NEWS
SSFC makes minor cuts to two requests
Looking for a print version?
Simply choose ‘Print’ on your computer and a printer-friendly document will be generated.
Also by Nathaniel Liedl:
- Officials discuss changes to Union South (February 17, 2005)
- Religious groups strong on campu (February 9, 2005)
- Organization asks SSFC for $672,000 (January 28, 2005)
- Citizens remember King's dreams (January 19, 2005)
- Police urge end-of-the-year safety (December 14, 2004)
Related Stories:
- Diversity Education Program, Sex Out Loud submit budget requests (October 5, 2004)
- Organization asks SSFC for $672,000 (January 28, 2005)
- SSFC cuts MCSC budget by $6,000 (November 19, 2004)
- SSFC approves program's budget (February 1, 2005)
- SSFC passes ASM budget for new year (January 25, 2005)
Share This:
by Nathaniel Liedl
Friday, October 8, 2004
Two organizations, the Diversity Education Program and Sex out Loud, had their 2005-06 budgets allocated by the Student Services and Finance Committee in a meeting Wednesday night.
DEP, an administrative group focusing on student diversity, was allocated $415,600 after a heated debate in which SSFC member Barbara Kiernoziak walked out of the meeting in frustration.
Kiernoziak was in favor of cutting the $12,425, designated for a Big Ten Conference weekend by $8,950. The Big Ten Conference weekend is a social event with approximately 1,500 attendees. The attendees pay an $80 registration fee for the weekend, which features a keynote speaker and provides most of their meals. When Kiernoziak’s proposal to amend the funds for the weekend met strong disapproval, she walked out.
The original $12,425 proposed for the Big Ten Conference remained intact. The DEP’s proposed 2005-06 budget was cut by a total of about $700 when it was passed, after a mistake in the proposal was amended. This increased last year’s allocation by approximately $53,000.
Bill Hebert, director of the DEP, was relieved.
“It was one of those situations where it was difficult to cut anything,” Hebert said. “We had already sliced so much from the budget … we are going to use students’ money wisely.”
Sex out Loud’s 2005-06 budget was approved at $55,324, up more than $7,000 from last year’s budget, after amendments were passed that cut the proposed budget by almost $1,700.
Amendments to the organization’s proposed budget included their sexual health week program supplies and small cuts to employees of the student organization.
“Everything is in line with what we spoke to committee members about,” Patrick Emanuel, project coordinator of Sex out Loud, said. “Even though there is a cut in the budget, it reflects everything we want to do next year.”
Another organization, the University of Wisconsin Roman Catholic Foundation, presented its 2005-06 budget to the SSFC at the meeting. The UWRCF requested over $144,000 to fund its campus services, up over $100,000 from its 2004-05 allocated budget.
During open forum, several individuals involved with Saint Paul’s University Catholic Center spoke in favor of UWRCF. The Center is affiliated with the UWRCF.
Approximately 2,300 students visit the center each week. The student organization said they feel their request of $144,000 is modest and reasonable considering the large number of students who use their facilities.
Twenty-four percent of UWRCF’s budget is allocated from student segregated fees. The remaining 76 percent of their budget must be sought, as it is every year, by calling parents and alumni of the Saint Paul’s University Catholic Center seeking grant monies, according to a report issued by the center.
The UWRCF’s budget proposal may not pass. The dean’s interpretation of allocation of University of Wisconsin public funds says money cannot be used to fund religious entities or religious services, although the group garnered fees last year.
A meeting on Monday will decide the allocation of SSFC funds for the UWRCF.
Anonymous (October 8, 2004 @ 7:10am):
"We had already sliced so much from the budget ... we are going to use students' money wisely." HAHAHAHAHAHA
Do people realize what this DEP organization spends money on? They're spending over $250,000 on salaries alone, and nobody knows what the people working for them do all day. In fact, I would guess that 80% or fewer of students on campus have even heard of this worthless organization. DEP was denied funding by SSFC a couple years ago partly for that reason. Of course, the administration and Student Judiciary intervened and made sure that we have to continue to waste our money on them.
One of the salaries DEP proposed was more than $62,000 a year plus benefits!! There's very few entry level positions that a person with a bachelor's degree could get that pays this much, and that job doesn't even require any technical expertise.
The $700 that was cut is a rounding error compared to DEP's total budget size. Shame on SSFC for allowing such a ridiculous budget to pass!
Anonymous (October 8, 2004 @ 10:51am):
"The UWRCF's budget proposal may not pass. The dean's interpretation of allocation of University of Wisconsin public funds says money cannot be used to fund religious entities or religious services, although the group garnered fees last year."
So now it's okay for the administration to be non-viewpoint neutral as they influence the seg fee funding process? Smells like discrimination to me.
Anonymous (October 8, 2004 @ 12:22pm):
smells like state law to me
Anonymous (October 8, 2004 @ 12:34pm):
Was the state law passed before or after the U.S. Supreme Court rulings in the Southworth and University of Virginia cases?
Anonymous (October 8, 2004 @ 1:50pm):
Rosenberg v. University of Virginia (Rector). Anyone feel free to look it up. It doesn't matter what the dean of students says. Last time I checked the Supreme Court was the one who interpreted the law annd determined the boundaries of viewpoint neutrality.
Anonymous (October 8, 2004 @ 1:54pm):
This isn't the first time the Dean has grossly mistaken viewpoint neutrality rules. The point of their office is to chime in on university policy not to give the committee on their interpretations of the court's decisions and say that is the be all end all. Given the fact that they have been so wrong on numerous occasions this year (just ask the members of groups who witnessed some of Dean Hong's interpretations) maybe they should think about just keeping quiet and let others work this out.
Anonymous (October 9, 2004 @ 10:56am):
The perspective on this story should be "SSFC raises student fees another X dollars", rather than the incredibly misleading headline suggesting anything resembling a cut. I suggest the BH keep a running tab on how much student fees are increasing with every SSFC meeting.
Anonymous (October 9, 2004 @ 9:08pm):
Yes, I agree with the comment posted just above this one. Students got gouged again.
