I like the idea of getting rid of the distinction between annual budgets and SPRs since functionally, annual budgets have ceased to work that way. I think, though, that with this change it would be good to clarify that multiple events can still be submitted as a group and that an organization would not have to submit a separate budget for every event that they plan.

It would be nice if we can submit the reimbursement request online or suggesting people submit it with an additional electronic version of the receipts if it is for things bought online since it might be clearer to look at.

In the previous guidelines, you could submit a budget for the following year by the last Friday in April of the current year (ie, submit a 2019-2020 budget by next Friday, Apr 26th) for approval by Aug 15th. Is that option still available? It doesn't appear in the new table of deadlines and it would be a nice option for welcome events held between the start of the semester (Aug 29th) and the first budget approval deadline of Sept 15th. Thanks!

It would be helpful if the deadline for submitting reimbursement requests was clarified. On lines 60-62, it states "Events funded through GPSA Fall/Spring budget allocations must occur during the academic year, defined for GPSAFC purposes as starting the first day of graduate student classes in August and ending the day of commencement in May." The event must be held before commencement, but when does the reimbursement need to be submitted? Do we still have 30 days after the event to submit?

Also, the table of deadlines on page 3 does not seem to be accurate. For instance, last year the form to submit summer budgets wasn't even available by the last Friday in March, the listed due date. These deadlines should be adjusted to reflect the actual dates forms are available and due on OrgSync. Or if the deadlines are flexible (which would be preferable), this can also be represented. It was also helpful last spring when messages from Beth Yarze went out on OrgSync announcing the opening of the budget periods.

I also noticed on page 3 that the spring budget submission for the following academic year has been removed. I know one of the other changes is we can now submit multiple budgets, but it would be good for the spring budget submission to be reinstated as the next budget deadline isn't until the end of August and not reviewed until September 15th, so organizations cannot hold events in August after classes start (since this beyond the time frame of summer budgets but before the next budget submission) and organizations that hold events in early September won't know if their budget is approved until mid-September. Our organization always submits our annual budget in the spring so we can form committees to plan events for the following academic year. Flexibility is good, but that spring deadline is crucial for our and likely other organizations.

Thanks for making these updates. They clarify some points that have confused me in the past.

These changes look great, thank you for working on them.

The proposed cap on GPSAFC-funded alcohol expenditures would effectively eliminate the ability of the Society of Wine & Jurisprudence (SWJ) to hold campus events. The organization relies heavily on GPSAFC funds, with only a small $250-allocation from Cornell Law School.

SWJ is a student organization whose mission is to educate the greater Cornell community on wines from around the world, and to encourage the appreciation of local and world-class wines through meetings and social events. SWJ also looks to engage its members in professional etiquette training and various other professional development opportunities where knowledge of wines can be helpful for networking and career events. All of our events are open to the entire graduate community, and many students across the Cornell graduate programs have attended our educational wine tastings, as well as our casual gatherings.

Given SWJ’s financial dependency on GPSAFC funds, we ask that the clause limiting alcohol expenditures not be passed. It would mark the end of our organization, which has long been enjoyed by students not only as a break from the typical rigors of graduate school, but also as a unique opportunity to learn about wine. If the clause must be passed, we would then like to ask for an exception for student organizations whose missions are intrinsically related to wine.

- Kimberly Lee, President of SWJ 2018-19
- Zora Franicevic, Incoming Co-President of SWJ 2019-20
- Johnna Purcell, Incoming Co-President of SWJ 2019-20

I echo everything Kimberly Lee has submitted on behalf of the Society of Wine & Jurisprudence. The club is very helpful. I learned things, made new connections, and had fun during a stressful time in law school.

The law school is severely lacking in social organizations and the Society of Wine and Jurisprudence has been successful at filling that gap. It would be a shame for them to lose their funding because of this regulation, which would also impair other law school organizations' abilities to host similar social events, since the organizations depend primarily on GPSAFC funding. We request that the clause limiting alcohol expenditures not be approved.

The alcohol expenditure limitation would be devastating to the budget of the Society of Wine and Jurisprudence. SWJ serves as an important role in the extremely stressful law school environment by serving as one of the best ways for first year students to get to know upperclass students and their fellow peers. As a naturally introverted person who does not enjoy the bar scene, there are not many other mostly social opportunities to get to know upper class students that do not involve going to a bar. The other clubs at the law school, though important, are all much more inevitably linked with law and therefore do not provide the same kind of escape and easy socializing. Losing the SWJ would be a terrible loss for Cornell Law, and the grad student community as a whole.
Andrew Melendez, incoming treasurer, Society of Wine and Jurisprudence.

SWJ is one of those few organizations on campus that offers an escape from the daily grind and allows students to enjoy their time here in Ithaca. Effectively eliminating SWJ by limiting alcohol expenditures, would be devastating, not just for the organization, but for the larger graduate school community.
-Brandon Hanley, 1L

The Cornell Law School Society of Wine and Jurisprudence is an informative and cross-disciplinary organization that fills a niche spot within the Law School's extracurricular activities. Applying an arbitrary cap across the board on alcohol expenditures would disproportionately impact this group, effectively eliminating it. Please reconsider.

The proposed limitation on alcohol expenditure would severely restrict the budget of the Society of Wine and Jurisprudence, one of Cornell Law's organizations. Not only is SJW an amazing way for students to socialize and upperclass students to get to meet their fellow peers, but it is crucial to further our knowledge on wine. With most law students going to big law firms, it is necessary to be able to pair certain wines and food together and to know various details about wines when at dinners with partners and firm clients. By going forward with the proposed restriction and effectively eliminating SJW from Cornell Law, the GPSAFC would be harming law students' careers.

The proposed clause limiting the allocation of funds for alcohol would effectively withhold finances from the Law School's Society for Wine & Jurisprudence (SWJ) that are necessary for the organization's continued existence.

This organization serves a number of wonderful functions in the Law School community. It facilitates a great deal of social interaction within the Law School, particularly among first-year students. For these students, SWJ events provide opportunities not only to cultivate new, strong friendships in an unfamiliar place, but also to begin constructing a network of contacts within the legal community that will be invaluable to them throughout their careers.

The knowledge that SWJ seeks to impart is of equal importance to the community-building impact of the organization. By educating students on the evolution of jurisprudence concerning wine production and regulation, this organization serves a unique educational function that no curriculum in the Law School currently reflects. Additionally, a general knowledge of wines and wine etiquette can be extraordinarily helpful in greater legal and professional communities. Early on in one's legal career, social aptitude is necessary to securing gainful employment. It is of great importance that law students have an opportunity to cultivate and/or refine certain skills before the stakes become too high.

As a rising 2L who deeply enjoyed and benefited from SWJ events throughout the year, I hope that the proposed limitation on alcohol expenditures will be struck.

I am a member of the society of wine and jurisprudence (SJW) and I am writing to express my concern about the limitations to alcohol spending. While I understand the inclination to limit this sort of spending for many clubs, it simply does not make sense for clubs like SJW that have a legitimate educational purpose surrounding their spending on alcohol. If this proposal is enacted it would drastically limit SJW’s ability to operate as a club. I therefore request that this proposal either be eliminated in its entirety or be amended to allow for exceptions for clubs like SJW.

The proposed spending cap on allocation of funding for alcoholic beverages should be struck as it would effectively eliminate the Society of Wine and Jurisprudence ("SJW") at Cornell Law School. SWJ is not only a rare social reprieve for law students, but SWJ is one of the few, if only, organization that allows students from the law school to co-mingle with other members of the graduate and professional community in such a way to increase graduate collegiality.

The proposed cap would be majorly detrimental to the Society of Wine and Jurisprudence (SWJ) at Cornell Law School. SWJ is a fantastic organization that encourages discussing legal issues against the backdrop of a collegial environment. The cap would effectively restrict SWJ's activities, and this is a harsh message against small, collaborative groups like SWJ. Please reconsider the cap.

The proposed limitation on alcohol expenditures for student organizations would be unreasonably restrictive on student organizations and would cripple if not effectively eliminate certain student organizations such as the Society of Wine & Jurisprudence (SWJ). Our organization hosts several events throughout the year which are attended by students and professors. At these events we discuss wines from different regions, brands, colors, etc. These are great events that law school students have come to enjoy as a part of their experience here at Cornell and it gives them the opportunity to engage with professors in a more comfortable environment. At best, this proposed measure would stand in the way of these events that we've hosted. At worst, it will be the end of the organization. For this reason, I implore you to vote against this measure.

I join the concerns of the other members of the Cornell Law School Society of Wine and Jurisprudence below. The clause regarding the allocation of funds for alcoholic beverages and a spending cap on alcohol would have a uniquely adverse impact on the Society of Wine and Jurisprudence. The club, which has existed for numerous years now, is not only cherished by the students of Cornell Law School, but the numerous other graduate students that attend its events. At the very least, as the current and future presidents of the Society have stated, there should be an exception from this clause for the Society of Wine and Jurisprudence.

I share the concern of my colleagues that this proposal would effectively destroy the Society of Wine and Jurisprudence. The law school community, and the larger Cornell student body, values this organization as one that is enjoyable and educational. Moreover, its events are helpful as we enter a profession in which alcohol might often be a point of discussion. I encourage this cap to be reconsidered, or at the very least, I encourage that there be an exception for organizations such as SWJ.

I echo all of the concerns of my classmates below regarding the proposed alcohol cap. Additionally, I note that SWJ frequently collaborates with hospitality students to host events. The events provide unique professional development opportunities for these students. For example, two of SWJ’s events this past year were wine tastings where a hospitality student applied what she learned in class to teach attendees about wines from various regions. Destroying SWJ will adversely affect the entire graduate community, as well as the hospitality students who benefit from the opportunity to collaborate with the organization.

In line 81/82, the procedure of maintaining sign-ins for a year will create a needless paper trails. Further the sign in sheets do not truly help with determining the size of the events in years to come, as events change due to student interests. Additionally, on line 32, it is redundant to submit a budget proposal, and then to ask for another one two weeks before the event. By submitting additional information two weeks before the event, groups will not yet know all of the details if their budget has not been approved. Please fix and clarify so that it is not redundant.

I echo the concerns of my fellow students who are concerned about how the proposed regulation will effectively destroy an organization that does important and crucial work for the law school community.

Headers & Footers – please be sure the final document has headers and footers on each page, that clearly indicate the title, page # of total page #s, and adoption date.
Line 4 – shouldn’t this read, “…for the current academic year (Aug-May).” Since all clubs have to register each fall?
Line 40 – add “events.cornell.edu” when referring to University Events Calendar.
Line 40 – What is the “GPSAFC Event Calendar” and how does one link to it from the University Events Calendar?
Lines 67-77 – I applaud the inclusion of additional Cornell properties/Campuses. I would suggest for “Auxiliary Cornell properties” that you modify the definition to include Cornell-leased properties, along with Cornell-owned properties, as much of the property in NYC, and even in Ithaca is long-term leased, rather than actually owned by Cornell.
Lines 227, 281-282, 305 – Can we PLEASE re-institute the generic GPSAFC@Cornell.edu email address, so there aren’t messages about funding appeals only being sent to the current chair’s personal email?
Line 253 – The timeframe should be 2019-20
Line 254 – perhaps the wording should say, “…Appropriations Committee, may re-evaluate…” instead of using “should”
Line 465 – I think it would be safe to eliminate “Zeppelin” travel. Have we EVER had to reimburse a speaker for a zeppelin flight?

The proposed limitation on alcohol expenditures is needlessly restrictive and would effectively eliminate organizations, such as the Society of Wine and Jurisprudence, whose missions are intrinsically tied to alcohol. SWJ provides unique opportunities to relax and socialize with fellow law students and other members of the graduate community. It also fills an important niche, allowing Cornell Law students to develop their understanding and appreciation for wines produced locally and globally. This matters, particularly in a profession where networking and client dinners play an important role. Moving forward with this proposed restriction would be detrimental not only to the social atmosphere of the law school and wider graduate community, but would also be detrimental to an important aspect of law students' future careers. Please strike this limitation, or at the very least, amend it to include language that would exempt organizations whose missions are inextricably linked with alcohol, such as the Society of Wine and Jurisprudence.

The proposed limitation on alcohol expenditures is needlessly restrictive and would effectively eliminate organizations, such as the Society of Wine and Jurisprudence, whose missions are intrinsically tied to alcohol.
This organization has provided amazing opportunities for law students to build community and learn throughout the past year. The ability to have a non-legal informative activity has built a further appreciation for the local area and its connections to the larger world related to viniculture while also providing a place for professional growth, particularly learning skills and knowledge that can be required for effective client counseling and networking in many legal spaces. Further, this has allowed for cross-class year mentorship and connections to be formed. Moving forward with this proposed restriction would essentially destroy this organization which has played a fun and informative role in many of the law students' lives, whether they were active members of the group or attended one of the many wonderful events throughout the academic year. Please strike this limitation, or at the very least, amend it to include language that would exempt organizations whose missions are inextricably linked with alcohol, such as the Society of Wine and Jurisprudence.

LIne 35a. To obtain 300 USD or more in funding for an event, additional detailed information, including but not limited to previous receipts, quotes, budget breakdown, time and location of the event, number of attendees should be submitted at the time of budget submission. Furthermore, the organization must submit the event details (i.e. time, location, program speakers, topic descriptions) to University Events Calendar and provide a link to the GPSAFC Event Calendar two (2) weeks before the event. For events receiving less than 300 USD in GPSAFC funding, detailed budget breakdowns and Event Calendar submission are recommended but not required.

---The section does not make sense to me---This is under making a budget request--so the group is supposed to submit event details AND the calendar submission two weeks prior to the event? How do they submit this if the event has not been approved? Why would they post to the calendar when it hasn’t been approved? Do they submit this after they have received allocation? And to whom do they submit this to? For events less than $300 they don’t have to do this?

If this is a requirement AFTER they have received funding to receive reimbursement---then that should be made clear under #7, line 58?