home      forum      meeting minutes      lottery      program house guidelines      bylaws      links


Untitled Document

Residential Council Minutes :: November 4, 2008

Present: James Reed (Chair), Greg Anderson (Policy Chair), Mark Fuller (Program House Chair), Ben Lowell (Lottery Chair), Jillian Robbins (Secretary), Sophie Asher, Al Carter, Jerry Cedrone, EJ Chung, Paige Hicks, Mannan Jalan, Chaz Kelsh, Adam Lewin, Mike Sokolovsky, Christine Sunu, Jane Zhang

Guests: Dean Tom Forsberg


  1. Continued Discussion of Card Access - 'Favorite 5' plan versus expanded regional access
  2. Animal House

1. Card Access proposal

  • amended proposal from the one a few weeks ago, modeled on the 'Favorite 5' plan
  • may be a good long term proposal; a potential future solution (whereas expanded regional access may be a more immediate solution)
  • this plan does not provide specifics, but represents the ideas/thoughts we have
  • we don't foresee ResLife implementing the changes mentioned in this proposal
  • motion proposed and passed 10 - 1

2. Regional Access proposal

  • should we modify the regional pairings that currently exist?
  • Caswell is currently grouped with Slater and Hegeman; should Caswell be grouped with Barbour and Grad Center because these dorms all contain predominantly sophomores?
  • should NP 1 and NP 2 be included with the above linkage (Caswell-Grad Center-Barbour) to group more sophomores together? will this linkage be too large?
  • should Minden, Young Orchard apartments, New Dorm, Hegeman, and Slater be grouped together? would this linkage be too large?
  • motion proposed and passed unanimously: to ask ResLife to group Caswell, New Pembroke 1, New Pembroke 2, Grad Center, and Barbour Halls together for regional access
  • motion proposed and passed unanimously: to ask ResLife to group Young Orchard apartments, New Dorm, Minden, Hegeman, and Slater together for regional access; if this is too big, it can be broken down into two groups
  • all other currently existing linkages will remain the same
  • what about the dorms that currently are not included in a regional access group? is this fair? this includes: buildings on Wriston, 111 Brown Street, Machado, King House, Plantations House, and West House
  • Wriston: how do we give people on Wriston fair access to other dorms? should all people living on Wriston be granted access to other dorms?
  • should only independents living on Wriston be granted regional card access? the majority of independents living on Wriston are sophomores; therefore, should independents on Wriston be granted access to Grad Center? should there be only one way access for these independents (so that those living in Grad Center will not have access to Wriston)?
  • motion proposed and passed, 10 - 1, for 111 Brown Street, Machado, Plantations House, King House and West House to have no regional access


  • can these two proposals be passed at the same time? should they be combined? what is the ultimate goal we are trying to establish? what is our immediate goal? are our goals realistic?

3. Animal House:

  • proposed by Katie Barnwell '11
  • proposal for an "Animal House" program house: what are the goals of the house? what needs will it fulfill? what will it add to the community?
  • how many pets will be allowed? what will happen to the animals when people move out? who will clean up after all of the animals?
    • the house will have 3 cats and 3 dogs, the maximum set by the state of Rhode Island
  • is dedicating time to an animal different from dedicating time to another program house?
  • should this house be located off-campus? would living in an actual house be better for the animals?
  • the stakes would be higher than in other program houses because the lives of actual animals would be involved
  • how can we help Katie make this the strongest proposal possible?

Katie's proposal:

  • there are students who miss their pets
  • if an animal house is planned well, students involved will be given clearly defined responsibilities 
  • there are animals that need homes
  • therefore, why shouldn't we do this?
  • the people living in the house would make visits to animal shelters
  • also, the animals could be placed in the house via foster care
  • the house would have an emergency fund for vet bills and for brief stays in animal boarding shelters (for during school vacations) --> this is where the dues would go
  • the house would have a strict 'chore wheel' to ensure it would be kept clean and all animals would be cared for

Our feedback:

  • include in your proposal, more specifically, what will happen to animals over vacations and what will happen if the house is disbanded
  • be clear about owning the animals versus keeping them in foster care
  • be clear about how the space will stay healthy, safe, and clean
  • create specific plans for funding and financing

End of Meeting

Submitted by Jillian Robbins, Residential Council Secretary 2008-2009