The Badger Herald

NEWS

ASM grills students over union initiative

Looking for a print version?
Simply choose ‘Print’ on your computer and a printer-friendly document will be generated.

Also by Alexandra Rogers:

AIDS battle progressing (May 10, 2007)
Students slam city bar ban (May 3, 2007)
Neighbors discuss ownership options (April 27, 2007)
Business mogul donates millions (April 26, 2007)
Students to help 'cleanup' hunger (April 13, 2007)

by Alexandra Rogers

Thursday, October 12, 2006

With this year's Associated Students of Madison Student Council elections approaching, ASM representatives grilled Student Union Initiative representatives on the details of the initiative's financial and construction plans.

The Student Union Initiative will be voted on in the Student Council election Oct. 18 and 19, along with the Living Wage referendum.

The Student Union Initiative aims to bring the Memorial Union up to current safety and accessibility standards and construct a new Union South.

UW junior and Student Union Initiative member Stephanie Krubsack said she is concerned about what might happen to the Union if the initiative is not passed.

"We are worried that they will take away Union South and change it into a retailing space," she said.

Although Student Union Initiative representatives predict the project will be completed by 2014 should the initiative pass, the loan will take 30 years to pay off, according to Travis Slattery, a Student Union Initiative representative.

If the majority of UW students vote in favor of the initiative, students will pay $48 per semester in segregated fees over the first two years, and $96 per semester for each subsequent year.

UW senior and Student Union Initiative member Tristan Sather said the design team includes nine students, two faculty members, two alumni and two staff members.

But despite the initiative's goal, several Student Council members raised concerns of the use of student-segregated fees. Representative Erika Lopez said the large dedication of student-segregated fees would mean fewer scholarships in the long run.

Lopez said the Student Union Initiative should be about more than trying to make the union "look pretty."

Another issue brought forward during the open forum was the new proposed voting structure within ASM's Shared Governance Committee. The voting structure — proposed by representative Patrick McLeod — raised a few eyebrows within the council.

The proposed voting process, called "collective voting," is still in the beginning stages of development, though.

"The state statute says that it is our right and responsibility to do shared governance, but it doesn't say what form shared governance should take," McLeod said. "The statute gives us a legal basis in a very broad way."

Wisconsin Union Directorate President Shayna Hetzel said she had multiple concerns regarding the proposed voting process. She said collective voting would slow the discussion and progress of ASM committees.

"If this something ASM is interested in pursuing, then there would have to be an amendment to the bylaws," Hetzel said.

The Student Council did not make any decisions regarding the restructured voting proposal.

Feedback

Show all comments

Hide anonymous comments

Anonymous (October 12, 2006 @ 8:14am):

The student union initiative plan has one major flaw: the students the next two years will be paying for improvements that will not be complete while they are attending the UW.

The Union was crafty in forcing students next year to pay for improvements that won't be completed for years to come. Students can support the improvements to the unions without being forced to pay.

Segregated fees are the only portion of the budget that students directly control. Segregated fees are $365/semester this year and if the measure passes, students would be paying an additional $48/semester for improvements that won't be ready for years to come.

The union has been doing a huge advertising campaign. There is no loud voice opposing this funding scheme and those students need to be vocal. Please vote NO on Oct. 18-19.

Anonymous (October 12, 2006 @ 11:00am):

Half of students in the 1920s gave $50 or more -- the equivalent of almost $600 today -- to build the Memorial Union, which they would never see as students.

Think about all the things that previous generations of Badgers built for us. Is $48 a year for a couple years really so bad for an investment that we as alumni, and future generations of students, can enjoy?

I'm not even a student anymore, and I plan to give much more than that.

Anonymous (October 12, 2006 @ 1:22pm):

The point is that students should have the option to donate. The seg fees are a requirement that must be paid. Students should support the initiatve through donations. Forcing all students to pay for improvements is not the solution to funding the building.

Students should vote no on the plan.

Anonymous (October 12, 2006 @ 5:08pm):

The union was originally built with federal dollars, not student donations. Students then also had significantly lower tuition, and could afford to give an extra 50 bucks.

Students should not be expected to bring the union up to fire code and repair flood damage. The Wisconsin Union has a multimillion dollar budget to do this.

Anonymous (October 12, 2006 @ 7:32pm):

Students in Minnesota, Illinois and the majority of public universities of our caliber and size pay 100% of their union's functions including facilities and staff salaries.

Here we only pay for "building ready for use" things.

If you have a problem with your seg. fee level, maybe you should start questioning everything else that gets seg. fees that students use much less frequently.

How many students does SLP serve? They just got over $50,000 just for this year to program. The Union has over 10,000 students walk through its doors every single day.

How many students benefit from paying ASM staff members or ASM chair stipends?

The unions are worth it.