Minutes: February 10th, 2015 by Student Government of Loyola Chicago

“The greatest danger to our future is apathy” – Jane Goodall Student Government of Loyola Chicago February 10, 2015, 4:00 PM Sister Jean Dolores Schmidt MPR South, Damen Student Center, Lake Shore Campus Senate Minutes

1. Roll Call a. Call to order at 4:00PM 2. Visitors and Guest Speakers a. Kendo Club Budget Appeal – Procedural Error (John Francis Dela Pena) i. Francis: Club denied budget request on the grounds that the event would only be open and accessible to members when that is not the case. Have held this event for the past two years and all members of the Loyola community are welcome to attend. Procedural error. ii. Sen Black: In their hearing, they told us the practice would only be open to club members. Demonstration and practice. High cost of event, so practice open only to the members. We felt that was not a good use of the SAF. 1. Sen Cirone: Was it a misinterpretation? Did your group intend to say it is open for all? 1. Francis: Never intended to exclude either event from anyone. Kendo Club open to anyone. 2. Sen Tsarouhis: How many non-members would actually show up? 1. Francis: No way for sure to know how many would show up i. Sen Tsarouhis: How many have shown up in the past? 1. Francis: Unclear in the first year. In the second year, had a small audience of maybe 25 people, only four of which were members of the club. 3. Sen Alam: What advertising methods would you use? 1. Francis: Little bit of everything. Post flyers around every building we can. Members post in their dorms. Spread through Facebook and word of mouth. 4. Sen D’Onofrio: So the practice is open to anyone? 1. Francis: Anyone. It can be seen as a hands-on demonstration for anyone whether or not they are in the club. 5. Sen Tsarouhis: They said it was not open during the hearing? 1. Sen Black: I specifically asked if it would be open to all Loyola undergrads. We were told it would not be, only to members. 6. Sen Bosnich: Are we allowed to consider outside information or can we only use what was in the hearings and original request? 1. Sen Black: Only what was in the hearings and original request

7. Sen Tsarouhis: It was explicitly said in the hearing by a representative from your organization that nonmembers cannot come to practice. Is there a miscommunication? 1. Francis: I talked to this representative (our VP) and he told me he never intended to say that any component of the event would be exclusive to anyone. Perhaps he meant to say members would get the most out of that, not meant to exclude anyone. 2. Sen Tsarouhis: Even though he didn’t intend on saying that, he did say that during the hearing? 3. Francis: I, myself, was not at the hearing. 4. Sen Tsarouhis: But you said you spoke to him. Did he say it? 5. Francis: He told me he never intended to say that. 6. Sen Tsarouhis: Never intended to, but he did…? 7. Francis: I’m sorry? 8. Sen Tsarouhis: Alright, thank you. b. Dr. Rhys Williams: Discussion of Re-evaluation of CAS i. Co-chair of CAS taskforce. Discussing taskforce’s role in reevaluating structure of CAS. ii. Dr. Williams: Chair of Sociology department and also co-chairing this taskforce with Professor Joyce Wexler, chair of English department. We were charged from the Provost to write a report that assesses the College of Arts & Sciences in its current organization and structure. Biggest college at Loyola. As one big college, is that the best way to organize things or should we split them into smaller colleges? There was not a School of Communication previously; it was actually a department in the College of Arts & Sciences. Thought it would prosper more as a school itself, so it was split off. We were not given directions as to what should happen. Asked to investigate the college and come up with idea of how to make it run efficiently. iii. Three options: 1) Don’t change anything; 2) College split into two colleges: Colleges of Arts and Letters (Humanities, English, Philosophy, social sciences) and a College of Sciences (STEM). Might lead to more interdisciplinary research; give students more value to focus particularly on their subject areas; 3) Take Fine and Performing Arts and spin it off into a school of Fine and Performing Arts that is separate from the CAS. These are the three basic things we have been exploring. iv. Twelve faculty members and one staff member of the college make up the task force. Six department chairs, people in humanities, social sciences, and sciences. Report due sometime end of this month or early next month with our recommendations. Looking at other colleges and universities

similar to Loyola to see if they have restructured along these lines. Looking at the literature in education and doing all sorts of interviews. Asked for a report from the Education Advisory Bureau about if it would be a good idea. Public forums with faculty members. Talked to Academic Council, Faculty Council in University Senate. The taskforce doesn’t have yet a firm recommendation of what should be done. Have ideas, but haven’t decided the best course. There are advantages in splitting the college and in not splitting it in some ways. Often ask for comments and people’s reactions. v. There are four particular areas in which the taskforce has been focusing: 1. Core Curriculum. Loyola has a large Core Curriculum that spreads across CAS. What happens if there isn’t a CAS anymore? Does the Core stay the way it is? Different schools have the Core a little different from the one in CAS. Would we have to revise the Core again? Marquette didn’t split their CAS but started School of Engineering and have had to redo the Core. Nobody on the faculty is looking forward to doing that again. 2. What about interdisciplinary teaching? More team-taught courses. International Studies, Islamic World Studies, Asian Studies – would those benefit or be hurt? 3. Question about cost and revenue. Smaller units that might be good but then would need a dean of both colleges. Two different deans—is that a good thing or does it just add more administrative cost? 4. Final point is enrollment. This is in some ways what it comes down to. Would more students want to come to Loyola? Get a better education at Loyola? Effect on enrollment, retention, recruitment, and education. Tuition? vi. People have asked if there is some sort of secret plan to split the CAS. If there is, it is secret enough that I don’t know about it. Secret plans aren’t very good if they aren’t kept secret… then I would be lying to you and not tell you, but I’m not lying to you. I think President Garanzini and Provost Pelissero were thinking that this is a time to evaluate and see what we think would serve Loyola best. Three years ago, DePaul split its CAS into three different schools. Question is, if DePaul is doing it and it’s working for them, maybe Loyola should take a look at it. Opportunity to evaluate where the university is. 1. Sen Bunnage: What do you know about the decision making process? Who is going to be involved in actually making the decision of what happens? 1. Dr. Williams: We are producing this report and they will present it to the Board of Trustees in March. Ultimately,

decision is made by President Garanzini with input from the Provost, the medical school, and various deans involved. Has to be ratified by the Board of Trustees. The report we will write is purely advisory. We don’t have a direct part in the decision making itself. 2. Sen Nowak: Which colleges have you talked to in getting advice? 1. Dr. Williams: Marquette and DePaul, partly because they are close and people on the taskforce know people there. The person who used to be chair of Chemistry department here is now dean at DePaul. Another guy who used to be dean here is dean at University of Seattle – only Jesuit university that doesn’t have Arts and Sciences in one college. Has two different colleges. We thought we would talk to him about how it is working in Seattle to have the colleges separated. Difference is that Seattle has a large and longstanding Engineering program and we are just getting started with one. Also done phone interviews with a number of people—I can name some of them and I can’t name some of them because they contribute to Education Advisory board and promised to remain anonymous. Administration thinks it competes with mostly other Jesuit universities. A couple of other places split recently. Tried to be focused on if we consider them part of our peer group (Jesuit universities) or if they have just gone through this process. 3. Sen Dumbauld: Do you foresee there being division between individual departments? 1. Dr. Williams: In a couple cases, there might be. Anthropology offers a BS and BA. The other one would be the Psychology department. With Seattle, Psychology is in the Liberal Arts. I don’t know how that decision would get made. i. Sen Dumbauld: Could there be a third category of interdisciplinary departments? 1. Dr. Williams: What happens with interdisciplinary programs right now? Islamic World Studies, International Studies, etc. – all of the faculty belong to another department. If we split the college, what happens to those faculty members? Teaching across colleges? I don’t know.

Departments get faculty hires based on how many students they teach. 4. Sen Kelley: DePaul split their CAS and School of Communication at Loyola split. What was the overall benefit? 1. Dr. Williams: I wish I had a fast and simple, straightforward answer. But it’s going to be an essay answer. Enrollments dipped at first with the School of Communication. Went from 600 majors to 400 majors as a school. People had to do a lot more cross-listing to get credits. Has recovered since then. School of Communication changed its focus over the past six years into more of a professional school. Would you do that with Fine and Performing Arts? Most of the people who are in Fine and Performing Aarts don’t imagine themselves working as a dancer or painter; they see themselves teaching those things. That question is up in the air. DePaul split – people are generally happy with the split in the sciences because they got more resources. In liberal arts and humanities, they are less happy because they feel they aren’t getting enough individual attention. But DePaul has a lot going on in terms of finances, hard to tell if the split affected the university. Only been three years. 5. Sen Henry: University of Seattle is split into two, correct? 1. Dr. Williams: It is. 6. Sen Henry: What were the effects when that took place? 1. Dr. Williams: It’s been that way for a while. Engineering a really important part of their university for a long time. The better example might be Marquette, kept the CAS together and split off just Engineering. i. Sen Henry: Is the College of Engineering our only roadblock? 1. Dr. Williams: We’re a ways from having a standalone school of engineering. And engineering is expensive. Would have to build another building for it. Serious capital investment. I don’t have anything against engineers, but that’s a big step. Still somewhere in the future. IES just an institute right now. Not a school but not just a department. What to do with that? 150 majors now in IES. If it continues to grow,

will it be a school on its own? How much do we want to fracture the university and how many deans does that mean we have to hire? 7. Sen Bosnich: Thank you for coming today. Is the engineering department going to add to the enrollment in the freshman class or take away from other majors? 1. Dr. Williams: At the moment, not going to add to the freshman class. Dormitory space is limiting the enrollment of the freshmen class – room for about 2300 freshmen each year. Two years ago, people were living in hotels because there wasn’t enough dormitory space. If people are coming for engineering, not coming here for something else. i. Sen Bosnich: Same number of students, same amount of tuition, larger capital investment for the split… 1. Dr. Williams: That’s the issue. There are ceilings on tuition. You can only charge so much before you charge yourself out of the market. Sorry to talk about you all like you are all customers, but this is the way administrators talk about students. Increasing donations or getting more research dollars that come with big grants. Sciene and engineering get the most research dollars, maybe those schools could pay for themselves. 2. Sen Bosnich: They would have to be the exception to the teaching load that was just reinforced last spring? a. Dr. Williams: That’s an interesting question and a much debated one in the task force. One could ask why the teaching load needs to be uniform across the university given the different styles of teaching. Do we actually need a separate college to need a different teaching load, or adjust? As Loyola gets bigger and diversifies, does a one-size-fits-all policy serve everyone better? 8. Sen Tsarouhis: Have you met any significant opposition?

1. Dr. Williams: Faculty in general think splitting the college is not a good idea. Not everyone thinks that. Some in Fine and Performing Arts think a separate school might actually benefit them – really complicated department. Another concern is about transferring hours. Think you want to be a biology major, but then you took sociology with Williams and want to switch to sociology, in the current CAS, that isn’t hard. If you had to transfer colleges to make that change… it’s not impossible. But it’s potentially more complicated. Final thing that has come up a lot is what they think of as the Jesuit philosophy of education and Loyola’s mission. Knowledge is integrated and not just in little compartmentalized places. You get ethics and philosophy and theology as well and not just chemistry. If we split it up too much, maybe that mission might be lost. Those are some of the concerns. 9. Sen Sulejmani: We would get more money for grants and research if split into STEM and the other school? 1. Dr. Williams: General presumption that more grant dollars are going into interdisciplinary teams of research. There is the thought that STEM interdisciplinary research team would be easier to foster than in the current CAS – whether that is true or not, we don’t know, but that’s the logic behind it. Why it can’t be done in the CAS? There are some roadblocks that perhaps make that more difficult. Students in the STEM college would get a more intense science education. 10. KC: Do you feel that your taskforce has had sufficient time to study this issue? Will your committee report in public once it is complete? 1. Dr. Williams: I have no idea if it is going to be public. We’re sending it to the Provost. I don’t feel empowered to release it publicly without his approval. Don’t know if the full report will go to the Board of Trustees or just the executive summary – the Cliff Notes version. I don’t have any control over that. We have not had enough time if our task was to plan the restructuring of the college. But our task was to assess whether it is a good idea. I’m personally torn about this. Had 6-7 months. Collapsed time frame to take on a question this big. 11. KC: Tied to strategic planning timeline at all?

1. Dr. Williams: Getting the draft of new strategic plan, our report, and similar report on Quinlan School of Business. In that sense, it is tied to it. Some of the things in the strategic plan we’ve been thinking about because we think it’s reasonable to ask if restructuring makes the plan better or worse if it goes forward. But that is a different bus and it’s leaving without us. 3. Approval of the Minutes a. Minutes approved. 4. Unfinished Business 5. Committee and Board Reports a. Safety and Wellness (Chair Santy) i. Tabling tomorrow 4-6pm in Damen. Photo campaign asking what consent means to them. b. Sen Winn (Chair Winn) i. Met with Tina, talked about commuters upset at not having snow day. ii. Meeting with Katie Rutkowski, interim director of ResLife since Cass left. c. Allocations (Chair Black) i. SPOT 2 budget requests due this Friday. Open houses on Wednesday night and Thursday night. If you know anyone who has questions, send them our way. d. Justice (Chair Bunnage) i. Peace Circle was amazing, powerful event. ii. Hotel Meeting this Wednesday. There will be community members, people from the union, and students there. Send me an email if you’re interested so I know you’re coming. Would like student representation. iii. Friday 6:30am first workers’ breakfast in the mailroom. Mariana helping plan it, reach out to us if interested. Project that we hope grows beyond student government. Encourage you all to participate. e. Academic Affairs (Chair Bosnich) i. If you’re already tired of your classes this semester, most of next semester’s offerings are on LOCUS. f. Advisor’s Report (KC) i. Jesuit Jam tomorrow evening in Gentile arena. Basketball game sponsored by Jesuit community, lots of free giveaways. ii. ResLife transition to leadership. Katie Rutkowski serving as interim leader. Cass’s last day was Friday, Feb 6th. New person will most likely not start until July 1. iii. Colossus weekend, 5500 tickets sold. Jason Derulo and Gabriel “Fluffy” Iglesias. Well-known artists. Check out ((dop))’s website. Purchase tickets sooner than later.

iv. Tomorrow is deadline for priority registration for Arch Madness. March 5-8. $40 and $50 packages, $20 per room hotel rates. Includes pep rallies, two meals, a Loyola scarf and game tickets. I believe Flavio and Michael is going, although he hasn’t purchased his package yet. g. Executive Report i. President Bravo: 1. Hope you all can meet me at the arch, as they say! 2. March 11 Father Bosco talk on 4th floor IC “Racial Divide in the U.S.” 3:30-5pm. 3. SGLC nominated for Damen Student Organization Award and the Community & Solidarity Award – congratulations to you all! ii. CSO Kadri: 1. First CAN meeting last Thursday. Good feedback from student orgs. April is our transition month. Lots of student orgs were upset we didn’t do multiple workshops last year and did a one-day thing. 2. 26 new potential organizations. 3. Student Organization Awards, received 41 nominations. Keep spreading the word. iii. CCO Cheng 1. Michael and Flavio meeting with Provost and President tomorrow morning, continue to tweet! 2. Committee Chairs or people working on campaigns, let us know soon if you need any communications assistance. h. Judicial Report (Chief Justice Nasser) i. Judicial report sent out last week. We didn’t meet last week. Meeting Thursday at 7:15pm in the SGLC office. 6. New Business and Discussion a. Budget Appeal Discussion i. Sen Bosnich: Allocations heard the hearing, told event was exclusive in club members, be that true or false. I don’t see how there is grounds to vote in favor of procedural error. Not allowed to consider outside information when voting. Any information not in the request or hearing cannot be considered as evidence. ii. Sen Tsaroushis: Are we supposed to close this meeting? 1. Speaker Murtaza: No rule in the bylaws about that. iii. Sen Tsarouhis: No procedural error. A little bit inconsistent. Allocations was right. iv. Sen Bosnich: I move to vote.

v. Sen Santy (POC1): Senators who were not present for the appeals presentation should abstain. (Sen Fleisher, Sen Sorrell, Sen Cirone, Sen Paulson, Sen Sulejmani, Sen Patel). vi. Sen Kelley (POO2): Votes on appeals themselves are not made public. Since this meeting is open, vote on the appeal itself will be public. This will be recorded in the minutes. Just want to make it clear that normally, if our technology was functioning, this vote would not be public. But it will be made public because we are voting by show of hands. vii. Vote by show of hands. Appeal has been denied 0-25-11. 1. Allocations Committee committed a procedural error: 0 votes. 2. Allocations Committee did not commit an error: 25 votes. 3. Abstain: 11 votes. b. Sen Bosnich: Jackson, did you pick a new date for Smoke Screen? i. Sen Santy: In the process of doing that. c. VP Fasullo: Wise for us to all talk about what Dr. Williams just brought up. Lots of questions and answers we haven’t heard. Develop next steps, but that’s all up to you. d. CAS Future i. Sen Bosnich: Thanks Michael for the suggestion. I think it would be helpful to wait for the report to come out, contingent on it being made public. I have a feeling it’s not going to be. He seemed in favor of not making the move, by the way he answered our questions. Maybe in five years when the engineering department is thriving, if it thrives. Great point to think about strategic plan. ii. Sen Bunnage: If we were to move forward, not safe right now. I’m totally against it. No one ready to take a stance publicly. We could make a clear statement about decision-making process, what happens postrecommendation? If we want it to be a transparent process, could make a clear statement about that. iii. Sen Tsarouhis: Spoke to someone on University Senate about this and she is very much against it. I agree with Senator Bunnage. Should make it clear that we don’t want the same thing that happened with the finals schedule, which came out of nowhere. Should be very involved with what’s going on so we can effectively communicate that to the students. Plans to reach out to members of University Senate. iv. Sen Kelley: Can we request from the Provost that this report be made public? 1. KC: Flavio and Michael are meeting with the Provost tomorrow morning so that would be an opportunity to raise that question. 1 2

Point of Clarification Point of Order

v. Sen Bunnage: Do you think it’s too messy to, moving forward, bring up the CAS in the letter we’re writing? 1. KC: It’s worth noting. Huge decision being considered right now. vi. Sen Kelley: For anyone who sits on University Senate, is the University Senate going to have any… will their perspective be considered? Have a vote? Monumental decision. 1. KC: It has not come up in that body yet. Doesn’t mean it won’t. University Senate relatively new. Merely an advisory board; doesn’t have final decision making authority. Largely a faculty issue. Curriculum entrusted to faculty. 2. VP Fasullo: I sit on the executive committee of University Senate. The agenda is set by the executive committee. We had a meeting about the Feb 20th meeting and we talked about some agenda items for the March meeting. Nothing was talked about for CAS split for those two meetings. If brought up, most likely will be as an FYI thing. Unless we as student government want to do something. When a piece of legislation is passed, it goes to University Senate. vii. Sen Tsarouhis: Many students from Loyola came in as premed students, probably majored in bio, a good chunk of those students end up switching. I know people who switched from bio to literally any major. Can be an issue. Don’t know what the process is like to switch schools. viii. VP Fasullo: Just as a student, my biggest concern is funding. 2.5% increases every so often, seems logical and justified. This would be expanding us dramatically. New facilities, new deans, faculty and a lot of hypotheticals about where the funding is going to come from. What is this university doing to ensure we are reducing cost for students? And that is something that won’t be in the report, doesn’t deal with logistical items. Just about whether it is a good idea. ix. KC: Reach out to your peers at DePaul. They just lived this three years ago. Many may have insights about student experiences there. x. Sen Fleisher: Will be talking to student body president of DePaul tonight so I can ask him. Don’t know anything about this and I sit on Academic Affairs on University Senate. e. Constitutional Review Committee Progress i. Sen Kelley: Working on in-depth review of Articles of Governance. Several things need to be revised: simple grammatical errors. Corrected gender-specific pronouns. Syntactical fixes. Will propose some changes in one mass amendment. I want to make sure we are all as informed as possible. I can give you all a brief outline now and take any questions and you can voice your opinion at CRC meetings (Thursdays 5PM in the SGLC office). Or I can send it out via email. 1. Sen Bosnich: Can you do both?

1. Sen Kelley: I can do both. ii. Sen Kelley: Timeline is to propose something next week. 1. Grammatical structure changes to make throughout (the work of Sen Santy and Sen McNelis). 2. Judicial process 1. Attorney General currently does not have to file a complaint if it is sent to them; they have the option. We propose it changed so that the Attorney General must. 2. No process for Judicial Board members to be censured right now. Their censure hearing would take place by their fellow judicial board members. We propose that Senate hears those hearings. 3. Unclear how impeachment works right now. Intend to solidify how it works. Unclear on what grounds you can be impeached and how it works. 3. Legislative process 1. All legislation has a first reading then a waiting week and then voted on. Does it have to be submitted 48 hours in advance for that first meeting? Intend to clarify that. More uniform way of proposing legislation. 4. Election board amendments proposed by Dominic. 1. Sen Tsarouhis: Inconsistency of when we have candidate meetings and when campaigning starts. Tough to plan out the process and put down the packet. 5. Miscellaneous 1. Attendance policy not very clearly defined. It wouldn’t change how the policy is currently enforced. 2. Voting threshold – previously under Robert’s Rules, when a vote is taken, abstentions count in effect as negative votes. In order for something to pass, has to receive simple majority of ‘Yes’ votes. When someone abstains, takes away a potential ‘Yes’ vote. Abstentions technically count as if that person is not present. If half abstains, only a quarter plus one is voting ‘Yes’. If only 17 people are present, still quorum, if half abstains, you only need a majority of 7 people to pass. 3. Ethics Code – abstract nature of some of the conditions that some members of SGLC are held to. iii. Sen Alam: Under the Articles now, voting records are to be published. Are they published? Can we do anything to codify that they are? 1. Sen Kelley: The Speaker sends it to the CCO and the CCO publishes to OrgSync or our website. I like the way Gonzaga University does it. They make all legislation public and on the

legislation itself is a list of all of the Senators and how they voted. I propose for that to be the protocol. 1. Sen D’Onofrio: Would it be cumulative? i. Sen Kelley: That public record would be fixed to the legislation. Could you run a report and see how that Senator voted on particular issues? That’s up to the Speaker right now. If there is significant support for such a thing, I would leave that open to the body. CRC trying to take collective voice of SGLC, administration, student body and make changes to make it more efficient and transparent. I don’t think it would be something that would be written in the Articles. iv. Sen Kelley: I’ll be sure to get an email out to everyone with an outline of the things I just mentioned. Planning on having first reading next week. Will accompany that with a presentation that is a little easier to follow. 1. Sen Henry: Can you do a side-by-side comparison for what it is currently and what you are proposing? 1. Sen Kelley: I’m waiting on the Chief Justice to confirm that this is OK, but I would like to include a copy of the Articles with the proposal so you could do that comparison. But we do intend to have that comparison. 2. Sen McNelis: I was responsible for a lot of the grammatical changes and you will be able to see side-by-side what the problems are for those. f. Demonstration Policy Change i. Sen Alam: Everyone heard of the demonstration policy change? Administration changed it from a 10-day notification to a 3-day change and this happened over a lot of meetings with administration. I have heard a lot from students, concerns with the fact that we have to register to demonstrate on campus. Some campuses do this and some don’t. I will be doing more research on it, if anyone is interested let me know. 1. Sen Black: I’m on the Demonstration Policy Advisory group so we can talk if you want. 1. Sen Alam: I didn’t know that existed, but cool. g. Metropolis i. Sen Bunnage: Adding Metropolis question to the ballot. Will be writing proposal after Justice meeting next Monday. If people want to be apart of the writing process, you can. Will start writing 4:30pm. Anyone can join. 1. Sen Henry: Are you definitely going to the next AFAC meeting? 1. Sen Bunnage: I’m presenting at the AFAC meeting but we have a timeline if we want to get it on the ballot.

ii. CCRO Rocks: Jared and I are taking a lead on the Metropolis conversation. Supporting Senators who are working on this. Hope with referendum vote is to engage wider conversation on campus. Need help. Simple and cool legislation to write. iii. Sen Kelley: They want support from 3000 students? 1. Sen Bunnage: We don’t know for sure about that. 2. ESO Brocklehurst: Amy had a positive outlook on it today. She didn’t give a specific number. Talked about the contract, was vague to me. Would consider if we hit the number they are looking for. Sit down with Tony to discuss feasibility of getting it back on campus. Seemed like Amy had positive vibes about that as well. 1. Sen Bunnage: Best way of coordinating that meeting with Tony? i. ESO Brocklehurst: Encourage Tony to reach out to Amy with intention of giving survey data of preliminary vote. Discuss possibility of coming back. h. Sen Tsarouhis: Budget Appeal says USGA on it three times. i. Sen Chavez: Workers’ breakfast at 6:30am. Go and interact with the workers. j. Attorney General Lynch: Just shared the Candidate Rally on our Facebook page and invited everyone who has a Facebook. Please share that post, share the event, and please come if you can. Worked really hard to put this together. Will be exciting and fun, so please show up. k. Sen Nowak: Five questions for CRU “What is Love?” If anyone is interested, please see me after. 7. Adjourned at 5:46PM.