Editor’s Note: The names of the MSA, JSU, JVP, and Students for Peace Representatives were removed due to privacy and safety concerns.
Introduction
Maria: Welcome everyone! We are still waiting to reach quorum but we have gotten to 80%! While we wait we have two wonderful groups that wanted to perform today and are here. While we wait please text, email, do whatever it is to remind your friends to come if they’re not here yet! We have asked those who would like to give community comment to sign up in advance, however, if you have not done so and would still like to please talk to our Co-Secretaries. With that being said, we pass on the microphone to Emmeline, our Senior Class Rep, to introduce our performers for today.
Emmeline: Make some noise for BOUNCE and Haverittmo!
Jorge: We have now reached quorum and can start. I want to give a shoutout to BOUNCE and Haverittmo!
Maria: As some housekeeping items, please make sure to pick up your trash and dispose of any snacks or boba. The Athletics Department was kind enough to allow us to bring boba into the room so please keep the space clean. There are trash bins located throughout the room. We also ask you to please remove any devices that you can use data for from eduroam because our secretaries need wifi to keep the minute and the zoom live. Lastly, a huge shout-out to our quorum counters. To help them out and to also avoid losing quorum we ask that if you need to use the restroom please use the left side door and that if you are leaving please use the right side. We will now begin a moment of silence as is customary.
Jorge: Hello everyone, welcome to the 2024 Spring Plenary! My name is Jorge Paz Reyes (he/him).
Maria: My name is Maria Reyes Pacheco (she/her).
Jorge: We are honored to address the Student’s Association on behalf of Students’ Council for our final semester.
Maria: Plenary exemplifies one of Haverford’s core values: student governance and it encourages us to engage in imagining the future of the College as a collective. As such, we are happy to see the Haverford community come together as a body to engage in healthy dialogue and to discuss the issues that affect our community. Thank you to all the students present, both in person and online for your commitment and engagement. It is customary for us to begin with the State of the Fords to share what Students’ Council as elected representatives have been working on these past few months, the status of last fall’s resolutions, as well as to share the current concerns and initiatives happening on campus.
Jorge: One of the main goals of Maria and I this semester was to make sure that the Students’ Council played an active role in both helping and empowering the community. Thus, given the events of last semester and the ongoing violence in Palestine and Israel, this semester we triggered an emergency plenary and along with the Jewish Student Union Board, Muslim Student Association Board and the Jewish Voice for Peace to introduce a ceasefire resolution. Through the four days of emergency plenary, Maria and I were encouraged to see the community engage in dialogue and demonstrate that we can disagree and still be in community. The results of the emergency plenary demonstrated that the majority of campus wants the student body to call for a ceasefire and more than 70% of campus engaged in the process. Following the results of the ceasefire resolution, Maria and I kept our word and have reached out to other Student Government Associations to encourage them to engage similar processes so they can also advocate for anti-militarism, care, and peace. We first reached out to our partner schools Byrn Mawr and Swarthmore and then other schools such as Middlebury, Vassar, Morehouse, Smith, Wellesley, Wesleyan, Kenyon and many more. We were happy to learn that next week Smith College will be conducting its own version of plenary to go over a ceasefire resolution that was inspired by ours. Bryn Mawr will also be conducting their first in-person plenary since the pandemic in order to engage in a similar dialogue that we did. We are glad that our work has had an impact on neighboring communities and again we wanted to thank all those that participated.
Maria: Aside from these successes, we have also been so impressed and blown away by our council members! We truly feel very connected as a team and at the start of the year during our retreat, were able to hear the concrete and tangible goals that each one of them has. Our Representative for International Students, Julia, came in very determined to re-establish the International Students’ Lounge as a space where students could build community. After much work alongside the Residential Life the lounge was able to be renovated over the Spring Break and will hold its grand opening this Thursday! Our Secretaries, Thea and Emma, have also overseen the renovation of the Skate House as a third space where students can hang out and host events. The renovations were completed over Spring Break and the space is set to have its inauguration in late April which will be open to the entire community. We would like to thank facilities as well for their work and enthusiasm in making the community-led project a reality. Our vice presidents, Kabir and Grant, reinstated the appointments committee last semester and have since been able to collect feedback from all shared governance committees to compile an annual report in what we hope is part of an annual cycle that will allow for transparency and accountability with the community. Lastly, we were able to expand our Librarian team and the three of them, Yasmin, Tim, and Claire have been integral as we begin institutionalizing our work as this year’s council to pass down the torch to next year’s council. They have finalized the first ever StuCo website, conducted interviews with our council members, and are working on an annual report for all the work we have done. These are of course only highlights of our wonderful team and we encourage you all to attend our meetings or read our minutes to hear more about the work each of our reps/officers are doing! Last semester we passed three resolutions which were: COML Resolution; Updates to StuCo Resolution; Raise the Student Wages. The first two were immediately implemented as constitutional amendments and the one on raising student wages resulted in the immediate initiation of a Student Employment Task Force. Since then, the many student representatives alongside administration and staff have been working to find solutions to the needs of student workers. As of now, administration has given approval for a $1.75 increase on conditional approval with details being finalized by Dean McKnight and the Controller’s office. Final confirmation should be released to the community in a few weeks. This increase would be for all pay rates, so the premium rates will go up the same amount. Additionally the committee is working on some training and resume building reform for future years. As part of the discussions and conversation in the task force, administration has also committed to continually reevaluating the wages over the next few years. These are all great updates that show the importance and power of the student body coming together at Plenary. More specifically we want to congratulate Oliver Wilson as well as all the members of the task force for their labors in contributing to important changes that will benefit all of the student body.
Jorge: When we first got elected in this position we did not think things would turn out the way they did. These two semesters have been full of ups and downs and many challenges. Our main goal for these two semesters was to strengthen communication with the community, empower student organizing and to leave a structured student council behind. Throughout the semester we tried our best to accomplish these goals, we created ExecBoard, solidified the budget and appointments committee, restarted the fords forms and played a proactive role as the bridge between student organizers and Admin. All of these initiatives took time and effort to implement, and without the support of our council and our community we would’ve not been able to do it. Aside from all the structural and bureaucratic initiatives, I can also say this semester that the thing that took the most of our time was community work. Throughout these two semesters we spent countless hours hearing the many perspectives of the community and hearing how lived experiences have influenced their Haverford experience. Maria and I have realized that while this work can be exhausting it is also extremely rewarding and essential. As we end our term as Student Council Co-Presidents, we want to once again thank the community for all the trust that they put on us. I want to thank those who leaned into discomfort and engaged in the hard conversations and for those who trusted through emergency plenary and through all our decisions. We want to thank our Council, our Chesick community and all those who supported us and checked in. We also want to recognize the energy and effort of student organizers on campus and encourage students to keep engaging in dialogue.
Maria: Being mindful of time, we will end by saying that the Students’ Council is learning, we are learning, but our biggest priority continues to be serving you all and providing all of you with the resources and support you need. So we encourage you to please reach out if you ever have questions or concerns and we would love to support you. Thank you.
Community Comment Time
Maria: We will now have our community comment time. This is a time for any announcements or concerns you would like to bring up to the student body. Thank you to all the people that signed up to share today. We now invite those students to please come up. Each speaker has 2 minutes to speak, please look at our timekeeper Jillian who will give you a 30 second countdown and then indicate STOP when your time has run out.
CAPS
Astrid: Hi, friends! My name is Astrid, and I am a sophomore.
Kai: My name is Dakarai, and I am a first year here. We are representing CAPS as your CAPS Student Liaisons, and wanted to talk to you all quickly about ways CAPS is here to support the student body. Most of you will already know about individual sessions, but we wanted to talk about resources that fewer people know about.
Astrid: Before we jump into therapy options, due to the new email policy, CAPS cannot send hc-all students emails, so you need to manually subscribe to receive CAPS newsletters. We will only send two emails a semester, and these include information about therapy options, updates about staff, and tips for the semester. If you want to sign up, just scan this qr code.
Kai: This past month, and year, we have really seen the importance of community and CAPS has spaces for students to explore mental health with communities. We want to highlight three specific resources. First, group therapy. This semester, the groups CAPS is offering include: neurodiversity group, lgbtq focused group, living with anxiety group, and a connecting and relating group. However, what is super important is that groups can be added based on student needs, so if there is something that you would like support with you can talk to John Krigel, the therapist who manages group therapy.
Astrid: This semester, we have also started mindfulness drop in sessions. These happen every Friday, from 10 to 10:30 every morning in the CAPS offices. This is an opportunity to drop in, learn more about mindfulness, and bring up things you want to discuss. No commitment – drop in any Friday you would like.
Kai: Finally, we have drop-ins that happen from 11am-noon, and 2pm-3pm every Monday through Friday. You can meet a CAPS counselor for a brief 15-20 minute session, and to attend just come to the CAPS office located in Stokes Suite 203. This can be for anything you would like. Thank you very much, and see us at the CAPS table for any additional questions!
Bi-Co Mutual Aid
Noa: Hi, our names are Anjali Agarwal and Noa Gilbert and we are speaking as members of Bi-Co Mutual Aid. We are a group of Bi-Co students who are inspired by mutual aid efforts taking place all over the country. We recognize the disparity of wealth created by capitalism and white supremacy and see how our schools’ attempts to promote narratives of total equality on campus erase the needs within our community. We see the unmet needs of many students and want to take matters into our own hands by harnessing redistribution of resources within our community.
Anjali: How does it work? BCMA solicits contributions from the Bi-Co Community, ONLY when needed. The funds pool in a Bi-Co Mutual venmo balance. From there, we can send up to $5K per week, and/or transfer money into the attached bank account for writing checks. Community members request aid through the “Aid Request Form.” BCMA team reviews the form, contacts students if need be, and makes plans for filling requests. At any time, a community member may request a non-monetary service (car ride, grocery pickup, etc), and BCMA will reach out to a network of volunteers to coordinate fulfillment of the request.
Noa: On the screen is a QR code that will take you to our LinkTree, where you can find links to our Aid Request Form as well as our Venmo to make a contribution. Right now, our requests far surpass our ability to fill them. If everyone at Plenary who had the capacity donated just $5, we would be able to support our community with their medical, housing, and grocery expenses. Last Plenary, we raised over $1000! If you have the resources, please consider making a contribution today.
Anjali: We also have a table where you can ask any questions to our members as well as find links to our resources. Thank you!
BSL
Tristan: Hi everyone my name is Tristan and I am a representative from BSL. BSL is hosting a panel of 5 black alumni from various career backgrounds who have graciously agreed to return to the school to provide guidance and advice to all students on campus. This will be followed by a networking lunch in this event will be in Whitehead Campus Center on Saturday March 30th from 10:30am-1:30pm. All of the student body is encouraged but please RSVP using the link in our @haverfordbsl instagram bio. This link will also be in the weekly consensus that goes out tomorrow.
GRASE
Sophia: We at the GRASE Center are excited to announce that we are bringing back the bi-co drag ball this year during Haverfest. This year’s drag ball will be on Friday, May 3rd in Founders. The doors at 7, show will begin at 8. We’ve got a lineup of 3 professional drag performers and the opportunity for students to showcase their talent, and we are highlighting BIPOC performers from the Philly and New York area.
Naomi: Students who are interested in performing or lip sync should fill out the forms so we can also integrate you into our show! (links should be shared by plenary ppl but they are also accessible through the linktree on the GRASE Center instagram) We want to thank our many partners for this event, including IDEA, Hurford, SDEA, REEO, and student engagement for helping us put on this event. Please sign up if you are interested, and we will see you on May 3rd!
Haverford Students for Peace and SJP
SJP Representative #1: We’re standing here as representatives of Haverford Student for Peace and SJP. We are back here again and nothing has really changed since the last Plenary. Throughout our time organizing and speaking out for Palestine, I’ve wrestled with a profound sense of disappointment and despair– a feeling that seems to grow with each passing day. I look out at this crowd, filled with faces I recognize and those I don’t, and I can’t help but feel a pang of sorrow. A sorrow born of a collective grief– a mourning for the state of our world, for injustices that persist despite our mutual aid work, calls on the administration to take action and rallies and marches. My disappointment extends far beyond this campus. It stretches across continents and oceans, and includes the failure of the international community to stop a colonial apartheid state from killing more than 30,000 Palestinians, and intentionally starving 2.1 million Palestinians in Gaza. How many more lives must be lost before the world takes decisive action against such atrocities? How many many more lineages wiped away, and children’s livelihood uprooted and tossed to the side, before justice prevails?
SJP Representative #2: And then there’s our own white rich community which prides itself on its liberal values, yet turns a blind eye to the suffering of the marginalized. I see a community that fights its students and reprimands them for standing against the oppressor and calling for justice for the oppressed. But perhaps most upsetting of all is the response of our college administration. Instead of standing in solidarity with those who are oppressed, they cower in the face of pressure from zionist interests. They prioritize the comfort of a privileged few over the lives and dignity of Palestinians and their allies. They betray the very values they claim to uphold, including the Quaker values. How many more lives must be lost before our own community acknowledges the urgency of addressing the atrocities committed by a colonial settler state? How many more lineages wiped away, and children’s livelihood uprooted and tossed to the side, before justice prevails even within our own circles?
Students for Peace Representative: You have the power to act. Something as simple as showing up to a protest, voting on a resolution, or joining on campus organizing efforts, which we encourage you to do by coming to our table (which is over there), can make a difference. All that’s left for you is to use that power. I hope you use it with empathy and care.
Haverford College Democrats
Julia: Hi everyone, I’m Julia and this is Rachel and we are the co-heads of the Haverford College Democrats club. We wanted to share a couple of reminders about the primary and general elections. The Pennsylvania primary election is on Tuesday, April 23rd. Most importantly, our on campus polling place has moved to the Swan room in the GIAC, or the multipurpose room. It’s on the second floor of the GIAC and is accessible by elevator. Even though the general election isn’t until November, it is still very important to vote in this primary. Specifically, the Pennsylvania attorney general race is quite competitive in both parties. The attorney general is crucial to our criminal justice system and is often used as a stepping stone to higher offices.
Julia: Switching gears to the general election, we know this election is far away, but for current sophomores who will be studying abroad in the fall, we just want to put on your radar that you will need to request absentee ballots to vote while abroad. Pennsylvania is a swing state and it is so important that everyone votes in this election even if you will be abroad. We will be posting more information about how to do this as we approach the election. Make sure to follow our Instagram at haverford college democrats so you don’t miss those updates. There is nothing you need to do right now, but we just wanted to make anyone in this position aware that in the coming months you will have to request this absentee ballot to vote in the general election.
Community Comment
Jorge: We have received an anonymous community comment. I will read it now.
Community Comment: Haverford, What makes us a community? The collective of students sitting together, here now. Are we together? Putting hundreds of students onto a campus, let alone, a room does not make us one. How many people have felt peer pressured to take some initiative? Does pressure to be one, still make us one? Especially, after we’ve divided ourselves so much. We’re spiteful of those that see the world remotely differently. We can disagree, but why do we hate? Why do we alienate? Why do we make active choices to exclude? It just makes us lonely. When we put the word “friend” everywhere to accentuate our Quaker roots, do we mean it with our hearts? Can every person here be a friend? Do you even know that type of friendship is your goal? Do you know what your goal is? Is it harmony? To be equals? We don’t know how to disagree, how to forgive each other. Maybe we’re afraid. But it is astonishing that in a community of people that are so beautifully sensitive, so wonderfully caring, so bright, so deserving, we have not managed to figure this out. And, admittedly, there is nothing student council or the administration can force that will change that, that will instill unity. Forcing “agreement” only ever creates more division. And we should not necessarily lay that burden on them. This is a matter of every student opening their minds to the true liberal arts ideals, to why we chose to be here. We are not together because we hate something else. We are together because we are curious about one another, about each other’s differences. Let’s not create oppositional micro-communities. Let’s open our minds and be comfortable knowing how different worlds have merged. We are Jewish students. Please see us.
Haverford Survivor Collective
Pae: Hi I am Pae and I am one the co-heads of the Haverford Survivor Collective.
Georgia: I am one of the board members.
Pae: Next Monday April 1st is the start of sexual assault awareness and prevention month. There are over 460,000 victims of SA each year. April gives us the opportunity to honor people who have experience sexual violence. Thanks to the efforts of Haverford health and wellbeing education, ResLife, Student Engagement, Title IX, we will be hosting a bunch of events in the coming events. They are open to the whole BiCo. We will have a public demonstration on Denim day which is the last day of April. Keep an eye out for our emails or from our Instagram. Please come to us with any questions if you want to get involved.
Intramural Futsal
Kabir: Hi everyone I am Kabir. I run IFL or . Over the past year we have had 206 players. It starts in a week and a half. Registration closes Wednesday. It is an indoor football game in the GIAC. It is really fun and we raise money for things. Email me if you have any questions. Sign up for Futsal!
Maria: Thank you everyone. That concludes community comment time. We will now continue with the overview of the agenda and rules of order.
Rules of Order/Agenda
Jorge: The agenda for today includes three resolutions. The first is on Effective, Efficient, Restorative Honor Council Procedures. The second is titled Updating Student’s Council Responsibilities Pt. 2. The third is the Ceasefire Resolution. Last, is the opening of the Honor Code Ratification.
Maria: The rules of order go as follows and can also be found in the Plenary Packet which you can find in the email we sent this morning.
Jorge: These proposed rules of order are from section 4.02h(iv) in the Students’ Constitution.
Maria: (i) Quorum. In order for quorum to be reached, at least 66% of the students living at Haverford must be present at Plenary. When computing quorum, students studying away will not be counted when determining the total number of the Students’ Association. 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. (ii) Voting Options. When voting, students may choose one of three options: “Yes,” indicating approval of the matter at hand; “No,” indicating disapproval and “no Vote,” indicating a conscious decision to not vote. (iii) Majority Rules. The outcome of all votes is determined by the proportion of students present at Plenary voting in the affirmative. Ratification of or amendments to the Alcohol Policy, the Plenary Rules of Order, and the Students’ Constitution will require a two-thirds (2⁄3) supermajority. Ratification of all other resolutions and amendments will require a simple one-half (1⁄2) majority.
Jorge (iv) Voting Procedures. Votes at Plenary shall be conducted electronically for remote attendees and overseen by the Elections Coordinators. Each ballot will be required to reach a 66% quorum of the students living at Haverford, and Students’ Council shall ensure that only those physically present and counting for quorum at Plenary may cast ballots for that vote. When electronic voting is impossible or impractical due to time limitations, the Students’ Council Co-Presidents may permit a vote to be conducted using an informal method (e.g. raising of packets). If the outcome of the vote is abundantly clear in the eyes of the Elections Coordinators, they may proceed as if that outcome were decided by a formal vote. After any such determination, the Co-Presidents will call for any dissent as to the adjudication of the vote. If eight (8) or more members of the Students’ Association come forward, or if the Elections Coordinators determine that the result of the informal vote is unclear, then a paper or electronic ballot must be conducted.
Maria: (v) Amendments to the Plenary Rules of Order. These may be presented and voted on prior to the presentation of the first resolution. Any portion of the agenda may be changed. (vi) Pro-Con Debate. During any given pro-con debate, a person will not speak for longer than 90 seconds 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 (1) additional time. Pro-con debate shall initially be restricted to ten minutes and thirty seconds of speaking time, or seven (7) speakers. It may be extended by a simple majority of the Students’ Association. (vii) Amendments. Plenary may add “Friendly Amendments” or “Unfriendly Amendments” to a resolution by a vote of the majority. All friendly and 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 are passed with the consent of the resolution writers, whereas unfriendly amendments are passed without, but require petition of seventy-five (75) plenary attendees.
Jorge: (xiii) Recusal. To speak to the content of a resolution, a chair must step down until the proposal is resolved. The Co-Vice President(s) shall then preside for the remainder of that resolution if both chairs of Plenary step down. (ix) Time Limit. The time limit for Plenary shall be three and a half hours. If this time limit expires, the assembled Plenary shall vote to extend the time limit for half an hour no more than two times. If the assembled Plenary fails to extend the time limit by a majority vote, the pending resolution (if any) will be voted on immediately, without further discussion.
Maria: Now we are opening the floor for debate. Does anyone have any amendments they would like to present to the rules of order? Great. With no amendments presented, we will now move on to ratify the Plenary Agenda and Rule of Order,
Jorge: In line with the rules of order, the Students’ Council has talked to Megan Fitch, Chief Information Officer from IITS, and given the frustration of last year’s Fall and Spring Plenary electronic voting we will be proceeding with informal voting. Megan Fitch assured us that IITS has done its best to provide extra routers but has determined it is not possible to support the size of this much of the student body using the server all at once. As such, in order for us to finish on time we will proceed with informal voting. Those on Zoom will still have the opportunity to vote virtually and that should not be a problem. After informal voting, the elections coordinators will declare the outcome of the vote if it is abundantly clear. At this point, you will have the opportunity to object if you disagree with their interpretation. If 8 students object, we will proceed to formal voting using a Google form.
Voting for Rules of Order/Agenda
Maria: With that being said we will now vote on the rules of order. This needs a supermajority of 2/3 to pass. We will have the people on Zoom and in our satellite rooms vote first, and then we will conduct voting for those who are here in the GIAC. So, for those on Zoom, please respond to the poll that just went live. For those in the satellite rooms, please now follow the instructions of the StuCo member in your room to vote.
Michael: The votes of those on Zoom and in our satellite rooms have been recorded. For those in the GIAC, please be ready to vote. Raise your white paper if you would like to vote for the rules of order. Raise your white paper if you would like to vote against the rules of order. Raise your paper if you would like to abstain from voting. After counting all the votes from the satellite rooms and the GIAC, in the eyes of the Election coordinators, the rules of order pass with more than 2/3rds of those present. If there are any objections, please come forward now. Seeing none, the rules of order pass.
Effective, Efficient, Restorative Honor Council Procedures
Maria: With that being said, the first resolution to be presented is the Effective, Efficient, Restorative Honor Council Procedures, presented by the Honor Council Co-Chairs.
Ethan: We are speaking on behalf of the Spring 2024 Honor Council and we are introducing new, effective, efficient, and restorative Honor Council procedures for academic and social matters. We have consulted extensively with Student’s council, the COMLs, the Affinity Group Coalition, faculty, senior staff, and the Dean’s office, and they are all in favor of our proposals. What is left is the most important group: you. Our processes more effectively and efficiently create restoration in the community and return power to students. Also, we are differentiating the academic and social procedures to better handle the unique questions in each type of situation.
Alex: Currently, we have one universal trial system for all types of code violations. We’re changing this. Academic and social proceedings will now be different. In addition, the academic and social proceedings each have two parallel options: the traditional, non-restorative panel, and our new restorative circle.
Emily: For academic matters, the new process begins with a mediation between a professor and student to try to come to a mutual understanding. If both are on the same page, and a student takes responsibility for violating the Honor code, a restorative circle begins. The circle allows the student to take active responsibility in addressing the harm that they have caused by engaging community members in a two-way dialogue. This is different from the current procedure where judgements are rendered upon students. The panel procedure exists for the cases where students and professors are not in agreement, or the cases where students don’t want to participate in a restorative procedure. In both cases, the process is much shorter than current Honor Council procedures and cut down the time commitment for faculty, addressing one of their chief concerns. Additionally, restorative practices are emphasized as much as possible in both procedures, which have been shown to create more effective outcomes.
Caroline: For social matters, an Honor Council Co-Chair first meets separately with all the involved students to come to an understanding of what happened. They determine if a restorative process is appropriate and if everyone involved is ready for one. In preparation for either a circle or a panel, Honor Council can require students to meet with educational offices on campus like the IDEA and the GRASE Center. After these initial meetings, Honor Council decides the best process forward. One option is a restorative circle, if everyone involved is willing and ready. Another option is an Honor Council panel, which is more like an abbreviated version of the current process. Finally, if Council determines there was no Honor Code violation, Honor Council can refer the case to another group, like the COMLs. These new processes prevent many of the harms that have been perpetuated through the current Honor Council procedures. They also make sure that all students involved feel that the outcomes effectively address the damage that has been caused and truly restore the relationships between students. All of our new processes are more detailed than this, but this is a general overview of the proposed procedures and their advantages over the current procedures.
Rafael: There are several current flaws of Honor Council procedures, and this is how we are addressing them. First, faculty aren’t currently required to report cases to Honor Council, which has caused them to lose trust in students, according to the data we have collected during the Fall 2023 semester. This was a change that was made three years ago, and has not worked well. We have also consulted with academic integrity experts at other universities that use restorative practices who have pointed out potential inequities from this system.
Jonah: Our new procedures return power to students by routing cases through Honor Council, deterring professors from unilaterally making decisions about the academic fate of their students. Additionally, our new, more efficient procedures will keep the increased caseload manageable for Honor Council. In the past, resolutions from Honor Council proceedings have often been ineffective at achieving restoration. Our new procedures allow students to play an active role in their own restoration and create outcomes which directly address the issues they feel are most important. Finally, current Honor Council procedures have often perpetuated systemic harm against marginalized students. These changes prevent this kind of harm by ensuring that all parties are ready to begin a procedure (before they engage in such).
Sarah: Our new procedures create more efficient processes, more effective resolutions, and more restorative outcomes. We have rooted these changes in existing restorative practices that work well at other institutions and have ensured that students retain control in upholding the honor code. These reforms don’t fix every problem, but they do work to address the feedback we collected from you, the student body, both in our survey and in conversation. The current process is broken and a change needs to be made. Thank you!
Q/A
Jorge: We will now begin a time for question and answer. As a reminder please raise your hand to ask a question. The presenter will then respond. We will be alternating from the Zoom to the GIAC to ensure all spaces are able to engage. We will begin here in the GIAC. If you have a question please raise your hands and one of our lovely StuCo members will call on you and then please come to one of the two microphones at the front.
Mia: I am Mia, I am a senior. This is similar to a resolution that was passed a year ago. What is the timeline for this resolution being put into action? What is the difference between last year’s resolution and this one?
Sarah: To address the timeline, none of the changes would go into effect until next school year. As far as differences between last year and this, although the values have remained the same the content is very different. We have deleted and replaced an entire section of the constitution. Last year was more of an editing of the current procedures. While both aim to implement restorative practices in honor council, this one is a much larger overhaul.
Pro-Con
Jorge: Now begins the pro/con debate. Speakers will be given one and a half minutes to present their reasons for supporting or opposing the resolution. We will alternate between those speaking for and those speaking against the resolution. Similar to the Q&A section, please raise your hand to request to speak. We will start with someone speaking in favor of the resolution.
Sarah: Hey y’all I am Sarah, class of 2026. I think Honor Council has put a lot of time, work and effort into this resolution. I think you should vote yes! Not only are they implementing restorative justice practices, but they care a lot about yall and have your best interest in mind. Thank you!
Maria: Anyone against the resolution please come forward.
Maria: Anyone in favor please come forward.
Maria: That concludes the pro/con debate. The presenters will now be given 3 minutes to respond.
Ethan: We want to summarize a few key points. The first thing to emphasize is this returns power to students. We are looking out for students, we are students.
Sarah: These procedural changes have been a long time in the works. You all saw last year’s resolution. Beyond those two years Honor council co-chairs have talked for years about procedures and the increasing issue of professors not reporting violations.
Maria: Thank you Honor Council! They put a lot of work into this.
Call for Amendments
Maria: We will now call for friendly and unfriendly amendments. These should have been shared with us and resolution writers by last Thursday. As a reminder, friendly amendments have been accepted by the resolution writers, whereas unfriendly amendments have not been accepted by the resolution writers and require 75 signatures. All amendments require a written change and require a majority vote to be adopted. If presented they will also need their own Q&A session as well as a pro-and con debate. If you have a friendly or unfriendly amendment you would like to present now, please come forward. Seeing no amendments, we will now ask for a moment of silence before we vote on the resolution itself.
Voting for “Effective, Efficient, Restorative Honor Council Procedures”
Jorge: Thank you. We will now vote on the final resolution. This resolution needs a super majority to pass. We will have the people on Zoom and in our satellite rooms vote first, and then we will conduct voting for those who are here in the GIAC. So, for those on Zoom, please respond to the poll that just went live. For those in the satellite rooms, please now follow the instructions of the StuCo member in your room to vote.
Michael: The votes of those on Zoom and in our satellite rooms have been recorded. For those in the GIAC, please be ready to vote. Raise your white paper if you would like to vote for the resolution. Raise your white paper if you would like to vote against the resolution Raise your paper if you would like to abstain from voting. After counting all the votes from the satellite rooms and the GIAC, in the eyes of the Election coordinators, the resolution passes with more than 50% of those present. If there are any objections, please come forward now. Seeing none, the resolution passes.
Presentation of Updating Student’s Council Responsibilities Pt. 2
Maria: We will now be moving to the second resolution which is titled Updating Student’s Council Responsibilities Pt. 2. The VPs will be presenting this resolution.
Kabir: Hello, our names are Kabir and Grant, we are the Students’ Council Co-Vice Presidents, and we will be presenting the Updating Student’s Council Responsibilities Pt. 2 on behalf of Students’ Council. Very simply, this resolution has one goal: to bring ongoing Students’ Council practices in line with the Constitution. Currently, the Constitution does not accurately reflect much of the work that Students’ Council does throughout the year. As a result, Students’ Council cannot function transparently and effectively when our work is not constitutionally supported.
Grant: This resolution can be summarized into three sections: updates to role descriptions, updates to the budgeting procedure, and clarification of the appointment process. The five positions that the respective officers have identified needed revisions are the Officer of Athletics, Officer of Campus/Student Life, Officer of Multiculturalism, Class Representatives, and Representatives to the Board of Managers. We ask that you refer to the plenary packet for the specific edits, however, these are all minor changes to position descriptions.
Kabir: The updates to the budgeting procedure are focused on establishing the Club Funding and Registration Guidelines as the official procedure for club budgeting in future semesters. Additionally, the Budgeting Committee, made up of members of Students’ Council, is officially established to review the Guidelines, Appeals, and Extraordinary Budget Requests.
Grant: Finally, the Appointment process, which is nonexistent in the current Constitution, is established so that future Vice Presidents, us, can more effectively appoint representatives to vital shared governance committees. This will address the issues surrounding the vagueness of the role of Students’ Council Co-Vice President, student representatives, and the appointment process. If these changes are implemented, the improved structure in appointments will allow future Councils to better utilize this vital piece of student advocacy and agency.
Kabir: We believe that all of these changes will allow the Students’ Council to better serve the student body and continue to work to improve our campus. Thank you, and we now welcome any questions you may have.
Q/A
Maria: We will now begin a time for question and answer. As a reminder please raise your hand to ask a question. The presenter will then respond. We will be alternating from the Zoom to the GIAC to ensure all spaces are able to engage. We will begin here in the GIAC. If you have a question please raise your hands and one of our StuCo members will call on you and then please come to one of the two microphones at the front.
Pro-Con
Maria: Now begins the pro/con debate. Speakers will be given one and a half minutes to present their reasons for supporting or opposing the resolution. We will alternate between those speaking for and those speaking against the resolution. Similar to the Q&A section, please raise your hand to request to speak. We will start with someone speaking in favor of the resolution.
Jonah: I am on Honor Council and I genuinely don’t know what StuCo does all day. I think we should let you guys cook.
Jorge: Do we have anyone against the resolution?
Student: I respect StuCo. I have a couple concerns in regards to the multicultural liaison being only elected by BIPOC students. I feel like multiculturalism can incorporate students that are not BIPOC and how do you decide whether a student is BIPOC?
Jorge: If you did not pay attention during the presentation. The officer of multiculturalism is only being elected by BIPOC students. Right now we are going to move to someone speaking in favor of the resolution.
Student: I am an Honor Council representative. I want to emphasize this resolution codifies practices we already have in place. There are arguments for having those practices that could be discussed in future plenaries. It is important to note these practices already exist, and by modifying them it helps keep power in the hands of the students. The Roman Republic fell because they tried to do tradition instead of laws. Laws are good.
Jorge: Now, we will call for someone against the resolution.
Jorge: That concludes the pro/con debate. The presenters will now be given 3 minutes to respond.
Kabir: I will be responding to pro and con. Thank you for the trust and letting us cook. For the concern, that is a legitimate concern. We want to emphasize that for the officer of multiculturalism elections, it will be very similar to elections for the international student rep. It is self identified. You can decide if you are a part of the BIPOC community. Thank you guys.
Call for Amendments
Maria: We will now call for friendly and unfriendly amendments. These should have been shared with us and resolution writers by last Thursday. As a reminder, friendly amendments have been accepted by the resolution writers, whereas unfriendly amendments have not been accepted by the resolution writers and require 75 signatures. All amendments require a written change and require a majority vote to be adopted. If presented they will also need their own Q&A session as well as a pro-and con debate. If you have a friendly or unfriendly amendment you would like to present now, please come forward. Seeing no amendments, we will now ask for a moment of silence before we vote on the resolution itself.
Voting for Stu-Co Clean Up Resolution
Maria: Thank you. We will now vote on the final resolution. This resolution needs a super majority to pass. We will have the people on Zoom and in our satellite rooms vote first, and then we will conduct voting for those who are here in the GIAC. So, for those on Zoom, please respond to the poll that just went live. For those in the satellite rooms, please now follow the instructions of the StuCo member in your room to vote.
Michael: The votes of those on Zoom and in our satellite rooms have been recorded. For those in the GIAC, please be ready to vote. Raise your white paper if you would like to vote for the resolution. Raise your white paper if you would like to vote against the resolution Raise your paper if you would like to abstain from voting. After counting all the votes from the satellite rooms and the GIAC, in the eyes of the Election coordinators, the resolution passes with more than 50% of those present. If there are any objections, please come forward now. Seeing none, the resolution passes.
Presentation of Ceasefire Resolution
Maria: We will now be moving to the final resolution, titled Ceasefire Resolution. We invite the presenters to come up.
JVP Representative: As members of JVP, MSA, and the board of JSU, we cannot sit in silence while the enormous destruction of civilian life in Israel/Palestine continues. We co-sponsored this same Resolution presented by Students’ Council at Emergency Plenary, and it received overwhelming support from the student body, with 87% of the 1,043 votes being for yes, falling just short of the 75% super-super-majority quorum number.
MSA Representative: We remind everyone that the violence in Gaza and Israel since October 7, 2023 has resulted in the deaths of more than 30,000 Palestinians and more than 1,200 Israelis, the taking of at least 6,000 Palestinians, and at least 250 Israelis, which causes ongoing suffering of both Palestinian and Israeli communities. As a student body, this resolution publicly makes a stand against this ongoing violence and calls on peer academic institutions, our surrounding community, and elected officials to do the same.
JSU Representative #1: This ongoing war has had a major impact on all of our communities – both within Haverford and at home — and we hope that by endorsing this Resolution, we can contribute to calling for an end to it.
JSU Representative #2: This destruction has had very real impacts for many of our community members as well, most visibly being the shooting of one of our own Palestinian students. In addition to our religious backgrounds, as students at a historically Quaker institution, we seek to uphold our college’s values of non-violence and anti-militarism and encourage others to do the same.
Q/A
Jorge: We will now begin a time for question and answer. As a reminder please raise your hand to ask a question. The presenter will then respond. We will be alternating from the Zoom to the GIAC to ensure all spaces are able to engage. We will begin here in the GIAC. Stefan and Yasmin please raise your hands! If you have a question please raise your hands and one of these two lovely StuCo members will call on you and then please come to one of the two microphones at the front.
Student: I have a question, if this resolution passes, what is the expected effect, and do you have planned next steps?
Jared: If this resolution passes then the administration will issue a statement for a ceasefire on behalf of the student body. This will set a very important precedent for our community and will facilitate conversation about the ongoing violence in Gaza.
Jorge: Do we have any other questions?
Zoom: Would the position of anti-militarism within the resolution continue within the call for a ceasefire to condemn the movement of liberation within Palestine by any means necessary?
Harrison: That language is not in the resolution, so no.
Maria: Any other questions?
Student: Wouldn’t Wendy veto the resolution? How can you make sure Wendy complies with the resolution?
JSU Representative #2: We can’t make her comply. We are making a decision on behalf of ourselves as students. We hope that she respects our institution, but we cannot make her do anything. This is the same for every resolution at plenary.
JVP Representative: Initially, there was conversation with Wendy, and language was written with an agreement that she will hopefully pass it.
Student: If I understand correctly, this resolution is calling for a “permanent ceasefire”. It was a bit unclear as to what that meant. Can you clarify, are you calling for a ceasefire or a permanent end to the conflict.
JSU Representative #1: This resolution calls for a permanent and immediate ceasefire.
Jorge: Please be respectful everyone.
Maria: Are there any last questions?
Student: I had a quick question. You guys mentioned the Israeli hostages, I was wondering, I didn’t see if the ceasefire was also calling for a release of the hostage?
JVP Representative: We were very clear in the call for the ceasefire that requires a systematic release of hostages and Palestinian prisoners.
Alexis: This is based on current governmental talks about a ceasefire.
Jorge: We have a zoom question.
Zoom: Suppose the resolution is passed. What tangible benefits will it bring to the cause? Will there be fundraising? If not, why does it matter?
JSU Representative #1: Why does it matter? Over 30,000 Palestinians have been murdered in the violence. This is an issue which should all hurt our hearts very deeply. It is important for us to hold our institution accountable and take a stand against violence. We see this as doing what we can for our college to set an important precedent and a step in starting conversations.
Zoom: Were there any changes in this resolution from what was submitted for emergency plenary than what was submitted for today?
Harrison: No.
Pro-Con
Jorge: Now begins the pro/con debate. Speakers will be given one and a half minutes to present their reasons for supporting or opposing the resolution. We will alternate between those speaking for and those speaking against the resolution. Similar to the Q&A section, please raise your hand to request to speak. We will start with someone speaking in favor of the resolution.
Student: Today I am speaking on behalf of Students for Peace. We do support the ceasefire resolution as we believe that the Haverford Student body calling for a ceasefire can lead to other institutions doing the same. This could eventually lead to an increased level of international pressure against Israel. We all have a responsibility to take action and support the Palestinian liberation. This resolution serves to speak against a genocide that is happening as we speak. We cannot wait to speak about the Palestinian genocide when we can put our voices together and see something happen. Our governments are failing us, and this is where we as citizens have to advocate for the unjust murder of children, women and men. This is a genocide and it will not end if we turn away.
Jorge: Now we call for someone against the resolution. Now we will move to someone in favor of the resolution.
Kabir: Hi I am Kabir. I am going to be talking about a pro. Haverford is an institution with quaker values. It’s a bit insane that we haven’t condemned violence yet. Our institution is failing. People speak up for it and we are in a country that is the only country that is funding over 90% of the deaths happening right now. Over half of this country does not know where most lives are being lost. We have a duty as people who are aware of what is going on and as a respected insulation to speak up with the bare minimum of condemning violence. We should keep talking. Let’s show that quaker values are important to us. Killing is bad. Thank you.
Maria: We will now call for someone speaking against the resolution. We now call for a pro.
Allison: I am Allison. I am a senior. I grew up in a white liberal jewish family who was fed zionist propaganda from a very young age. When you grow up, surrounded by that, it is easier to see it as a two-sided conflict. That’s how I saw it on October 6th. I want to say that the activism of this student body, the work done for organizers advocating for Palestinian rights on campus has changed my stance on this issue. You said at the beginning of this plenary that you felt that your contributions to this campus had fallen on deaf ears. I wanted to say that it has not. It has changed opinions and has made a difference. It will continue to make a difference whether the administration does anything with this resolution or not. We are not voting for Wendy Raymond’s statement, we are not voting for anyone to stand up and say some vacuous words about what they think.We know that they won’t really think it. Our opinions are what will change. Voting for this resolution is not a question of what we do right now. This will not end when you walk out of this room. If you vote for this resolution you should commit to going forward with progressive values in your mind that can actually make change in the world. That is something that everyone in this room should vote for irrespective of what they think of this resolution. It is not about the resolution, it is about us and what we believe, and how we fight for what we believe.
Maria: We will now call for someone speaking against the resolution.
Jorge: I want to remind everyone this space is safe and we want everyone to be able to engage in dialogue and share your opinion.
Maria: Seeing none, we call for a pro.
Zoom: Previous anti war and anti apartheid efforts (Vietnam, South Africa, Iraq) were active at all levels of society (work places, homes, and very importantly college campuses). This work is only effective if this mass mobilization exists. While this resolution is not sufficient, it is necessary, and a part of that larger struggle.
Jorge: Now we call for someone speaking against.
Zoom: The resolution is not a direct application of values and beliefs; it is a non-objective political statement, and I want to acknowledge that everyone in this room has values that they will enact with their vote; Quaker or other values do not necessitate any specific vote.
Jorge: Now someone in favor.
Erin: My name is Erin, I am a freshman and I am in favor of this resolution. We as students have the ability to share our voices in the political sphere. So much of politics has been led by students. This is our opportunity to represent the student body. We are asking the students to represent their voices. This is your chance to let your voices be heard. Please vote in favor of this resolution and encourage governments to call for a ceasefire resolution.
Jorge: Now a final call for someone speaking against.
Maria: That concludes the pro/con debate. The presenters will now be given 3 minutes to respond.
JSU Representative #1: We agree with Students for Peace’s contribution during the pro-con debate. Language of genocide and occupation are necessary. However, due to the process and timeline which we as co-presenters had to submit this resolution, we were not able to make those language changes. We want to voice that we agree and it is sad that that language is not in the resolution. We also want to mention that this resolution is an important dialogue about the ongoing genocide.
Zoom: I also wanted to mention the con that talked about quaker-values and a very important quaker value is pacifism. This is a violent conflict.
Call for Amendments
Maria: We will now call for friendly and unfriendly amendments. These should have been shared with us and resolution writers by last Thursday. As a reminder, friendly amendments have been accepted by the resolution writers, whereas unfriendly amendments have not been accepted by the resolution writers and require 75 signatures. All amendments require a written change and require a majority vote to be adopted. If presented they will also need their own Q&A session as well as a pro-and con debate. If you have a friendly or unfriendly amendment you would like to present now, please come forward. Seeing no amendments, we will now ask for a moment of silence before we vote on the resolution itself.
Voting for Ceasefire Resolution
Maria: Thank you. We will now vote on the final resolution. This resolution needs a simple majority to pass. We will have the people on Zoom and in our satellite rooms vote first, and then we will conduct voting for those who are here in the GIAC. So, for those on Zoom, please respond to the poll that just went live. For those in the satellite rooms, please now follow the instructions of the StuCo member in your room to vote.
Michael: For full transparency, there are around 600 people in this room. For this to pass we only need around 400 votes. This room can determine if this resolution passes. The votes of those on Zoom and in our satellite rooms have been recorded. For those in the GIAC, please be ready to vote. Raise your white paper if you would like to vote for the resolution. Raise your white paper if you would like to vote against the resolution. Raise your paper if you would like to abstain from voting. After counting all the votes from the satellite rooms and the GIAC, in the eyes of the Election coordinators, the resolution passes with more than 50% of those present. If there are any objections, please come forward now. Seeing none, the resolution passes.
Presentation of the Honor Code
Jorge: With that being said, we will now be moving to the opening of Honor Code.
Maria: As outlined in the constitution:“At Spring Plenary, there must be a vote by two-thirds of those present in favor of opening ratification of the Code. If this occurs, the electronic ratification system will be open the fourth and fifth days following Spring Plenary. If two-thirds of those assembled at Plenary do not vote to open ratification of the Honor Code, the Code fails the first round of ratification. To subsequently ratify the Code, students must create and circulate a petition requesting the convening of a Special Plenary to enable ratification to open. Forty percent of students must sign this petition conveying their desire for such a Special Plenary and pledging to attend. During the ratification period, Honor Council will schedule eight hours each day of tabling to answer any questions and receive any criticism of the Honor Code which might arise. This council member will have a computer with network access which students may use to ratify the code. All students are strongly encouraged under the Honor Code to vote or to communicate to Honor Council reasons why they did not or could not. Ratification ballots will have three options and a space for comments, suggestions, or criticisms. Filling in this space for comments will be required by the electronic ballot. The ballot will read as follows:
A) I have thoughtfully considered my position on the Code and I vote for its ratification for the following reason(s):
B) I have thoughtfully considered my position on the Code and I vote for its ratification, but I have the following objection(s):
C) I have thoughtfully considered my position on the Code, and I do not vote for its ratification for the following reason(s):
If more than two-thirds of the student body chooses option “A” or “B”, the Honor Code is ratified. If less than two-thirds of the student body chooses option “A” or “B” but more than two-thirds of the student body votes, the Honor Code fails, and a Special Plenary will be scheduled to modify the Code in such a way as to enable a two-thirds majority to vote for ratification.
If less than two-thirds of the student body votes, the Honor Code fails.”
We now invite the Honor Council Co-Chairs to present the Honor Code
Ethan: Hello, my name is Ethan Baker, I’m a senior, and I’m one of your Honor Council Co-Chairs.
Sarah: Hello, I’m Sarah Campbell, I’m also a senior, and I’m the other Honor Council co-chair. We thank all of you for being here today at plenary and for your thoughtful discussion about the resolution that we brought forward. We are excited about the student body’s move towards more effective, efficient, and restorative Honor Council procedures. Recently, there has been a decline in trust between professors and students, which has led to worse outcomes for all members of our community. Additionally, Honor Council is under-utilized as a resource for handling social confrontation, largely because of the nature of the proceedings. Our changes overhaul all of these procedures to create a system that achieves Honor Council’s stated goals of education, accountability, and restoration. Our central goal over the next few months is to implement these changes by working with the incoming co-chairs, creating a new training program for Honor Council members, and developing educational materials for the new processes.
Ethan: We also want to recognize the structural inequities always present on our campus, and wish to remind everyone that simply saying we abide by the Honor Code, or agreeing with the values stated are not enough. It is our task as community members to truly live by the antiracist and empathetic principles of the code, and to demonstrate our commitments to the values we have all agreed to by leaning into discomfort and holding ourselves accountable. Haverford—and Honor Council—has a history of perpetuating structural and systemic racism. We urge the entire community to reflect upon the weaknesses of the Code, and think creatively of ways to improve and strengthen the commitments above, as students both at this Plenary and in past plenaries have done.
Sarah: We want to explain exactly what the Honor Code gives us. In an academic sense, the Honor Code maintains a balance of trust between the student body and the faculty and protects student rights in academic contexts. Over the past few years, this trust has eroded and faculty are increasingly becoming more suspicious of students, which has limited the freedoms the Code provides. As we work to implement the changes we just passed, one of our central priorities will be restoring this trust. Our new set of procedures work more efficiently, which will increase faculty buy-in, and will create more effective resolutions through the restorative pathways. We are therefore optimistic that students will regain some of the freedoms that have been lost recently.
Ethan: The Social Code is the set of statements and values that we have all committed to uphold. It guides us in how to live in and engage with community, and particularly outlines what it means to respect others in this space. In particular, the Social Code commits the student body to anti-racist and equitable values. It is our belief that this work is ongoing and continual.
Over the past year we have seen the challenges in applying the Social Code. The Social Code has intentionally described violations generally because it is not meant to be a rulebook of how to behave at Haverford, it is instead meant to encompass a set of values that we aim to uphold. Because the code is not a set of allowed behaviors, it is often ambiguous in how exactly it should be applied. However, we see this as a strength of the Code. The value statements in the Code allow us to have difficult conversations with our peers and engage in dialogue to a degree that is unique to Haverford.
Sarah: We urge students in the future to continue critically engaging with the Honor Code, and to continue proposing changes for the betterment of this community. It is our belief that the code has incredible potential and is integral for the well being of student autonomy. Student self-governance is a unique aspect of Haverford’s community. This means we have a shared responsibility to protect and foster self-governance for future generations of students, and to make sure the Honor Code is serving everyone on this campus. In a moment, we will vote to open Honor Code ratification. If two thirds of those present vote yes, Honor Code ratification will begin on Thursday and continue through Friday. During this period, two-thirds of the student body must vote to ratify the Honor Code. If this fails, then the Honor Code will fail and we will need to call a special plenary. Sophomore, Juniors and Seniors know how painful that process is, so please vote as soon as the form opens on Thursday! Thank you all for your engagement today. If you have any questions about the Honor Code or Honor Council processes, please reach out to us–we are always here to support you.
Voting on Opening the Ratification of the Honor Code
Jorge: Thank you. We will now vote on opening the ratification of the Honor Code. This needs a super majority of ⅔ to pass. We will have the people on Zoom and in our satellite rooms vote first, and then we will conduct voting for those who are here in the GIAC. So, for those on Zoom, please respond to the poll that just went live. For those in the satellite rooms, please now follow the instructions of the StuCo member in your room to vote.
Michael: The votes of those on Zoom and in our satellite rooms have been recorded. For those in the GIAC, please be ready to vote. Raise your white paper if you would like to vote for the opening of the ratification of the Honor Code. Raise your white paper if you would like to vote against the opening of the ratification of the Honor Code. Raise your paper if you would like to abstain from voting. After counting all the votes from the satellite rooms and the GIAC, in the eyes of the Election coordinators, the opening of the honor code ratification passes with more than 50% of those present. If there are any objections, please come forward now. Seeing none, the ratification of the Honor Code opens.
The End
Maria: That concludes Plenary, we did it y’all. Thank you for your patience and engagement. We will now be waiting for President Raymond to approve the passed resolutions which she will do within 30 days. Resolution writers will reach out to the community with next steps for implementation. Thank you again everyone and have a wonderful Sunday!
Be First to Comment