COUNCIL ON STUDENT SERVICES
4:00 pm, Wednesday, 28 January 2009
Room 313 Koffler Student Services Centre
PRESENT: Joeita Gupta (Chair), Greg Wong (Secretary), Anita Comella, Mark Overton, Jeff
Peters, Louise Cowin, Terry Rubenstein, Jill Matus, John Paul C. Catungal, Adam Awad, Adnan
Najmi, Sandy Hudson, Lucy Fromowitz, Meghan Gallant, David Scrivener
GUESTS: Rose Da Costa, Mark Stinson, Rosanne Lopers-Sweetman, Jim Webster, Melinda
Scott, Jude Tate, Yvonne Rodney, Mary Gaines, Sara Taman, Arlene Clement, Victor
McCormack, Richard Chambers, Francesa D’Alvin, Lisa Chambers, Cara McCraig, Anna
Cortez, Murphy Browne, Ken Brocklehurst
REGRETS: Neena Saloiya, Fatih Kurt, Tom Nowers, Marijana Josifovska, Berry Smith
1.
Call to Order
Gupta called the meeting to order at 4:05 pm.
2.
Agenda
There were no comments on the agenda.
Cowin moved to approve the agenda.
Motion: Be it resolved that the agenda be adopted (Overton/Cowin).
Carried
Point of Order: Catungal made a point of order to examine and approve the minutes from the previous
COSS meeting (January 21, 2009) before carrying on with the meeting.
3.
Previous Minutes
Point of clarification: on page 2 Rubenstein the protocol noted increase should read “and/or”.
Peters said that statements couldn’t be changed.
Rubenstein said that it was a statement that he made last time and that he was just changing his own
statement.
1
Gallant’s name was listed twice in the attendance, and misspelt in one instance.
Comella’s last name was misspelt.
Catungal referred to page 3, third paragraph, 4th sentence, that student unions should request speaking
rights at UAB, not COSS.
Gupta requested a motion to approve the previous meeting’s minutes.
Motion: Be it resolved that the minutes be approved (Najmi/Catungal).
Carried
4.
Budget Presentation for Student Life
Introduction
Fromowitz said that she might call on some of the guests to speak about their particular divisions on the
budget if clarification or more detail is needed.
Fromowitz recalled one year ago, when she was fresh at the COSS table, reminding the table that the
process can be overwhelming for newcomers. She referred to the Student Life information package sent
out on the previous Friday (January 23, 2009). Since reorganization/changes to Student Life occurred in
the past year, not everyone understands the new structure. She drew attention to the highlights in the
information package so that COSS could understand what is funded. She added that charts could be
picked up at the end.
Fromowitz began the Student Life budget presentation.
Fromowitz said that starting at the beginning, we spend lots of time in Student Life division, whose
objective is: to bring coherence to complexity. Looking at Anita Comella, who is newly initiated, COSS
can be a very confusing place. UofT is an institution with extraordinary resources – if you can find them,
and manage manoeuvre around the university. Student Life creates opportunities in order to translate
those resources into transformative experiences. We want to support, engage and challenge students so
that they can reach their full potential. Administration doesn’t decide how students will engage or what is
important to them.
Fromowitz said that what Student Life does is: provide services, educational opportunities and support to
the university and larger community. Early in the COSS cycle last year, Student Life laid out strategic
directions and goals. At the first opportunity to meet with the 3 student unions, this was given with
commitment to keep them informed. Fromowitz stated that anyone was allowed to tell her if it was felt
that she didn’t hold to that commitment. She said that she would consult and listen as much as possible.
Fromowitz said that she wanted to share goals to provost office. The key areas are: communication
strategy and building relationships. Student Life doesn’t own communities; they exist throughout the
institution at UofT. We want to support the communities, not bring them to us. We want to support faculty
to incorporate experiential education, to enhance leadership in the co-curricular experience.
Fromowitz said that measuring success is important. There is not a lot of information on Accessibility
Services because they are not in the package. The cost of operating Accessibility Services is over
2 million dollars; the university provides the difference. As well, the Career Centre and community
partnerships is not student-funded. Lisa Chambers is here and can speak to that. Counselling and
Learning Skills, and the First Nations House are not part of the package. Hart House is technically part of
2
Student Life, but has a separate budget which will also be discussed by COSS. In addition, Health
services, Housing Services, the International Student Centre, the Multi-Faith Centre, Psychiatric services,
and Student Crisis and Response are all not supported through student fees. Student Life programs and
communications are part of the package, Early Learning Centre, Family Care, and LGBTQ resources are
in the package.
Fromowitz stated that numbers are not a quality measurement, but we want to spend moments to give
idea about number of students that we serve.
Fromowitz walked through many of the divisions of Student Life, citing their yearly numbers for
membership, usage, participation, events, services provided, and more. For example, student life
registers over 400 clubs, 50 campus groups, 120 student leaders who attended the New U conference,
800 orientation leaders, 170 residence dons. Detailed numbers were given in the Student Life
information package.
Fromowitz reminded COSS that when we don’t use services, they are invisible to us. Therefore, in
understanding the extent and breadth of services, numbers are only one measurement. Learning
outcomes will move us in the next direction. There are teams of people working on divisional outcomes.
Each department will develop their own learning outcomes, and that will allow Student Life to begin to
determine benchmarks so that next year we can look at growth.
Fromowitz discussed the history and allocation of resources in the information package. Looking at the
student ancillary fees, 62% of the Student Life budget is represented in these fees. OHIP is 15% of the
budget, covering the cost of doctors, medical health and psych services. The Central university budget is
9%, including accessibility services, and there us a $750 000 gap between grants and needs. There are
government grants for accessibility. 5% of the budget is revenue, but this is not significant. It comes from
things like the Housing Services posting fees for example. Career Services has some but not much
revenue because it is undesirable to charge students and employers who are looking for employment
resources.
Fromowitz continued in the information package, stating that, over last 10 years, the Student Life fee has
increased by $12.79. This was used to serve 32 000 St. George students, and 50 000 students across all
3 campuses. In 2008 – 2009, Student Life serves 50 000 to 70 000 students across the 3 campuses, and
from 2 500 to 8 000 international students. Looking at the line graph on page, Student Life’s services are
plotted by wage inflation over the last 10 years, and the projected services based on student fee
increases are shown. The objective is to grow incrementally and continue to serve, but as more students
use the services and demand goes up, quality and growth slows. We are so heavily vested in the people
who actually serve the programs that less than 9% of the yearly budget is not committed to salaries. The
other chunk of the budget is in occupancy costs. More details on the finances can be found in the
information package.
Fromowitz continued through the information package, talking about some of the other programming that
division of Student Life provide. She said that New U life, the Student Life group recognition system, is
now online. They introduced wireless, brought in new servers, and introduced Wordpress blogging so
there is no interference from admin. There have been 34 000 unique visitors since August. Here,
Student Life is responding to, not creating, a need. Other examples include Jolt, which is a joint
orientation leader training that builds capacity, Health Promotions (services are not there to help people
who are ill – they are to help students reach academic success by healthy lifestyles and choices), and Girl
Talk, which allowed Health Promotions to go to residences and talk to students with real discussions.
The Multi-Faith centre is a new space that we hope to continue creating. The First Nations House
produced an Aboriginal focused magazine, which is available online (with limited prints from an external
donor). International Services, has huge numbers and provides services like Sitcom English classes
where TV language is analyzed. Upbeat is a new student blog, employing students hired through WorkStudy programmes.
3
Fromowitz stated that one of the most important themes of Student Life is student involvement in the
development and assessment of what we do. As a reference, the Career Centre Users Committee, with
GSU, APUS, UTSU, as well as Commerce and Engineering student union representatives, meet 4 times
a year. There is student input and participation in the development and assessment of everything Student
Life does. There are focus groups and many Work-Study students who are guinea pigs to test and try
new ideas and programming. We want students to critique and feedback on student services,
Counselling and Learning Skills provides regular feedback surveys from all student users to get ideas.
For example, there was a play produced about date rape, involving lots of student groups. There is also
the First Nations House student advisory committee, which is very active. The Native Students
Association also has space within the First Nations House. Development and assessment work together.
Gupta pointed out that there could be a possible overextension of the meeting due to the current
timeframe. She said that she didn’t want to cut anyone short of speaking time, and asked COSS
members if they wanted to extend the meeting hours, so that there would be enough time for questions.
Fromowitz said that she was willing to focus on the budget and wrap it up quickly to allow for questions
from the questions from the table.
Gupta said she didn’t want to cut anything short, and asked to do a vote.
Peters suggested letting the presentations go as planned and if more meetings are necessary, to have
more meetings.
Gupta asked the table if they wanted to let the presentation continue in full, hope the timeframe works
and ends at 6pm, and possibly have another meeting. She reiterated her desire to avoid rushing any of
the budget presentations.
Gupta asked for a vote to extend the meeting by thirty minutes.
Matus said she had to leave at 6pm.
The rest of COSS agreed to let the meeting be extended if necessary, up to thirty minutes.
Fromowitz continued the Student Life budget presentation, noting that she would focus it to the key
issues since there was a Hart House dinner scheduled for 6:30pm which some COSS members would be
attending.
Fromowitz reiterated that students are involved in decision making. She encouraged everyone to read
the Student Life information and budget package to get a better understanding of who we are and what
we do, including the 3 areas not part of Student Life but included in the presentation.
Fromowitz directed the attention of the COSS members to page 40 in the budget information package:
Student Life Programs, Services, and Operating Budget. The Net Cost for fee purposes of Student Life
programs and services (including $875 000 student activity occupancy space) is $1 586 000. Student Life
is asking to meet obligations for $108.06 for full-time students and $21.61 for part-time students at
St.George campus. There is a 5% change over last year, and the temporary fee from 3 years ago came
off. Some costs could be covered, but ultimately, in order to balance, Student Life is requesting a fee
increase of $5.15 from full-time students, and $1.03 for part-time students.
Fromowitz ended the Student Life presentation, and added that she had also sent a message to the
presidents of all three present student unions (UTSU, GSU and APUS) asking if they would like to make
time to meet up, sit down and discuss the budget in more detail. During COSS there is a break so that
unions can consult with boards. Fromowitz volunteered to attend and respond to questions from the
board. At this point Fromowitz invited any questions from the floor.
4
Najmi said that the budget was kind of general about the expenses, and asked if Fromowitz could clarify
on one of the diagrams in the information package.
Fromowitz asked if Najmi was referring to expenses regarding occupancy.
Najmi said he was referring to the section on Net Direct and Indirect Expenditures, and asked if
Fromowitz could expand on what that meant.
Fromowitz said that it included expenditure, operations budgets, any and all. It also included office
supplies and human resources.
Najmi asked if Building Occupancy referred to heating and lighting and other utilities.
Fromowitz said that the Office of Space Managements helps with the appropriate charges regarding
utilities.
Rubenstein added that Occupancy covers the cost of things like utilities, caretaking, basic building
maintenance (but not improvements), services, and fire/police services. It is divided up on a building by
building basis, and looks at the ratio of cost to area in square feet. The costs are factored in a Lageur
basis; therefore the 2007 charges are being paid in 2009 – 2010.
Gallant commented that COSS has been provided with a nice snapshot of how services are being used,
and a nice breakdown of current revenue, as well of fee changes over time. She asked if someone could
provide a breakdown over 10 years.
Fromowitz asked whether Gallant meant a breakdown in terms of revenue or expansion.
Gallant clarified that she was interested in both.
Fromowitz said that there is a binder in her office that would be helpful. The majority of resources are for
HR and building occupancy, with small amount for occupation, but for the lists of services one would have
to read each one.
Gallant asked if the student fees and university budget have changed.
Fromowitz said that they have both increased, adding that there are some workers and services who are
part of Student Life but not charged out to ancillary fees. Crisis and retention counsellors are an
example. There is a gap between people who use student services and funding provided. Fromowitz
said that 5 years ago, the gap was $20 000; now the gap is at $750 000. Operation dollars from the
university have grown because of services that are not part of the fees.
Fromowitz asked if there were any other questions from the floor.
Peters asked if Student Life had looked at any way of getting the government to cover costs, adding that
it seems to be a pity in these economical times to raise prices for students.
Fromowitz responded that they had not. However, Student Life has made attempts to find private donors.
She added that that was impossible now, because of the current economic situation.
Tamlin noted that her division has been lobbying the government; especially the ministry of health.
Peters said that he has been in COSS many years, and would love to see a presentation that called for a
decrease in student fees.
Fromowitz said she appreciated what Peters was saying but added that every year, wages increase, as
well as the needs of students for quality services. The numbers go up every year, and costs continue to
5
rise; decreasing fees would result in a loss in the quality or number of services. She said she didn’t know
if that is what students want.
Peters said he hears about many part-time students who have to drop out due to economic reasons. He
wondered what is worth more surviving, and why we want to make it harder on students.
Fromowitz responded that the reality is that Student Life is asking for a dollar from part-time students. For
that additional dollar, there is more access for services within that community, like finding a general
practitioner, or a psych counsellor, or for career services. She said that the dollar increase for additional
services is a good deal. Fromowitz admitted that in the best case scenario, fees would not have to go up;
however, that is not the reality of our times.
Peters said that he was sure that everybody who works for Fromowitz does a fantastic job. He said that
regularly goes to the 1st Nations house and the team there is fantastic. He said he was not saying
anything about Student Life personnel. His concern was ultimately why students have to pay more.
Fromowitz said that there is no direct answer but that she appreciated the addressing of that concern.
Peters suggested that everyone think about it, adding that we need to create a path to free education.
Fromowitz suggested that the path lies in the path to Queen’s Park, and that if we were all funded
accordingly, the beneficiaries would be the students.
Peters said that every time he suggests coming together as a group to approach the government, it never
happens. He wondered then, why students should keep paying more.
Fromowitz said that the reason was because services cost more. She said that she appreciated that there
are going to be different views on how those services should be funded, but that she was presenting what
is the reality of the day. Student Life is as efficient as it can be on the price in order to limit the cost.
Fromowitz said that she and Peters would just have to disagree on what the students have to pay.
Gupta said she appreciated the standoff, but reminded the COSS members to keep an eye on the clock,
adding that with respect to student services, everyone should be especially mindful of the dollars that
students have to pay.
Scrivener said that at New U conferences this summer, UofT President Naylor made a presentation about
student budgets. Naylor had said that a lot of the increases in the budget are because people were paid
more wages. In a year where there are a lot of collective bargaining agreements coming forward, and
when there may be conflict with the labour unions on campus, this is especially frustrating coming from
the presidents mouth.
Scrivener inquired what percentage of the Student Life budget is going toward labour unions and what
percentage goes toward management.
Fromowitz estimated that there are 13 managers in the division and 160 support staff, adding that she
could confirm this at a later time. CUPE workers are paid to invigilate exams and tests.
Rubenstein added that Fromowitz’s estimates of managers and staff sound reasonably correct.
Fromowitz mentioned that she had held a town hall for all staff before but that the numbers might be
inaccurate.
Gupta asked if there were any more questions.
There were no further questions from COSS regarding the Student Life budget presentation.
6
Gupta reminded the COSS members that there would be further opportunities to ask more questions, and
that she hoped to schedule more COSS discussion meetings at a later date. For now, she advised that
the student union representatives bring the information back and take some time to reflect on and discuss
it more with their boards.
Gupta thanked Fromowitz for her presentation and turned the floor over to Cowin for the Hart House
budget presentation.
5.
Budget Presentation for Hart House
Cowin introduced herself as Warden of Hart House, adding that this will be her 2nd time at the COSS
table. She noted that she has provided less detail in both her presentation and information package, but
added that she has also been in contact with the student unions to allow for potential meetings to discuss
the budget in detail, outside of the scheduled COSS dates.
Cowin started the presentation by going immediately to the budget and the student fees. How much?
This is what you really want to know.
Cowin pointed to the Hart House information package at the proposed student fees. Hart House currently
charges $66.76 for St. George full-time students, $13.35 for St. George part-time students, $2.05 for fulltime students on the other campuses, and $0.12 for part-time students on the other campuses.
Cowin noted that this year, the UTI is less than CPI. In 2006 – 2007, Hart House was able to receive
from UAB the 2% CPI increase and the 1.5% UTI increase (which is temporary and is falling off this
upcoming academic year). Because of the UTI percentage being dropped, the most Hart House can ask
for and be granted during this COSS cycle is 0.07%. That increase would be $0.46 for St. George fulltime students, $0.09 for St. George part-time students, $0.05 for full-time students on other campuses
and $0.00 for part-time students at other campuses. Hart House is asking COSS to consider a 2%
permanent increase.
Cowin moved to the presentation to give an overview of Hart House. From a 4-year strategic plan formed
by the 2007 Hart House Review, the senior team at Hart House took up 12 recommendations and created
19 priorities. Those priorities are included in the information package. The Vision Statement states that
Hart House is a living lab of social art, cultural and recreational experiences where voice, rhythm, and
tradition converge. There is a commitment to education in its true sense, to create opportunities for selfknowledge and expression. Hart House was given by the Massey Foundation at turn of the century; this is
a contemporary take on their original mission statement.
Cowin discussed what is available at Hart House: meeting spaces, programme space, AV equipment,
courtesy telephones, box office, theatre, socializing space, athletics, art installations, the Hart House
farm, special lectures, and more. Hart House collaborates with partners on and off campus. If one looks
at some of the events, which are often free and student-organized, they are asking questions of the day,
engaging the university community and outside. These often include lots of art, including music,
performances, installations and film screenings. More details on the various student programming
throughout the year is provided in the information package.
Cowin drew attention some of the funding options that Hart House provides to students. The new
accessibility fund, allows students who want to attend an event to apply for assistance. With the Good
Ideas fund, students can apply to have their event subsidized.
Cowin said that Hart House has been prominently featured in Nuit Blanche over the past 3 years, and that
the art gallery has been receiving praise from local critics. The Hart House Theatre is putting on 4 shows
this year. Cowin suggested that it is fair to say Hart House contributes a great deal to the cultural life of
7
the University of Toronto. The programming is by students for students. Hart House has aspirations to
play an even more significant role in student life at UofT. 13 850 different students used the athletics
centre in Hart House last year – 25% of all students at St. George had their barcodes scanned.
Cowin said that Hart House needs to keep up with the times, remain relevant, and ask questions about
what students want in 2009. Those questions have been posted to the student unions. Some changes
include CIUT coming to Hart House and taking up residence in the Warden’s apartment, broadcasting
shows from all over Hart House.
Cowin said that, in terms of accessibility goals, the Board of Stewards approved that Hart House be given
permission to explore media partners to improve infrastructure and technology. Hart House takes a fee
from UTM and UTSC, yet there are barriers facing student at those campuses to use our facilities.
Technology is the way to connect with other students at other campuses. Hart House needs an
infrastructure to push us out, for example, to stream concerts to get to people not coming in through the
door. Negotiations have begun with media partners, banking and communications partners (TD/Rogers).
Cowin said that although 6 200 people use Hart House daily, and 2 000 are mainly for Athletics, the
numbers are not so important. What is important are the student learning outcomes. What do the
students get from engagement? There is not enough knowledge about this. Hart House is undertaking
its own assessment of engagement in the house activities – hopefully by next year the learning outcomes
can be discussed, aside from just counting numbers, in order to articulate how exactly it is that students
benefit from the experience.
Cowin brought the presentation back to the budget, saying that Hart House’s budget process includes
Ken Brocklehurst, and 25 active members of the Finance Committee, many of which are Rotman and
Commerce students. There is a governing council representative as well. This body of scrutiny makes a
recommendation to the Board of Stewards.
Cowin went to the information package to look at yearly revenue. Student fees make up $6 665 000,
which covers 50% of the expenses. Senior memberships (from alumni) cost $820/year and make up
$1 million. Interest and general revenue (weddings, workshops, conferences, etc) provide $2.3 million.
The endowment income is $0 from the university this year. Theatre support is $0 this year. For the
previous 8 years it was approximately $200 000.
Cowin examined the budget objectives, of which only 1 has been met this year. For example, the goal to
achieve a modest surplus which balances programming objectives and scheduled maintenance has been
deferred. Cowin did not blame the COSS protocol but she added that the protocol does restrict the
ancillary fee increase. Looking at sources of possible revenue like arts camps, science camps, and other
summer camps, she noted how much it costs to mount the programs compared to net revenue.
Cowin pointed to the budget challenges, and the $634000 gap. If Hart House staff remained the same,
the increase by collective agreements would be $357 000. $58 000 of yearly revenue has been chopped
because of the lack of endowment fund. The loss of theatre funding is $220 000. The theatre was not
part of Hart House for many years. UofT wanted to change it into classroom space, but public outcry and
donations prevented this. At the end of 3 years, $1 million was raised to keep the theatre but $7 million
more was needed. The extension of university funding goes until April 2009. $165 000 can be accessed
from a student fee increase.
Cowin said in terms of expenses, $7.5 million goes to salaries, wages and benefits, many are part-time
staff who are students and union members. $933 000 goes to utilities. Clubs and committees money has
been shifted to general fees. $700 000 goes to maintenance. Hart House spends $1.5 million on
programmes, $1.5 million on athletics (but $1 million comes back as senior member fees). $771 000 is
spent on the theatre (but $500 00 comes back as revenue from the box office – there is now a gap that is
no longer being filled). $850 000 is spent on caretaking, $1 million is spent on the HUB, IT, and night
management staff. More details on the yearly finances are included in the information package.
8
Cowin concluded her presentation by asking the COSS members to consider Hart House’s request for a
permanent 2% increase in student fees. She reminded the table that under the COSS protocol, Hart
House would only be eligible for the increase on a permanent basis if both COSS and UAB support the
request. She added that the fee change would not make a difference on fees for 2009 – 2010. However,
in 2012 – 2013, ideally the drop-off in funding would not occur, and that would require a permanent
increase.
Cowin opened up the floor for questions.
Gallant asked for clarification on whether the Hart House staff are making more than the minimum wage
as set by the collective agreement?
Cowin responded that the part-time student staff at Hart House work at the Hub, events, tech services,
ushers, athletics, and serve many other functions. Those employees typically earn more than the
minimum set by the collective agreement (which is $11.30). Usually the starting wage is $12 - $13 per
hour, and the wage typically increases by a dollar per hour after about a year.
Gallant asked about the possibility of media partners in a report from the Hart House Board of Stewards.
She wanted to know if this would be considered a possible source of revenue generation?
Cowin said that Hart House would ideally be looking toward long-term revenue generation, but in the
short-term, any revenue would be further invested in setting up the infrastructure for such a possibility.
Gallant asked for confirmation that this was not reflected in the budget.
Cowin confirmed that the budget did not include media partners or technological infrastructure costs.
Catungal inquired about the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE). He asked Cowin to discuss
what the survey is about and how it informs Hart House.
Cowin said that NSSE data in general points to something of a dilemma with services and programs and
the respective uptake of that opportunity by the UofT students. The data point to a diverse student
population, and therefore, Hart House has an obligation to adjust its programming to ensure that all
students are welcomed at Hart House and have a space within the programming. Cowin wondered, with
regard to obstacles in student engagement like elder care, part-time occupation, and commuting, how to
better engage students.
Fromowitz referred to the NSSE expert, Deanna Fisher. She said that they have been reviewing the
latest NSSE data which will be presented at the next UAB meeting, urging COSS members to attend.
There will be a call out to student governments if they would like a presentation of information of student
data after Tuesday February 3, 2009 if desired.
Catungal asked, in relation to the response on the NSSE question, aside from programming, how equity,
diversity and excellence are dealt with at Hart House, in terms of staffing and human resources.
Cowin responded by referring to a statement passed by Governing Council in 2006, which locates the
responsibility of equity, diversity and excellence on the shoulders of everybody at UofT (students, faculty,
alumni, public). Hart House is currently undertaking a project with New College: Lynette Spence, is
coordinating PD training with staff around equity and diversity issues.
Peters said that he had been looking at fees for UTM and UTSC part-time students. Looking at APUS
membership characteristics as a whole, it is difficult to see a part-time student from any of the suburban
campuses ever stepping foot into Hart House.
Cowin said that the point is well taken. Referring back to the communications point and Hart House
needing to push itself out to the greater body of students, CIUT will help with that, and so will investing in
9
the infrastructure with corporate sponsorship. Hart House is moving to make itself useful to students,
regardless of where they are.
Peters asked if there are any plans to set up, for lack of a better word, a satellite of Hart House at other
campuses.
Cowin said that a satellite would be unlikely. However, she added that there are outreach staff that go to
the suburban campuses, and that there are film presentations at no cost that go as well to engage
suburban students.
Peters suggested that one should not say there is no cost if students pay tuition. Also, according to the
budget information, they pay 42 cents.
Cowin admitted that her word choice was unfortunate, rephrasing that there is no cost for the outreach to
the suburban campuses.
Peters said that there should be no cost because free education is needed.
Scrivener voiced his concern around the fact that UTSU funds approximately 400 student clubs, despite
their operating budget being considerably lower than that of Hart House. He inquired as to how many
clubs the budget is divvied up towards at Hart House.
Scrivener also asked if there is an effort to do coordinated programming with clubs outside the Hart
House funding budget. He said that a lot of students have come to UTSU in the past having attempted
and failed to book events at Hart House. For example, the Muslim Students’ Association (MSA) tried to
schedule Eid dinner at Hart House and found that it was booked for a wedding.
Cowin responded that Hart House worked with the MSA to find a solution.
Najmi made a correction that it was for Ramadan, and agreed that a solution with Hart House was found.
Cowin said that in 2009 – 2010 there will be 30 Hart House clubs. She acknowledged that it is a recurring
question with respect to the privilege of Hart House clubs in comparison to other clubs on campus. She
said that other student clubs do have access to Hart House. In addition, a lot of the events coordinated
by Hart House are coordinated and programmed by the clubs themselves. Cowin said that the level of
involvement that goes on by clubs in Hart House is quite high, citing the debating team, which ranks in
the top 3 in world championships.
Cowin suggested that this is an issue we need to continue having a discussion about, adding that it is
hard to compare the 400 other clubs on campus with the depth of the programming and involvement that
goes on with clubs in Hart House.
Scrivener stated that he could think of a number of student clubs that would find that comment offensive.
He said that a lot of UTSU groups have scraped by on the amount of funding that they have, and that
they do excellent work. He said that groups not within the Hart House budget should have an opportunity
to use the space that they pay for in their student fees.
Cowin responded that the Good Ideas fund is a fund of money for those clubs to access, and that the
space is available to them at no cost.
Browne asked whether Hart House is going to be doing anything to mark or recognize February as
African heritage month, or whether this is the responsibility of one of the clubs.
Cowin said that in the past, Hart House has organized activities, though she did not know the specifics of
the current year. She added that there is also programming organized by the staff, but that she would
find out and follow up on that for later.
10
There were no further questions on the Hart House budget presentation.
Gupta announced the end of the budget presentations for the current meeting, and proceeded to move
forward to the scheduling of the next meeting.
6.
Scheduling the Next Meeting
Gupta reviewed the draft schedule for the remainder of the COSS meetings. She asked for a quick goround of when COSS members would be available to meet, reminding everyone that evenings are best.
She urged COSS to try to have a meeting set for next week.
Gupta said Wednesday, Thursday and Friday were best, but added that she would be flexible because
it’s important to do have the final budget presentation swiftly.
Comella was available all days except for Thursday, and would check Kidd’s calendar.
Gupta notified Comella that she had been appointed to take Kidd’s seat at COSS.
Overton was preferred Monday or Thursday.
Rubenstein was available any day except Friday, and reminded COSS members that on Tuesday, there
would be many voting members at the UAB meeting.
Browne was available Monday, Wednesday and Friday.
Peters was available Monday, Wednesday and Friday.
Gallant was available Tuesday after 5pm, Wednesday, Thursday and Friday.
Catungal was available on Monday.
Fromowitz was available Monday, Wednesday and Friday.
Matus was available Monday after 5pm and Wednesday after 5:30pm.
Cowin was available Monday, Wednesday before 7pm and Friday.
Awad was available Monday, Wednesday and Thursday.
Najmi was available any day.
Scrivener was available Monday, Wednesday and Thursday.
Hudson was available Monday, Wednesday before 6pm, Thursday, and Friday.
Comella said that Bruce would attend the next meeting.
Gupta decided that the next meeting would be on Wednesday, February 4, 2009, from 4pm to 6pm.
Peters reminded Gupta to contact members who were not present at the current meeting for their
availabilities, since they could not attend in that timeslot previously.
11
Gupta said she would be in contact with Saloiya and others not present.
Rubenstein suggested that COSS may not need to hold a meeting on the following week, but if desired,
the only possible days would be Monday, Wednesday and Friday.
Najmi said that UTSU is scheduling an emergency meeting for COSS on Tuesday February 24, 2009.
Gupta expressed her willingness to hold additional meetings for COSS if desired.
Fromowitz reminded all COSS members that for the next meeting’s agenda, there would only be one
budget presentation (by the Faculty of Physical Education and Health). She requested that as members
think about questions, please forward them by email, because sometimes the queries require additional
details so that they can be respectfully answered.
6.
Adjournment
Gupta requested a motion to adjourn.
Motion: Be it resolved that the meeting be adjourned (Najmi/Catungal).
Carried
Gupta declared the meeting adjourned at 6:12pm.
12