Fee Transparency Project

Student Fee Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes January 29, 2018

Present: Suini Torres, Ashley John, Gina Tu, Regina Gomez, Lucy Rojas, Lisa Bishop, Cathy Thomas, Ian Gregorio, John Steele, Julian Nzongo, Alan Christy, Bryna Haugen

Announcements, Approval of Agenda and Minutes

a. Announcements

i. Suini shares that her sorority is having a blood drive on February 7

at the Stevenson Event

Center. Sign up online.

ii. Office hours: if you haven’t submitted your winter quarter office hours, please send to Lucy and

iii.

Suini asap. Ian shares that Kresge Parliament is having a charity event for hungry students on February 2 from 7-9pm at the Town Hall. It is a game night.

b. Approval of Agenda

i. Ashley moves to approve the agenda. Gina seconds the motion. There are no objections, motion

carries.

c. Approval of Minutes

i. Gina moves to make an edit to 1B. Gina motions to approve the minutes. Ashley seconds the

motion, there are not objections. Motion carries.

Campus Based Fees Presentation Debrief

a. Graduate Student Fee Increase

i. Cathy says it is a great idea and that the outgoing GSA board from last year recommended this. ii. Gina asks why does SFAC comment on graduate student initiatives? Lucy responds that SFAC

comments on all proposed fees.

iii. Cathy notes the inter-connectedness between graduate students and undergraduate students.

Wellbeing is linked.

iv. Lisa mentions that there is a fairly large carryforward in the GSA balance, it’s about 30K each

year. Juliana responds that the council has decide to expand services which will spend down the carryforward. Travel grants will also increase. In 1-2 years, all carryforward will be spent down.

v. Overall impressions from the committee are positive. vi. Statement for ballot: The SFAC supports this fee increase because it supports graduate student

research.

Gina motions to use this statement; Regina seconds the motion. No objections, the

statement is adopted.

b. Testing Materials Fee

i. Lucy explains that Jessica has been making updates following feedback from SFAC and Planning

& Budget. ii. John is concerned for reducing responsibility of students and a potential increase in waste. iii. Lisa is concerned regarding communication with faculty every year. What if someone forgets, what happens if materials are not there. Gina agrees and shares that constituents had these concerns also. Departments will have to be consulted every quarter about needs. Gina states that Rachel Carson is supportive if there is confirmation that the numbers of materials have been removed from the ballot statement.

iv. Suini suggests inviting Jessica back when the draft is updated for further discussion. v. Rachel Carson asked about the eradication of green scantrons? Will $.50 need to change if

green scantrons are included?

vi. There is discussion regarding students who do not purchase testing materials based on their

majors.

vii. Gina states that Rachel Carson is OK with subsiding testing materials for students who will use

them.

viii. The general sentiment is that this idea is good in their but there is concern for logistics including

distribution, storage, audit of inventory, etc.

ix. Bryna states that she would like to see this come from faculty. She is not confident in SUA’s

ability to maintain the program.

x. Cathy expresses concern that this will put burden on TAs. Engineering and PBiSci will be most impacted. Suggestion to Jessica that she connect with Assistant Deans in these divisions.

xi. Lisa suggests that Jessica consult with the academic senate. xii. Gina says that she is not comfortable stating an official opinion until more details are figured . Ashley seconds the

out. We should invite Jessica back. Gina motions to table to February 5 motion. No objections, motion carries.

Funding Proposal Review

Lucy provides an overview of the rating process, the outcome of the ratings, etc.

a. b. Suini suggests that we start from the bottom of the list and work our way up through the rankings. We

will take a strawpoll to see if anyone wants to discuss the proposal. If any members say yes, we move to five minute discussion.

c. Volunteers Around the World

i. Strawpoll – mixed response, move to discussion. ii. Cathy suggests that we could fund this program and pull out the expenses that are not student

related.

iii. Gina asks Suini why should we fund. Suini responds that it is an important program. We

shouldn’t’ fund the ice cream social, but the other aspects would be OK to fund.

iv. Gina summarizes that it seems we want to fund this; she makes a motion to keep this proposal

for further discussion. Regina seconds the motion. There are no objections.

d. Federal Holiday Funding OPERS

John says that he prompted OPERS to put in the proposal so there are healthy options for students who are not going home over three-day weekends.

ii. Suini states that they didn’t meet the requirement for consultation, so the proposal would be

given low priority.

iii. Gina states that this would probably be underutilized. iv. Bryna says that the need to go to the gym on a three day weekend is not as great as other

programs.

v. Gina asks about other costs such as utilities? The proposal is only for salaries. vi. vii. Lucy asks what about student interns who will have to work? Will it be a burden to have to

John states he would be interested in knowing what usage would be.

work on a three-day weekend? Ian states that this would benefit some students and would be open to partially funding. viii. ix. Gina motions to not fund. Juliana seconds the motion. There are no objections. This proposal

will not be funded.

x. Suggestion: run a pilot and come back next year with more information.

e. Women of Color Cluster Retreat

i. Strawpoll: no majority, therefore, we move to discussion. ii. Cathy motions to fund $5,000. Cathy met with the author. This group is trying to revitalize a

group that used to be active in the 80’s and 90’s. She appreciates the efforts to create retention among graduate students. Idea behind the cluster is good, may not be reflected in the proposal.

iii. Gina asks about yoga in Napa – what is the return on investment? Seems more like a vacation. iv. Cathy states that there is a special collection at the library on the work of this cluster and there

is an effort to create community and mentorships; this didn’t translate in the proposal. Could we provide seed money to rethink and re-prioritize the group.

v. Suini said that she wants to fund the speaker series. vi. Cathy moves to continue discussion. Bryna seconds. There are no objections. vii.

Juliana wants to fund and suggests they change the location which would accommodate more students.

f. Mock Trial

i. Strawpoll: no clear outcome, therefore move to discussion. ii.

Juliana is wondering how this proposal benefits a greater group of students beyond those who are participating?

iii. Gina states that the dates are wrong and would not fall within our funding window. What if we

fund and they don’t make regionals?

iv. Bryna states she heard there has been a decline in participation. v. Cathy says it’s great to see UCSC students doing external facing activities. vi. Gina asks again about the dates. vii. Suini would like to fund because it’s good exposure for our campus. viii. Bryna motions to continue discussion. Cathy seconds. No objections.

Adjournment

a. Gina motions to adjourn. Regina seconds the motion. Motion carries.