Meeting Minutes: June 8, 2022
From: Judie Gorra, Class Secretary
Location: via Zoom
President Ken Kupchak called the meeting to order at 7:02 pm EDT.
Attending:
| Name | Role |
| Nancy Taylor Butler | Affinity Chair |
| Phyllis Rivkin Goldman | Annual Fund Rep |
| Judie Pink Gorra | Secretary & JFK Award Committee Member |
| Tom Helfrich | Class Council |
| Ken Kupchak | President |
| Susan Labarthe | History Committee |
| Steve Lewenberg | Class Council |
| Linda Cohen Meltzer | VP and Membership Chair |
| Carolyn Chauncey Neuman | Class Council |
| Michael Troner | Annual Fund Rep |
| Bruce Wagner | Immediate Past Pres. & Webmaster |
| Cindy Wolloch | JFK Memorial Award Chair |
Minutes of Previous Meeting
The Draft Minutes of the Joint Class Council and Executive
Committee Zoom Meeting of April 12, 2022, twice transmitted via email by
Bruce Wagner, subject to one reordering amendment, a shift of the
ratification paragraph from near the end of the draft minutes, to just
before the minute’s budget entry, were duly moved, seconded and
unanimously adopted, then posted online.
Meeting Purpose
The purpose of this meeting was to discuss a proposal for restructuring operations of the Class of 1964 JFK Memorial Award for Public Service to allow for an orderly transition to perpetual operations in a manner satisfactory to the Class, while remaining true to our intent. A Draft explanation and suggested perpetual structure concept was developed by our Class Award Committee, and previously transmitted to the Class Council and Executive Committee in the meeting notice and emailed reminder.
Cindy Wolloch, Chair of the Class JFK
Award Committee, presented the report and transition concept, making a
point to thank Ken, Linda and Mike for their comments prior to the
meeting. Cindy commented that it grew out of discussions with the
current Committee members and staff from Alumni Affairs.
A lively and wide-ranging discussion ensued with some of the following
comments or suggestions being offered.
Board Structure
An appropriate formalized Board
structure, with officers, is necessary for the University to recognize
it for transition. It was clear that, over time, a Board
largely/entirely composed of Award Alumni would be the best way to
ensure that our Class’s intent would continue to guide the Award
process.
Re the number of Board members: having nine Board members was considered
too many by the Committee. There are currently eight Committee members,
comprised of three Class representatives and five Awardees (“Award
Alumni”). The Award Alumni members have worked hard to expand contacts
with University academic staff. The presence of Award Alumni on the
Board appears to have inspired students to apply for the award.
Considerable discussion focused on just how to transition and what level
of continuing Class participation over what period would be most
appropriate.
How long should class members remain on the committee? A
continuation of the present three Class positions through the 60th
Reunion seemed reasonable. Various other continuing Class connections
were discussed, there being some sentiment to phase the Class transition
over a number of years beyond the 60th Reunion.
Should we make the Award Alumni committee members honorary members of
our Class and have them attend our reunion at our expense and hand the
committee over to them at our 60th reunion?
Carolyn Neuman commented that the founders of this Award have set a good
example for other classes.
Should an emeritus category be set up for the original Class members
who would serve non-voting advisory roles?
Is there consideration of adding a faculty member? The issue with
that is that of favoritism of certain departments in the selection
process.
The transparency of Awardee selection meetings was questioned.
Those meeting have been discussions re the applications which are quite
lengthy and were read previous to the meetings.
How will the Class of ’64 be apprised of the work on the Award
Committee? Should there be an explicit reporting requirement?
Ken reminded the group that we will have to put our trust in the people
we have selected to receive the award. The point of this meeting is to
approve a concept for transition. The Executive Committee of the Class
of 1964 voted and approved unanimously the concept that has been brought
forth, subject to its future approval of a final detailed plan which
addresses the questions and concerns raised.
It was suggested that the revised document be posted on the class
website and Facebook page. It was also suggested that this first be sent
by email, from Ken and Cindy, to class members explaining the process
and concepts with a link to the report and draft concept on the website
and Facebook page to educate and encourage classmate involvement. Ken
and Cindy agreed to work on this.
Tom Helfrich thought there should be more discussion about the cost
of paying for the attendance of class members and Award Alumni to the
presentation of the award. This will be discussed in the fall.
There was also interest in discussing our upcoming 60th Reunion. But
Reunion Chair Carolyn Whitman was not present, and Alumni Affairs will
not be ready to discuss the Reunion with us until after the June, 2023
Reunion.
The meeting was adjourned at 7:54 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
Judie Gorra
Secretary, Cornell Class of 1964
