the fact that there weren't controls as to what happened with management team, so they can't really tell what's going on with the Store.

Mr. Bertsch said they'll do what Mr. Hoffman suggested and arrange to get the legal documents.

Mr. Lewis asked if the executive board felt that the GA should take a position in the dispute. Mr. Bertsch said they've talked

about that over the summer and haven't really arrived at a definitive conclusion. Mr. Sandoval said he didn't see how it helps the GA. Mr. Lewis said that Mr. Doyle seemed to feel quite strongly that the GA should support the ASUC. Mr. Lew said that last year, when the issue seemed simpler, he believed the GA took a position. Mr. Bertsch said they approved a Resolution in support of continued student ownership of the Store, but the wording was fairly simple and wasn't taking issue on very specific matters. Mr. Bertsch said when the initial action was taken by the University, he was interviewed by the Daily Cal and said the GA's position was that students should own the Store, but that obviously there were problems with the ASUC's current situation that need to be resolved. And from his standpoint, he looked forward to compromise through mediation by Mr. Bravin or others, since that seemed to allow the student Store to remain in the hands of students, at least in the future. But the ASUC didn't want to give up the Store, but he believed there might have been dissent in the ASUC.

Ms. Dugas said that towards the end of the year Mr. Doyle presented an option that the ASUC turned down, to expand the Business Management Board and add people from the Haas Business School, alumni, and to make it more of a cooperative. But at that point the Chancellor reported to the Officers that it was a little too late, and the proposal was somewhat similar to what Mr. Harris had already turned dawn.

Mr. Lew said the current situation does not directly touch the funding of the GA. They need to watch the situation as it develops. If they do become involved, he believed that both of the parties would see the GA as be extraneous and marginal and wouldn't listen to them, with the GA wasting a lot of time. He thought they'd be better off spending their time an the grad student community and the things they do best. That was his personal feeling. But he felt they have to watch the situation, but not spend the amount of time they have for the last two years dealing with ASUC relations.

Ms. Heitsch moved that for the Executive Committee maintain their careful neutrality in this situation and that they postpone

discussion until there's mare to discuss. The motion was seconded. THE MOTION PASSED WITH NO OBJECTION.

Potential AGSE Strike

Mr. Bertsch said he thought they perhaps should have a Special Meeting devoted to the potential AGSE strike;, and that they invite someone from the University and from AGSE to talk to the GA as a body. They could hold this at the October GA meeting, but a lot of things will have already happened, from what he understood. A meeting is scheduled for the 1lth, and there are rumors that that is when a decision on the strike will be made, with a possible strike in October. The GA might want to talk about this before they get too close to that deadline. As he mentioned in his report, he's talked to a lot of people about this over the summer. And he's a member and supporter of the intent to gain recognition. There are varying reports on what grads in AGSE are likely to vote for, a longer strike or, if there is one, a lot of people are in favor of one reasonably short duration. So perhaps the GA can attempt to answer questions or just talk about this.

Mr, Hauser asked if Mr. Bertsch meant there was going to be a strike vote. Mr. Bertsch said it's complicated. There was a vote last spring to strike in the fall, for an unspecified duration. And according to union rules, they have to meet again in the fall and vote to strike. That hasn't happened yet, and that the meeting will probably occur at the beginning of October, around the same time as the GA meeting. Mr.

Hauser said there would be no strike, then, before that time. Mr. Bertsch said the word is that a strike would probably occur in synch with the other two campuses that are mostly unionized and have the most grads, San Diego and UCLA. They start at the end of September, and if a strike was going to be coordinated, it would probably occur at the end of October or the beginning of November.

Ms. Heitsch asked who has the power to recognize AGSE. Mr. Bertsch said the Chancellor has claimed not to have that power and said it's the decision of the VC Office of the President. And

UCOP has said it's for the campuses to determine. And he was sure the Regents could get involved. There's a problem with accountability in talking to people at high levels.

Mr. Kathotia asked if they could hear about this from Dean Duggan. Mr. Bertsch said he was sure they could get someone from the Grad Division, and if they don't, that would reflect unfavorably on them. Mr. Hauser said the only thing the GA has done before is to support the strike, or AGSE, or not, and they don't have a direct involvement other than being grad representatives. Mr. Wong said one possibility was to set up an ad hoc committee on the status of grad student employees, to explore different ways the GA and the Grad Council, which has some authority in these matters, oar address concerns AGSE has raised. And rather than having a meeting of all the Delegates, interested people could be part of a meeting that's arranged. Ms. Sanchez said she agreed and suggested a meeting after the strike vote.

Mr. Lew said they had a serious lack of information, and one function of the GA is to disseminate information to grads, as the only representative body that grads have. If the GA heard from AGSE and from the Grad Division, then Delegates, who represent a good :number of departments and schools, could go back to their departments and talk to people about what they found out and learn how people in their departments feel, and could bring that information back, which is ideally what the GA is supposed to be doing. And he thought it was logical to get preliminary information before AGSE votes. It was important they know what's going on and take part in the process, since AGSE is made up of the same people the GA represents. He didn't know much about AGSE, wasn't a member, and didn't know its decision making process, what their demands are, what the history has been, arid how the Administration has responded.

Mr. Kathotia said the GA should invite both parties and put the issues forward, and then farm a committee to discuss what the GA would do. Mr. Bertsch said the composition of such a committee would matter, and he was concerned about the democratic process. Ms. Heitsch said departments are still

electing Delegates to the GA, and asked if there would be enough time for that and to hold an informational meeting in two weeks. Mr. Lewis asked if it would be possible far the GA to organize a meeting for grads to hear both sides. Ms. Dugas said she thought it would be a good idea, and it might be possible to hold such a meeting in Pauley Ballroom. Mr. Bertsch sand he would like to keep it a GA meeting, which is open to all grads. Mr. Lew said the timing would be tricky for reserving a roam and making sure someone from the Grad Division could attend. Mr. Hoffman said that if they want to advertise, it would probably be best to take out a Daily Cal ad, which means an allocation.

Mr. Bertsch said they have two models: an open discussion sponsored by the GA and a GA meeting related to AGSE. Mr. Lew said that if they have a Special Meeting, the proper format would be to make it a GA meeting, with Mr. Bertsch in charge. Mr. Bertsch said they would have a straw poll on having a heavily publicized GA meeting at which AGSE would be the sale subject of discussion. Ms. Johnson said a meeting would be a good way to increase AGSE's profile. Ms. Heitsch said an informational meeting instead of a debate might lower the level of antagonism, which she would strongly encourage.

After a straw poll, Mr. Bertsch said there was a slight majority in favor of doing this. He asked the people who didn't vote for it about their concerns. Mr. Hoffman said he didn't see how they'd get anything done, and didn't see the difference between a meeting and an open discussion. Ms. Heitsch said it's not substantially different from having AGSE and people from the Grad Division at a GA meeting to speak to Delegates. They're just making sure a wider grad student population is aware of what's going on.

Mr. Bertsch called for a motion. Mr. McDonough moved to hold a Special GA Meeting, and invite representatives of AGSE and the Grad Division, to present information about the issues of AGSE recognition. The motion was seconded. Mr. Hoffman asked how much money they'd spend to advertise. Mr. McDonough said he was willing to refer the detains to the Executive Committee. Ms. Johnson said that wasn't something

to decide at that moment. Mr. McDonough said he'd amend his motion to have the Executive Committee determine the date and the relevant details. Mr. Lewis said the motion includes just the issue of recognition, and he thought people would like to hear other issues AGSE is interested in. Mr. McDonough said he would accept that as a friendly amendment. Mr. Bertsch called for any objections to the amendment. THE MOTION TO HOLD A SPECIAL GA MEETING, TO WHICH REPRESENTATIVES OF AGSE AND THE GRAD DIVISION WOULD BE INVITED, TO PRESENT INFORMATION ON AGSE'S ISSUES, WITH DETAILS TO BE WORKED OUT BY THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE, PASSED WITH NO OBJECTION.

Announcements

Mr. Lew said he's in charge of getting Delegates to work for the GA and wanted to point out that there are six positions at the GA they really have to fill. So if Delegates know of anybody who's interested, some of these positions are very good jobs. Mr. Bertsch said the positions are 25% time, or ten hours a week, on average, which is more manageable if people are doing other things. Mr. Lew said other positions are 50% time. But they have six positions, and he would ask Delegates to please tell people about them, and see if anybody they know is interested. If they need more information, they could contact him at the GA. And they really need a Funding Coordinator, which involves going through applications and giving money out, and is a great job.

Mr. Lew said he would also send around sign-up sheets for committees. The Educational Improvement Grants Project Committee is a funding Committee that gives out EIGP money. The Editorial Committee deals with "The Berkeley Graduate," The Funding Committee makes other funding decisions, and the Finance Committee works on the budget. Also, Mr. Lew said that as a previous GA rep to the ASUC Senate, he'll talk to Mr. Hoffman about that position. And at the last GA meeting in May, they passed a Resolution to study alternative forms of student government and to present findings on other ways to organize the position of the GA at Berkeley. He'd refer that to Mr. Sandoval. But Delegates should be aware that's one of the

Officers' responsibilities. And lastly, he would ask people to please take pizza when they leave, since there's a lot left. Mr. Lew said the GA really relies on Delegates to disseminate information, such as about jobs. He'll use e-mail to let people know about open positions, and he'd ask Delegates to get the word out as well. Mr. Kathotia moved to extend the meeting by five minutes. The motion was seconded and passed with no objection.

Mr. Sandoval said the UC Student Association meeting that month will be that weekend in San Francisco, with the October meeting also in San Francisco. So he would encourage Delegates to attend. And he would also ask Delegates to let any people in their departments know who might be interested. There are a lot of opportunities to work with the UCSA, and he had the details for the upcoming meetings if people want more information. Also, he'd like to introduce two people from the UCSA who were attending the GA meeting that evening, Sabrina, one of the full-time staff at the UCSA, who is a Field Organizer, and Ed Plinker, a student from UC Santa Barbara and a UCSA intern that summer. Lastly, Mr. Bravin previously mentioned the continuation of a Life Safety Fee that Chancellor Tien asked for and which the Regents approved. The only thing that Mr. Bravin mentioned that was not accurate was that the actual Berkeley campus fee is only $50.25, not $62, The Life Safety Fee will expire that fall, and is $31.50 of that $50.25. Mr. Sandoval said he read over the letter that Chancellor Tien sent, and the report, and it made clear that it's for a certain amount of time, spring '93 to fall '96. Bust it's hard to argue with safely issues, and there's an itemized list of work that would be done, including seismic retrofits, removing fire hazards, etc. He believed Mr. Bravin and another Regent wanted student government bodies to take a stand, since there's now referendum on this Fee.

Mr. McDonough said that having seen work redone, he was worried about spending fees wisely. Mr. Sandoval said the project being referred to fell under State funding. The Fee under discussion covers safety improvements on campus that are ineligible for State funding.

Mr. Hauser asked if the Fee was $31.50 per semester or per year. Mr. Sandoval said it's per semester. Mr. Hauser said that according to Mr. Bravin, it's $62 per year, or three times student fee money. He thought the University had to make the case that this maintenance can't be done out of their ordinary funds for maintenance. He asked why students were being asked to pay extra. Mr. Sandoval said the Safety Fee would improve facilities, and buildings also include student service facilities. Mr. Kathotia said he thought the University used funds for the past three years to do some of this work. Mr. Sandoval said they did, but they identified $73.7 million in planned maintenance budgets over a 30-year period, and they collected $6.7 million.

Mr. Hoffman said he thought the issue would probably require greater representation at a meeting before voting on it. Mr. Hauser said that if the GA doesn't vote at that time, the vote wouldn't have an effect, and they had to vote at that meeting. Mr. Kathotia moved to extend the meeting far five minutes. The motion was seconded and passed with no objection.

Mr. Bertsch said one concern other than a poorly attended meeting is that if the GA goes on record saying they support increasing student fees, that could potentially have repercussions in the future. Mr. Kathotia said he thought they should go on the record saying they should have more information going to students and that a referendum should be held. Coming to a decision with inadequate information was contradictory to the democratic process. Mr. Hauser said the GA would be against continuation of fees pending a student referendum.

Mr. Bertsch said the motion an the floor was for the GA to be opposed to the extension of this Fee pending greater disbursal of information to students and holding the referendum that

was promised. Mr.Sandoval said under certain circumstances, an increase in such a Fee doesn't need a referendum, such as if the Chancellor it's necessary for the health and safety of students. And a referendum was held in May of 1992, with 80% of the students who voted in favor of it. But there was an insufficient turnout.

The question was called and debate closed. THE MOTION TO OPPOSE THE EXTENSION OF THE CAMPUS SAFETY FEES, PENDING A GREATER DISBURSAL OF INFORMATION TO STUDENTS, AND THE PROMISED REFERENDUM, PASSED BY HAND VOTE -2-2.

Mr. Sandoval said that from the Officers' budget, they've hired .a student whose only job will be to do research with him on alternative forms of grad student government And Mr. Sandoval said he'd add to his report for the October GA meeting different relationships between grads and undergrads at other UC governments, and a history of the GA and its relationship with the GA.

This meeting adjourned at 7:10 p.m.

These minutes respectfully submitted by,

Steven I. LitwakRecording Secretary