During the 1994-95 year, GPSC restructured its internal committees and moved to strengthen its position as the representative organization of graduate and professional students with external groups.

The beginnings of GPSC influence in national advocacy:

In mid-May, the new GPSC President, Mitzi Forbes (Nursing), went to Washington DC to lobby for NAGPS on graduate student needs under health care reform. ASUA President, TJ Trujillo funded the trip out of his cabinet's budget. By July, the health reform proposals which were before congress held some provisions which could damage graduate students financial ability to complete their education. The Health Insurance Association of America offered to pay the expenses of sending a letter to every member of Congress outlining the concerns, and suggesting ways to address them in the context of health reform. As the Chair of the NAGPS Health Reform Task Force, Mitzi authored the letter. Eventually, the congressional session ended without passing health reform, and the issue died as national elections swept a new party into power.

The summer meeting of the NAGPS Board of Directors (BOD), which included Tom Cooley (as National Conference Coordinator) and Mitzi Forbes (as Mountain Region Coordinator), was hosted by GPSC in late June and early July. The BOD reviewed plans for the upcoming (October) National Confsolutimittee to write a proposal and lobbying packet. The result was the Teaching Assistants Benefits Package (or TAB) which was a three-point package of benefits designed to improve the conditions for TAs at the UA: 1) in-state registration waivers, 2) health benefits and 3) a teacher effectiveness training program for TA's during their first year of employment. The teacher effectiveness training program was developed by the University teaching Center, who would run the program. The initial cost of the package was budgeted to cost $3.6 million. Although it was expected that obtaining funding for the entire package would take several years, it was hoped that part of the package would be funded got 1995-96. Dr. Michael Cusanovich directed Sponsored Projects to develop a parallel plan which would implement the benefits package for GAR's (graduate RA's) as soon as it was won for GAT's. The TAB was presented to the ASA during a weekly telephone conference, and received positive comments, but the ASA never followed through with efforts to include it in their state lobbying efforts. TAB was also presented to the University Administration, and Pres. Manuel Pacheco included $1 million toward funding the package as part of the university's decision package request which was forwarded to the Arizona Board of Regents. In September the Arizona Daily Star published an editorial which referred to Teaching Assistants as " second-string" and "often deficient". GPSC President, Mitzi Forbes called the paper to protest and requested to speak to the editorial's author. The woman who wrote the editorial supported her assertions by claiming that UA Vice-President, Celestino Fernandez had stated this to her, and that "everyone knows it's true". After continued pressure to support her assertions with facts, she invited Mitzi to respond with a Guest Opinion of her own. The Guest Opinion, which defended the quality of graduate TA's, was published on the editorial page of the Star on September 20, 1994, and called for the community to support TAB. The Board of Regents approved the entire decision package which was then forwarded to the legislature. The new Arizona legislature refused to fund the University's decision package request, and the possibility of funding any part of TAB for the next year died.

Dental Insurance:

The GPSC Health Committee began to work on getting Dental Insurance for Grad Students. A member of TJ's presidential staff, Keli Farinech, was interested in working on the issue for all students, so the project was turned over to her. During the course of the year, TJ lost interest in the project, and Keli was not able to gain the cooperation of university administration without TJ's support. When it became clear that ASUA would not get dental insurance for the student body, GPSC took back the project of finding dental insurance for grad and professional students only. GPSC Vice President, Matthew Troth (BPA), found one dental plan which was available to grad students. Mitzi Forbes contacted a local dental HMO, and by April of 1995 two plans were available for UA grad students to enroll in.

Beginnings of the Professional Opportunities Development Fund:

Towards the end of the 1993-94 term, when GPSC was considering taking the grad share of ASUA funds and becoming independent, Ron Dickinson (BPA) proposed the establishment of a Professional Opportunities Development (POD) fund with a large portion of the monies. The fund would parallel the Graduate and Professional Student Travel Grant, but would be available for Masters and Professional students, who do not present at conferences, and to graduate and professional organizations who want to sponsor professional conferences or bring in speakers locally. When the effort to remove GPSC from ASUA failed, Ron rewrote the proposal as a project of ASUA. A resolution in support of POD passed both the outgoing 93-94 GPSC, and the incoming 94-95 GPSC. Mitzi and GPSC Treasurer, David Lane (NDS) sat on the ASUA Budget advisory committee. When considering the Clubs and Organization funding, ASUA VP for Clubs and Organizations, Josh Becker, claimed that $20,000 of the club funding monies went to graduate and professional clubs and organizations (most of it to fund conference travel). Mitzi proposed to Josh that he transfer that money to GPSC's control. GPSC would then use it to fund grad and professional clubs and organizations as part of the proposed Professional Opportunities Development Fund. Eventually Josh turned down the offer, and further attempts to get ASUA to establish a line item in the budget to fund POD to serve seniors, Master's and Professional Students failed.

The ASUA Budget and the "Audit":

During the summer, the GPSC was the only legislative body which was able to meet quorum, and so was the body to address the ASUA budget, which was initially presented to GPSC on July 20th. In reviewing the ASUA budget proposal, GPSC secretary, Ted Glenn (Science), found an apparent $50,000 discrepancy/ mathematical error. In light of the error, GPSC unanimously voted down the budget. The task of reviewing the ASUA budget and working with ASUA to correct problems was passed on to the GPSC Finance Committee.

Chaired by Ansel Kanemoto (Engineering), and including all the BPA reps (Matthew Troth, Kyle Pennington and Alex Sugiyama), the committee took on the unofficial designation, "BPA goons", and spearheaded GPSC's efforts to improve ASUA's budgeting procedures. During this time rumors surfaced that some units within ASUA in the past year had overspent monies and had broken UA policies for authorized expenditures. The 'goons' asked ASUA for information which would justify the budget requests of the various units within ASUA, and for the ASUA expenditures of 1993-94. Previous ASUA budgets had been planned in a haphazard fashion and had been poorly tracked. ASUA had not been implemented a system to track past expenditures, and it took the ASUA Treasurer about a month to gather the requested information. During this time ASUA President, TJ Trujillo submitted a budget twice more. Each time there were mathematical errors or discrepancies in the budget, and each time GPSC unanimously voted it down. Stating that even though past budgeting procedures within ASUA were inadequate, there was no justification to continue the practice of failing to properly handle an excess of half a million dollars of student monies every year. Eventually GPSC stated it would refuse to pass any budget which did not include monies to fund an audit at the end of the fiscal year. ASUA President Trujillo was opposed to the idea of an audit. Matthew Troth represented GPSC in working with ASUA to negotiate a settlement to the impasse, and proposed a compromise of requiring an internal accountant's report (IAR) rather than an audit. During the GPSC meeting of August 31st, GPSC was set to discuss and vote on the fourth ASUA budget proposal. When it became apparent that the budget would fail again, TJ Trujillo surprised everyone and agreed the IAR. The IAR would be funded out of any additional bookstore revenues if they became available, and would be funded out of his own presidential account if they did not. GPSC passed the budget, and ASUA began the process of improving it's budgeting and tracking procedures.

During the course of the ASUA budget negotiations, President TJ Trujillo decided to apply pressure to GPSC to pass the budget by freezing all accounts but his own, citing his position as Chief Financial Officer as authority to do so. Both legislative bodies disagreed with his interpretation of those duties, claiming that since the legislative funding is guaranteed in the constitution, the ASUA president cannot freeze their funds, and in fact, s/he cannot spend any funds her/himself without legislative authorization. This issue was not settled at this time, and would become a source of major conflict in the Spring. Later in the fall, President Trujillo decided that he wanted all areas of ASUA to submit goals and bimonthly reports to him, and he was refusing to sign requisitions for units which were not up-to-date on their reports, again citing his authority as chief financial officer.

Oiling the Internal Workings of GPSC:

As part of an effort to improve the inner workings of GSPC, Ansel Kanemoto (Engineering) forwarded a number of amendments to the GPSC Bylaws which would clarify the job descriptions of the GPSC officers and raise the requirements for GPSC reps to receive their stipends. A few of the officers resisted the efforts of the Constitution Committee to rewrite the bylaws affecting their office, and so GPSC Vice-President, Matthew Troth (BPA) shepherded Ansel's project through the Executive Board. It took some time, but both efforts were finally successful. In October, Matthew Troth proposed a consolidation of the GPSC committees which would reduce the number of committees from 12 to 5. The Executive Board proposed the 5 new committees, and GPSC passed the new committee structure as part of its standing rules. By the end of the fall semester there was still no budget passed for GPSC. Some disagreement existed between the executive officers who believed it was the Treasurer's responsibility to produce the budget, and the Treasurer who believed his responsibility was to track expenditures, not propose a budget. All appropriations until this time had either been passed individually by the GPSC or by the Executive Board. Ansel proposed that the GPSC finance committee draft a budget procedure for GPSC's internal budgeting. Eventually Mitzi and Kyle took on the task of producing a preliminary budget, but a specific budgeting procedure was not presented during the year.

Graduate Student Housing and Christopher City:

During the summer of 1994, the deplorable conditions of the UA family student housing complex again became news. Residents had complained for many years about the infestation of roaches, and the occasional sewer backups. When some residents finally complained to the County health department, the county officials blamed residents for the roach infestation claiming that some of them were not clean enough. Many of these residents are international students from cultures where cleanliness is a high priority, and they were deeply embarrassed by the public accusation. Eventually it was found that the backups in the sewer systems had caused some of the carpet pads to rot setting up a haven for roach infestation which was impossible to eliminate no matter how hard the residents cleaned their apartments. A task force on Christopher City was formed by the Student Affairs Division. Chaired by Dr. Robert Wrenn, it was assigned to address the immediate health and safety needs of Christopher City, and look for long-term solutions to the problems there. Initial efforts focused on fixing the complex's sewer system and replacing pads and carpeting in the worst apartments, and fixing faulty air conditioning. Dr. Saundra Taylor agreed to allow GPSC to appoint a GPSC rep who was also a Christopher City resident, Paul Funk (Agriculture), to the task force. Many residents complained that poor management of Christopher City and neglect on the part of the University had resulted in the deterioration of the complex, and wanted to take over management and form a cooperative. By late fall it became clear that the task force would recommend tearing down Christopher City instead, and rebuilding. However, the recommendation was for significantly fewer units and an increased cost in rent. In response to the immediacy of the report, and at Paul's request, Mitzi wrote a letter to the Wrenn task force outlining guidelines which the University should follow in deciding the future of family student housing. These principles included maintaining the number of units available, affordability of the rental units for families living on student employee wages, and supporting the sense of diversity and community which the current residents felt. The GPSC and the Undergraduate Senate both passed a resolution supporting these basic principles.

While family student housing was a pressing issue, there was also a desire on the part of some grad students for graduate housing for single students. The issue was brought to Dr. Saundra Taylor, Dr. Adela Allen and Dr. Michael Cusanovich during several meetings which occurred during December of 1994 and Spring of 1995. At a meeting with GPSC on April 20, 1995, Dr. Cusanovich discussed several possible ways to meet accomplish this goal. Dr. Cusanovich suggested that GPSC survey grad students to see if there was enough support for the issue to justify the investment, and to bring him a proposal on the issue.

Childcare, Social Activities and Advocacy rolled into one:

In September the new Campus Childcare Coordinator came to meet with ASUA President TJ Trujillo and GPSC President Mitzi Forbes to ask for $150,000 in funding. She proposed to use the money to subsidize childcare for low income student parents. At the time, ASUA was not expecting enough revenues to provide the funding, and GPSC did not have enough to assist. Mitzi returned to the council and challenged the Finance and Student Affairs Committees to 'get creative' and try to come up with ways to find $150,000 to help fund childcare initiatives in the future. Some ideas had come from other universities where the grad student organizations raise money by sponsoring social hours. During this time, the GPSC Communications Committee was developing a 1-page survey which would go to all grad students in the Graduate Informer. As part of the survey, grad students were asked what issues they would like to see GPSC address. The usual major issues (GA benefits, housing, financial aid) received support, but a surprising finding was the desire of grad students for GPSC to sponsor social events. At the same time, Dr. Adela Allen, Associate Dean of the Graduate College, and GPSC advisor, proposed that GPSC establish a monthly grad student night at Gentle Ben's, a favorite student hangout in the district just outside the University entrance. The owner of Gentle Ben's was a friend of Dr. Allen's, and she approached the owner about the idea. Gentle Ben's was enthused about the plan, but construction in the area delayed moving forward on the proposal during the remainder of the 94-95 term.

Campbell Commission and working to get the grad student 'voice' at the table:

During the Spring of 1994 the Arizona Board of Regents (ABOR) responded to pressure by the Arizona Students Association to investigate and take into account the costs of education when setting tuition from year-to-year, not just the requests of the University Presidents. A commission, chaired by Regent Rudy Campbell, was charged by the ABOR to investigate the issue and make a recommendation to the entire ABOR by December of 1994. The Commission was composed of 3 ABOR members, the outgoing student regent, Spencer Insolia, the University Presidents and the Student Body Presidents from all three Arizona Universities. Spencer wanted to have in-state registration waivers taken away from GA's and given to undergraduates, and he placed that issue on the Campbell Commission agenda. In addition the Commission was set to investigate the possibility of differential tuition (charging higher tuition for graduate students). Mitzi started to attend Campbell Commission meetings to represent graduate student interests on these issues. Although it is a rare occurance, the student body president at ASU was a graduate student this year, and his presence on the Campbell Commission was helpful. The argument was successfully made that differential tuition is based on a faulty assumption that graduate students have lucrative jobs waiting for them when they graduate. This is not true for those in the arts, the humanities, the social and behavioral sciences and those who intend to stay in academia. Charging differential tuition would unfairly disadvantage lower and middle income students from seeking graduate education as well, and harm diversity goals. Some of the Regents also were of the opinion that all or most grad students were given positions as GA's (at the whim of faculty)and are well supported. UA Interim Graduate College Dean, Dr. Patricia Van Metre and Mitzi had the figures at hand (due to the previous year's GPSC survey of GA's) to inform the commission that this is not the case. Only about 1/3 of UA grad students are GA's. Out-of- state GA's are state employees, crucial to the quality of education and research at the UA. It is unfair to pay them so little to teach this state's undergraduates and do this state's research and then charge them out-of-state tuition (which amounts to approximately 20% of their pay. Eventually the proposal to take out-of-state tuition waivers from GA's was dropped. Before the commission completed it's meetings, however, it became very frustrating to sit in the meetings and feel one does not have a 'voice' at the table of policy makers.

In December of 1994 and January of 1995, Mitzi and Matthew started a round of meetings with UA administrators. A major goal of the meetings was to convince the administrators that the graduate student 'voice' should be represented on all committees and task forces of the UA, whether standing or ad hoc, which addressed any issue of concern to students; and that GPSC, should be asked to appoint those students. Following this round of meetings, administrators increased their requests to GPSC for the appointment of grad students to UA committees.