No, Ryan, there is no pig tonight: your Student Council shmive shmog
11:23 And we are adjourned. Hey, that was fun. Alright, we’ve got some things to clarify later and we’ve got a lot of things to follow up on. Stay tuned, kiddies, and see what sort of magic we can perform.
It’ll be cool. I’m talking rabbit out of a hat kind of cool.
11:21 Williams addresses Ingram’s question about perceived confusion at the GSSF hearings. The hearing structure will be reviewed to consider ways to eliminate any confusion whatsoever.
11:12 SSFC Chair Williams: SSFC will be going over break-down of policies and things.
Here are some of the ideas:
Campus Services Fund–create funds to pay for a service that they decide they want on campus.
Reapportionment of Finance and SACGB to be under SSFC. They’ll sort of be in the same branch and they’ll de-limb a few of the ASM Octopus’s limbs.
Considering possible GSSF cap. UW is only school where student govt can charge students whatever it wants.
College Student Council Fund–possibility of individual college’s student councils getting their funding streams through SSFC
Possible internal budget process changes–let’s face it. It’s a clunky mother of a process.
Review of GSSF wage changes. Currently it’s set at $9.19 an hour for no discernible reason.
Looking at SSFC Vice Chair job description to change it after the position received a hefty raise.
There will be a GSSF mixer on Monday to listen to outside ideas for process changes.
11:11 Motion to end Q&A. That passes. Onto Chair Williams.
11:08 I’m just going to throw this out there: If the seats are apportioned based on enrollment, aren’t we just arguing over who gets the privilege of doing some math equations?
Hey, let’s make an equation! That always works well!
11:07 Williams: if your role is to interpret our bylaws, then wouldn’t you say you are bound to obey them?
11:06 Gosselin asks question basically making the point that SJ only has the power to run the elections, not decide what gets voted on.
Oh, man. And here I thought this meeting might end early.
11:03 This is getting good. What we have here is a good old-fashioned disagreement on bylaw interpretations. Ingram asks Darby if he thinks the bylaws need clarification.
Darby: if the committee feels that the bylaw is unconstitutional then they can so rule.
Ingram: how would a bylaw change be unconstitutional if the power is based on precedence.
Darby: I’m sure there are ways that SJ could veto that bylaw change.
11:01 Gosselin asks Darby if he sees SJ as a law-making body. Darby concedes that SJ cannot pass laws like Council can.
Williams asks Darby what makes him think SJ has the right to reapportion the Council seats. Darby says SJ runs the elections and there is precedence.
10:57 Student Judiciary Chief Justice Darby: Hands out proposed bylaw changes.
Says most of them are deadline clarifications. Changed the leadership in the SEC so you don’t have to be a justice to serve as the Chair or Vice Chair of that committee. Also eliminated parts of the bylaws that address summary dismissals.
More importantly: SJ reapportioned the Student Council seats based on the fact that SJ did it 4 years ago and it must be reviewed every 4 years. Made reapportionment decisions based on enrollment figures compared to when ASM began.
10:54 Vice Chair Templeton’s report: He’s awesome because he has 350 followers on Twitter. Gee. Thanks, Tom.
The Building Unity United Council meeting just recently went well. Well attended.
10:52 More questions for Junger about the MoU regarding the seg fee sweep and the upcoming meeting with the administration.
10:48 Junger reminds us all there will be a special meeting next week. Now report of the SACGB.
Chair Ziebell: Space allocations are done for the next two years starting in June, I think. The Board will be working on refining the allocation process for the next time around. Saw plans for the upcoming computer lab. 12 i-Macs will be going in on the 4th floor. She will be seeing furniture options in a couple weeks.
10:42 Shared Governance Chair Hanley: trying to fill seats in the newly-created SITIAC. Hanley will also be sitting on a committee herself.
Hanley has had to remove a few appointees for lack of accountability to the Shared Gov committee and, thus, students in general.
She has not had the Seg Fee focus group yet because some haven’t responded. Will have it within the week. We’ll keep you filled in on this. It’s about howSeg Fees are used to pay for UW building projects.
Also, her interview with me is coming soon. Send any questions you might have for Hanley that you’d like me to ask her to email@example.com.
10:40 Nominations Board Chair Sharpe: We’re almost done with filling vacancies. We are gonna look at some of the qualifications for some of the positions.
Noms Board will be appointing SSFC members for the next session.
10:36 Ingram asks if Johnson heard anything about a stumbling block in getting SAFRA passed because it has been added to the healthcare bill.
Johnson said he was told that was being done because the supporters of SAFRA don’t think they have enough votes. But this could make people vote against SAFRA b/c they are against the healthcare bill. Sounds like a clusterf….
10:34 Johnson also met with student leaders of other Big Ten schools at a conference. Talked about was the idea of a body made up of the student leaders of all the Big Ten schools to lobby for common interests at the United States Student Association national level.
10:30 Legislative Affairs Chair Johnson: Been to D.C. to meet with some legislators about the SAFRA. They are open to the idea of reforming financial aid. Even got to speak directly with Senator Kohl.
Wants to change the work-study policies to provide an actual positive for students.
Also spoke with legislators about a drive to increase funding for more energy education and energy jobs.
10:27 Finance Chair Beemsterboer: Okay he talks really fast and I had to wait for this site to update so I missed the monetary figures. What I can tell you is this guy is always meeting with and talking to RSO leaders and approving grants and the such. He’s a busy guy, and we love that he does a great job giving student orgs the money to do what they need to do.
10:23 Diversity Chair Olikara: working closely with Damon Williams to create the Diversity and Climate Committee. Student Leader dialogues will be next week to really start a good campus discussion. Meeting will be next Thursday, the 18th. Check out the goals of the dialogues at the ASM website under ASM Profiles.
10:18 Academic Affairs Chair Zinn: working with professors and such. Formed proposal to create a shared governance committee to deal with textbook price issues. Also holding a financial aid event to help students understand how to get the money they need and meet with advisors.
Zinn will be bringing the committee proposal to Shared Governance Committee tomorrow. Hanley thinks Zinn should use more advertising money to spread the word about the financial aid workshop. Good call.
10:14 Fergus will be looking to work with Chair Hanley to revive a committee that deals with student wages and such.
Manes: Does UW actually match up to $2 million from the government? Doesn’t a lot of work-study money not end up in students hands?
Fergus asserts that he will look into why the university matches this money and not other forms of aid.
Hanley sounds a little peeved that she was unaware of any such student wage committee.
10:13 Chair Fergus on starting up the Financial Aid Investigation Campaign.
10:10 Now to have the first vote on the Union naming ballot initiative. No questions, no debate. Let’s vote!
Passes unanimously. Time for reports of the committees.
10:09 Heywood: Have you considered calling the site anything other than Madison Property Rating? It’s too similar to Madison Property Management.
Templeton calls the question. That passes easily.
10:06 Gosselin: This project already has been decided on in the past session. The bluprint exists. What’s included here is just a proposal to move the money designated to run this site day-to-day this year, which is not needed because the site doesn’t exist, and move it into a line item to pay for the creation of the website. Got that? You better.
10:04 The legislation fails. Moving on to the fund transfer to create the Madison Property Rating website.
10:01 The amendment passes. Chairs will lose only 20% of their stipend.
Question called on the legislation.
9:59 Zinn: “For the love of god, somebody please call the question.”
Someone calls the question.
9:54 Ingram: hey, I’m a researcher and it’s not enough for me to go into the lab and do experiments. I’ve got to write reports on what I do. There does need to be reports. The Chair reports are not for the student body, they are for me. I appreciate hearing what’s going on. Yes, chair reports should be first at meetings.
9:52 Beemsterboer: I approve grants. That would be the one sentence in my reports. It’s not worth my time. Talk to me at my meeting and I’ll tell what got approved.
9:49 Junger: Hey! Let’s move Chair reports to the beginning of meetings so we can get through them. Then, you can all know what the committees are doing.
Chair Hanley: Hey, when I give my chair report people are not even paying attention. They’re messing around on their laptops. These reports in Council meetings are not where students are getting their fill of committee information and updates.
9:47 Chair reports are convention but the public is going to learn about what the committees are truly doing through press coverage. They are even going to be more objective. Is he saying I’m not being objective? Ah yeah. He got me!
9:45 Chair Sharpe does not think the written reports are even necessary or would be read.
Rep. Harris believes there needs to be some way to have these reports normalized. She wants to see these reports even if they come in late.
9:38 Gosselin lets us all know he may have ESP: he knew the debate would fall along these lines. He provides and alternative formula for this. Let’s see if I can follow along!
Let’s say the report takes an hour. That’s like 1.6% of a Chair’s total time in a month. Oh yeah, also include something that allows for leaway in timeframe.
Basically, Gosselin wants the ASM Chair to be able to subtract 2% from each Chair’s stipend for each missing report.
9:35 Rep. Smith disagrees with those who just spoke. He says that Chairs failing to submit reports absolutely means the chairs aren’t doing their jobs. He also supports the amendment because losing an entire stipend is a bit much.
Jesus, Hanley! That thing even has whipped cream and chocolate crumbles! Just eat it! Gah!
9:33 Oh, man. Chair Hanley’s chocolate cupcake looks so good. She’s just letting it sit there untouched just to torture me. This is horrible.
Oh yeah, she will also be voting against the legislation. The ASM Chair can already penalize committee chairs if they are not doing their job.
9:31 Junger thinks there are better ways to do this. There are other ways for people to find out about the work the committees are doing.
A. Johnson says the premise is “idiotic.” Man, I love strong language.
9:27 Zinn does not disagree with the intent of the proposal but it is too extreme. He motions to amend the legislation so that a Chair would not draw 20% of their stipend instead of the whole thing. It is important for Chairs to submit reports.
Junger seconded the motion to argue against it. He thinks the legislation is unnecessary. Frankly he does not think anybody should lose the pay for the work they do because they forgot to submit a “piece of paper.”
9:26 Williams: This is a sloppy piece of legislation. Paulson is okay with saying if there is not a piece of paper submitted, then a whole month’s worth of work was not done. That’s a bit much.
9:24 Sharpe: Is it appropriate to vote on something in the absence of the Rep who submits the proposal?
Templeton: Yes. He is a part of the body so he has the right to submit legislation although he cannot be here to defend it.
9:22 Next Paulson legislation: the Written Responsibility Act. Paulson wants all ASM committee chairs to have to submit written reports for every Student Council meeting. If they don’t they should miss their subsequent stipend payment. Man, he holds no punches. He goes right for the bag–the money bag.
9:19 Onto Paulson’s bylaw amendment. Must be approved at two consecutive meetings. This is first meeting. Basically, clarifies how Student Council can handle the election of Chair, Vice Chair and Secretary.
That passes pretty easily.
9:18 Williams won’t support the project because he wants more specific language but he calls the question. It passes with only Williams voting Nay.
9:15 Also, I might have misheard earlier but Zinn made the argument that this project is related to Academic Affairs because participation on campus in groups, etc. is a great way to learn and their are great lessons that are out there to be learned.
Gosselin also disagrees with the idea that Reps can’t inquire about the project just because others have asked more questions earlier. Other than that, he supports the project.
9:13 Williams: how can we ensure to get goals accomplished with soft language?
Zinn: the goal is to create this database of information and making ASM more active–these goals are less quantifiable than others.
Beemsterboer says he does not feel like now is the time to find out about this project because the Reps have had a week to find Zinn and ask him about it or share their strong opinions.
9:11 Beemsterboer: which Council members have you talked to since last meeting?
Zinn: you and Williams.
B: Is it the responsibility of Council members to seek you out to speak about this?
9:08 We’re back at it. Chair yields to Chair Zinn to discuss the Academic Affairs intern project.
The focus is not on community outreach, it is on student groups. The Morgridge Center is not doing the work of student group outreach as well as possible.
8:56 That passes. 10 minute break.
8:54 That passes. Onto the reappointment of the Shared Governance Project Assistant. They want to reappoint the guy that currently holds the position so he can do it next year, as well.
8:52 Onto the nomination of the Webmaster. They’re gonna vote on it tonight so we can have someone to handle the website. ZOMG I think I just peed with excitement!
8:46 Q&A closed. Moving on! Paulson’s apportionment of student council seats. According to Junger, SJ does not make laws and this should be done by Council. Looks like some internal disagreement over who reapportions SC seats every four years.
8:44 B. Williams wants to know if Love has been to any SUFAC conferences, or if he’s spoken to any administration people about this. Also wants to know how we can assume any legal wrong was done if we have no legal expertise?
Love: I admit I have none so we should speak with a lawyer!
8:41 Just an observation: whatever Gosselin is asking here, he needs to paraphrase when consulting long, legal definitions and laws. Holy crap, I don’t even know what the question was. I’m gonna just assume he asked Love whether he prefers Dora the Explorer or Go, Diego, Go.
8:38 A.Johnson concerned that none of the “Be it resolved” clauses says anything about consulting a lawyer.
Love believes the language would need to be amended and he supports that.
8:35 Love is weary of entering an agreement with the university that would say we would not fight this sweep this year.
Smith: if we enter an agreement does it have to go thru Council or just the Chair?
Junger: I would not sign anything that is not approved by this body.
8:33 Williams: Are you advocating for the complete non-touching of allocable segregated fees?
Love: No. Some things funded by seg fees do fall under what can be touched, but the administration has interpreted this bill wrongly.
8:31 Wow. Long story short: let’s consult someone with more legal expertise.–Maxwell Love
8:26 Love: my intent is not to be confrontational. He just wants to give ASM the ability to negotiate this tricky path.
8:21 Love’s basic stance here is that the seg fees are not the auxiliary funds the state has the power to touch.
Love: the state budget is requesting auxiliary enterprise funds and UW dipped into funds that are not auxiliary funds. GET THE BROOMS, EVERYONE! WE’RE CALLING SHENANIGANS.
8:17 Beemsterboer wants the Open Fund Grant to be capped at $15,000 per year or 10% of the Operations Grant. Whichever is less. Just introducing it. Now moving on the Love’s proposal about how ASM should handle the “Sweep.” I think this can only be introduce today and not voted on until next time.
Basically, he wants ASM to consult with a lawyer just to see how the legal issues and options stand.
8:14 Motion to close question and answer by Rep. Smith. Zinn objects.
Motion passes. Moving on to Operations Grant adjustment.
8:11 Junger: We would be criticized if we decide to not fight this sweep this year, but we must keep in mind the interests of students not just today but in the future as well.
8:08 It’s One Hour Dance Time! Remember, the only rule is that you must keep your pants on. If this discussion gets to two hours, I might change that rule.
8:04 Manes: Is it not true that this money would be coming from our reserves, and we would not have to cut any services? It’s the same as if we’d spent our entire budget.
Manes: Isn’t ASM really part of administration so we would be fighting ourselves?
Junger: No, we should not consider ourselves as necessarily one with administration and we need to stand up for students against administration when students’ needs differ from administrative action.
8:02 Gosselin: Is their clarity that something illegal has been done here?
Junger: It is not 100% clear. I was not even 50% clear at the start. So, no.
8:00 Love: So if something is being done that’s wrong this year, we’re just gonna let it happen because we didn’t fight it early enough?
Junger: No. But in this situation, the money would come from somewhere and students are going to be harmed somehow.
7:56 Zinn: “If we let this happen, we are saying that it is okay for the university to dip into student segregated fees.” Shouldn’t we do everything we can to stop this?
Junger: If we get the agreement we will have something to rally around in the future. It’s too late to fight this this year. We need to admit that we didn’t protect student seg fees before but that we are starting now and moving forward.
7:53 Junger: It’s important that we keep in mind that students come first, but it’s also important to work well with the other units on campus. We can get more accomplished if the university is willing to listen to and cooperate with us.
7:49 That was fun, but we’re now onto the 31st minute of “Sweep Talk” so all dancing must stop.
Manes: We should have a high level of pragmatism here. We would probablyhave to pay this money through some other means even if we win, so should we waste our time fighting this?
Junger: This is absolutely worth fighting for the short term gain.
Zinn: “It’s never even been about the money for me.”
7:48 Half Hour Mark! Everyone do your dance! Mine looks like a cross between the chicken dance and the sexy, watery chair dance from Flashdance. I’M A MANIAC ON THE FLOOR…
7:46 Hmm. Junger is now talking about putting money into buckets and then into other buckets. This is getting deep.
7:41 Just got back from a bathroom break for me. I already opened the Red Bull. Oops.
Reps still asking Junger questions about the sweep. I think they’re all trying to wrap their heads around a very big issue. Junger wants his next meeting with the university to be more about making this issue right for the future and not a fight about the past.
7:33 Ingram: I don’t understand how the state came to the amount it requested from the university if it did not take seg fees into account, but seg fees were used to pay this money.
7:31 Williams: Have you seen a convincing argument that the state acted legally in taking the seg fees?
7:28 B.Williams: I think you downplayed how much we talked about this, Junger. One of the possibilities of losing is that the state rules we have no right to control seg fees.
7:27 Love: Are you against consulting with a lawyer about pursuing litigation?
Junger: No, I am not against it.
7:24 Currently considering making an agreement with UW to guarantee seg fees will never be taken the the “128 Sweep” again. What would we have to give to get this agreement from the university? J’en sais pas.
7:19 Junger: I feel we are having these discussions a year too late. ASM being part of the sweep should have been discussed in the last session of Student Council. We gots ta play catch-up now.
Points out that Love’s legislation brings up great points about the possible illegality of the university taking this money, but the negative is that the only way we can use this argument is in litigation. Is there a legal smackdown about to go down with the university?
7:13 This is serious interesting. Basically, the state footed ASM with a bill ASM didn’t have the money for, based on some old idea of the available funds. However, the legality of the state’s ability to take this money is pretty questionable. ASM could either cut line items, cut services (SAFECab), increase seg fees, or could pursue litigation with legal support offered by United Council.
Really, this is a very complex situation that requires more attention than I can give due respect in a liveblog. Look for more on this tomorrow. We’ll prepare something to clarify this whole thing for the public. You have my word.
7:08 Templeton has on his big boy pants to take the Chair while Junger speaks.
It’s about the Seg fee sweep: the state takes the student cash ASM does not use. Does that sound right?
7:06 Agenda is adopted. Now they are reading the minutes to approve them. It’s an exercise in speed reading.
Ingram motions to postpone the minutes til next meeting. That carries. Onto the Chair Report.
7:03 Open forum now closed. Onto adoption of the agenda. Ingram wants to move Chair Report to item VIII (A). Better download your agenda, print it out, and start making marks.
But before we can adopt the agenda, Beemsterboer calls for a quorum call. Oy.
7:01 SSFC Chair Williams is pissed people walked out last week to undermine quorum. Reps should not use it as a strategy to block legislation they do not like.
Introduces a SSFC intern project.
7:00 Chair Carl Fergus is happy he gets to give a report later. He’s pissed he does not have a placard, though.
SSFC member is up now. He wants SC members to be good listeners and not multi-tasking during the meetings. Hah, son! Everyone is addicted to the liveblog. You can’t stop me now!
6:57 Rep. Maxwell Love is up now. Wants everyone to know that if his legislation seems confrontational, he is sorry. He did not mean to question anyone’s leadership. Check out his upcoming legislation at his blog.
6:53 SAFRA would allow these institutions to give out so much more money, according to Tina Lee Trevino.
She also is talking about a CWC event tomorrow at 5pm TITU. Called Comfort Women.
Take Back the Night to end sexual assault is coming up. Seriously, go. It’s super celebratory and also very powerful. I covered it for the Badger Herald a couple of years ago and still have the button someone gave me. It’s dozens of people banging on bucket drums and dancing.
6:49 A. Johnson: are you against Sally Mae b/c they are against the SAFRA bill? We should talk because we love it!
Ingram: Talk about the apsect of the student loan industry that allows people to get too little funds.
WISPIRG: the way they’re giving out loans is unfair.
Ingram: How should the system be changed to help students pay for school?
WISPIRG: More regulation, probably.These companies should be spending less on lobbying.
6:47 WISPIRG Secretary up next. WISPIRG will be tabling tomorrow on Library Mall as part of a campaign against Sally Mae to fight their unfair loan practices. From 1:45 to 2:45 p.m.
6:46 What common interest is it that you say you’re serving?–Gosselin
Helping people create, maintain healthy relationships.–Peter
6:43 Rep. Colin Ingram asked what the benefit to students will be.
Response: It will consolidate a lot of individual efforts that provide students with opportunities. I think this will be sort of a Kwik Trip for activism.
6:36 GAH! WordPress is messing with me again. Anyway, the first speakers are Peter and Zack (Zach?) who are lobbying to get the contentious intern project from last week passed. They are the interns who want to take on this project.
I think the gist of the project is to provide a service that will direct students to volunteer/activism opportunities.
6:35 Junger practically smashes the gavel into bits. We’re under way.
6:27 Hey, folks. Sorry, it’s me today and not that other hussy everyone seemed to like so much last time. Whatever.
We’re a few minutes from blastoff here. Get acquainted with the agenda. Cuddle it. I’m gonna hold off on drinking my oversized Red Bull for as long as possible. Let’s set the over/under at 8 minutes.