NEWS
Organization seeks clear ‘benchmarks’ for funding
Looking for a print version?
Simply choose ‘Print’ on your computer and a printer-friendly document will be generated.
Also by Rachel Leisemann:
Related Stories:
- Judiciary gives CFACT another chance (September 24, 2007)
- SSFC denies contract funding (September 7, 2007)
- Student Judiciary to release precedent-setting ruling (December 4, 2006)
- SSFC must reconsider contract status (December 5, 2006)
- Catholic foundation case before ASM court tonight (November 27, 2006)
by Rachel Leisemann
Monday, September 17, 2007
The Associated Students of Madison Student Judiciary decided Sunday to hear a Collegians for a Constructive Tomorrow case regarding the denial of its contract status.
SJ debated whether the Student Services Finance Committee’s decision to dismiss CFACT's case to get contract status would be upheld.
After recently being denied contract status for the first time ever by SSFC, CFACT filed a complaint with SJ, hoping to give its case a second chance.
With contract status, CFACT would have access to additional funding for organizational costs and special events.
University of Wisconsin senior Peter McCabe, who spoke on behalf of CFACT, said his organization's case was "against the system."
"CFACT's contract decision this year highlights the problem with the system," McCabe said. "Organizations need to know why they said 'no' or why they said 'yes.' There are no benchmarks here. We got told 'no' for unnamed reasons."
In CFACT's complaint submitted to Student Judiciary, the organization asked why "what had been a consistently viable explanation for contract status for multiple years before suddenly did not meet SSFC's apparent benchmark for gaining contract status."
Initially, Chief Justice Sol Grosskopf had intended to dismiss the case, calling it “very vague.”
The case dismissal was reversed by a vote of 0 to 3, with two members abstaining.
As a result of the vote, Student Judiciary will hear CFACT's case Friday, Sept. 21 at 1:30 p.m. in Memorial Union's Board Room.
"If that's what the committee felt was the best thing to do, then I wholeheartedly support it," Grosskopf said. "Hopefully, in the hearing, they will explain what they meant to say in their original complaint."
SSFC Vice Chief Justice Shaun Hernandez, who abstained from voting and wrote SSFC's original decision to dismiss the case, said Student Judiciary was reacting to SSFC's decision.
"SSFC had proven their side of the case and thus, we followed their request for dismissal," Hernandez said.
McCabe added he believed there was a glitch in SSFC's process.
"They have to at least hear our case," McCabe said. "CFACT, every year since it has applied, has gotten contract status, [and] this is the first year that we were denied."
Correction: Due to a reporting error, this article should have said the Student Judiciary debated whether to grant a Student Services Finance Committee motion for summary dismissal. It also should have said contract status would have allowed groups to manage their finances apart from SSFC. Shaun Hernandez should also have been cited as Vice Chief Justice of SJ, not SSFC. We regret these errors.
Anonymous (September 17, 2007 @ 7:11am):
I think you mean SJ's Vice Chief. If SSFC even had a Vice Chief, and it that person was writing decisions about his own committee, that would be a little suspect.
Add a comment
We welcome your thoughts, but please keep your feedback thoughtful, on-topic and respectful. Offensive language, personal attacks, or irrelevant comments may be deleted.
Login...
Not registered? Sign up now.
It's quick, free, and the email address you provide will not be sold or solicited.
