JCR Open Meeting Minutes Meeting on 3.2.2022 at 17.00 UK time ________________ List of Committee Members Names, initials and pronouns Role and * to mark non-attendance Jamie Charles, JC, she/her President George Stokes, GS, he/him Vice President James O’Garro, JO, he/him Treasurer Jacob Hougie, JH, he/him Secretary Keelan Shorten, KS, he/him Welfare Vasilisa Grachova, VG, she/they* Welfare Ben Palmer-Welch, BPW, he/him Welfare James Walker, JW, he/him Academic and Access Kitty Joyce, KJ, she/her* Green Yifei Zheng, YZ, he/him Catering, Accommodation and Facilities Matthew Wadey, MW, he/him Sports and Societies Gosia Szakowska, GoSz, she/her Ents Muhammad Mahmoud, MM, he/him Ethnic Minorities Neve Baskar, NB, she/her* International Students Emma Gibson, EG, she/they/he LGBTQ+ Lucy Trusler, LT, she/her Gender Equalities Izaac Mammadov, IM, he/him Computing ________________ Agenda Summary of Key Points 3 0. Administrative Matters – Apologies 4 1. President’s Request for Y6 (GS) 4 Summary of Key Points 1. After a long discussion and an aborted vote, the JCR voted against the President’s Request for Y6. ________________ ________________ 0. Administrative Matters – Apologies Meeting begins at 17.04.[1] ________________ 1. President’s Request for Y6 (GS) JC handed over the chair to GS. GS explained that at the last open meeting, the JCR President’s Room Policy was amended, allowing them to request an alternative prize room, requiring Open Meeting approval.[2] GS announced he had received a request under this Active Policy from JC for Y6, which college are happy with. JC explained that living on a ground floor room, with easy access would make her feel uncomfortable and unsafe and that she’d undergo the normal room ballot if the motion didn’t pass. Y6 would ensure that she’d be able to store necessary JCR equipment in a big room. Y6 is affordable, for the adequate storage space, and is accessible for storage. JC noted that historically the JCR President’s room used to be up tall and winding stairs, which would have been even more dangerous than carrying anything up to Y6. Kit Edgecliffe-Johnson (KEJ) argued that voting for this would set a precedent to allow the president to get whichever room in college they want, which would be unfair. KEJ added that other storage options are available. GS noted that this vote is on a specific case, not the principal, which was voted on at the last meeting. JC noted that her choice was to ensure good storage. Frederick Sehgal asked if the next most senior JCR Officer could take O0. JC noted that, this had already been discussed, in theory the Vice-President could also be guaranteed a large room. GS noted that O0 would go onto the prize ballot if this request was passed. Eleanor Soanes noted that the JCR President is elected. KEJ noted other people’s rooms could be used, but JC noted that this would change responsibility for the storage. Eden Dudley (ED) asked if there was a broader issue with O0’s security, which applies to other potential occupants and noted that Y6 may be just as noisy as O0. JC noted that comfort in privacy is important, but that O0 has little privacy, and that the noise from O0 comes from the gate slamming.[3] YZ pondered why this was all such a big deal.[4] Toby Proudfoot (TP) asked what the JCR need to store. GS replied that stash, alcohol for events and more need to be stored. KEJ noted that this is mostly during fresher’s week and that, in most years, this is for minimal time, but JC noted that stash is often stored for longer. Lachlan Chavasse noted that it was bad faith to change an Active Policy for immediate personal use, but JC noted that this speed was needed to ensure the Room Ballot system works. MW noted that the problem of the noise from the gate onto Benet Street could be solved by College by adding latches or sound pollution. JC noted that college is looking into this, but that it is complicated and that the noise is not the primary concern.[5] KEJ asked if next years prize winners should vote separately, but GS but GS noted that this is not the procedure under the Active Policy, and it seemed both improper and unfeasible to single out only next years prize winners from the whole community. KEJ asked why this should be decided now. GS responded that it was important information for the Room Ballot. Alex Mann (AM) noted that O0 is important for storage, since the JCR President is going to be responsible for storage and that only a large room can ensure safety. O0 is also a reward for the JCR President and that the question is whether granting other rooms is not much more of a reward. GoSz emphasised that rewarding the president was important given the amount of work they do for the JCR and that O0 wouldn’t be much of a reward for JC. TP noted that the JCR President is not given free choice, but that Y6 is the best room and that there are other equally useful rooms. Ben Cliff argued that living in O0 is no different to living in a house with a front door, but JC added that there are personal reasons that make O0 particularly stressful for her. ED argued that all rooms in college need to be safe for all people, rather than emphasising JC’s need not to live in O0.[6] JOG noted that all that’s happened is that two equally good prize rooms are being swapped and noted that any changes to rooms, however necessary, would not be able to take place before JC would live there, due to the difficulty of working on listed buildings.[7] GS decided it was appropriate to begin voting and put a link in the meeting chat. Shortly after this, IM noted that the voting link was shared beyond the meeting chat and JC noted this went beyond the principle of proxy voting in the constitution. George Birch noted that the language used to encourage people to vote was aggressive. AM noted that it was necessary for the meeting chair to rule whether proxy votes did not count and that this could be challenged by a later Open Meeting. GS noted it was near impossible to determine how many people were actually in the meeting.[8] GS ruled as chair that the vote should be re-run in light of the link having been shared outside of the meeting and the charged language with which it had been shared, especially since the constitution’s principle that proxy voting should be done in advance was contradicted by attempts to vote by non-attendees, who had not listened to the meeting. AM noted that the constitution does not cover online voting, which has led to this ambiguity.[9] IM noted that the principle of the constitution should be followed. GS noted that people that had left were being told they need to rejoin, so would not be disenfranchised. Some asked if an open vote could take place after the minutes had been published, but IM noted that this could be done by petition and referendum if people wished to challenge the Open Meeting’s decision. Vote to accept the JCR President’s request for Y6: 19 votes in favour, 24 votes no, 3 abstentions.[10] ________________ Meeting ends at 18.08[11] ________________ [1] This meeting started quickly pretty, with a rapid influx of quorum and a total of 48 people coming! Truly, JCR democracy was out in full force [2] The amended policy was sent out in the last Corporeal [3] I believe it was at this point that I got fed up of typing O0 [4] The glorious leader of CAF, as ever, eloquently expresses everything which is on the minds of his subservient subjects: https://www.facebook.com/CAFfess-102945052297886 [5] I believe it was a this point that I realised that the Meeting Chat was going on, but then immediately decided I could not minute two meetings at once [6] I don’t even know what was said in the meeting chat - it went far too quickly, but it looked pretty lively [7] As we conclude this discussion, post-facto Jacob would like to note that, after speaking to a current post-grad who previously was on the JCR, this may have been the most active JCR Open Meeting in Recent memory. [8] I wish I had a recording of this meeting - I honestly don’t remember the order of events and it took me 30 seconds too long to realise something of importance was going on, so I’m not sure if these minutes reflect the order of events [9] It’s a good job that the constitution is still under review eh? [10] Congratulations to GS and IM who valiantly took on the job of checking the list of votes against the attendees list and ensuring that duplicate/imposter votes were not counted [11] I promised a short meeting, I’m so sorry.