NEWS
Students show concern regarding seg fee policies
Looking for a print version?
Simply choose ‘Print’ on your computer and a printer-friendly document will be generated.
Also by Allie Tempus:
- Fans seek places to cheer on Packers (November 29, 2007)
- Students show concern regarding seg fee policies (November 27, 2007)
- SSFC hears budget plans (November 13, 2007)
- Gift helps reinvent Marquette school (November 1, 2007)
Related Stories:
- UW holding forum on segregated fees (November 26, 2007)
- Student government delays seg-fee decision, hears open forum during meeting (April 5, 2002)
- SSFC kicks off hearings (September 8, 2006)
- Legislators push system to leave seg fee policies alone (December 5, 2007)
- ASM chair has no plans to step down (October 24, 2003)
by Allie Tempus
Tuesday, November 27, 2007
A large and passionate crowd of University of Wisconsin students and campus community members voiced their concerns in an open forum Monday to discuss proposed changes to the student segregated fee policy — a fee included in all students' tuition.
The majority of students at the meeting represented Wisconsin Student Public Interest Research Group, with more than 20 individuals personally addressing the forum panel.
The Student Rights Campaign, Student Services Finance Committee, Associated Students of Madison interns and multiple other campus organizations were also represented by speakers at the forum.
Dean of Students Lori Berquam, Associate Deans Kevin Helmkamp and Argyle Wade, Assistant Dean Drew Wielgus, Student Services Finance Committee Chair Alex Gallagher and Associated Students of Madison Chair Gestina Sewell served as the panel and received input regarding the proposed policy changes.
Many students were especially concerned about a provision that would prohibit student organizations from paying off-campus rent and hiring non-university professional staff members.
"In the last few weeks, I've probably been spending 10 or 15 hours a week in our office and the same amount of time with our paid staff people," WISPIRG intern Andrew Sellers said. "Without these people we wouldn't be able to do the things that we do on the scale that we can."
Another issue of contention was the process by which the new policy changes were created, including the formation of the UW System Allocable Segregated Fee Policy Review Committee and decisions regarding committee members.
"Procedurally, the way in which this policy was created I think irks a lot of students here," said ASM Shared Governance Committee Chair Jeff Wright. "It appears as though the authority of students has been overstepped in the process from the very beginning."
Still, other speakers argued that the current segregated fee policy already functions well.
"No need for these changes exists — students have effectively maintained this system for years," said SSFC Secretary Kurt Gosselin. "It would be a detriment to the education of students involved in this system to remove this power that's been rightfully and lawfully delegated to their hands."
Berquam empathized with the students' search for explanations to the policy changes.
"In terms of where the policy ends up being really is going to be relegated to the campuses to figure out their internal process," said Berquam. "This is the first step, but I think there has to be individual campus policies as well."
In response to questions regarding the hiring of non-university employees, Helmkamp explained prohibiting this is a measure of risk management because the university is then responsible for that employee.
Despite heated discussion, Helmkamp was optimistic about the outcome of the open forum.
"I thought it was excellent," said Helmkamp, adding the panel already had a sense of students' opinions on the issue. "The forum clearly reaffirmed that understanding of where we've been the last month and a half."
Gallagher said he thought this meeting would be helpful for officials within the Offices of the Dean of Students and would demonstrate many students have concerns about segregated fees.
"Students honestly and genuinely feel that changes in this policy will have a dramatic effect on segregated fee expenditures," Gallagher said.
WISPIRG Chair Jeff Rolling had mixed feelings about the forum, saying it was long overdue.
"I think it was in a lot of ways not surprising," he said. "They didn't really answer the questions directly. Hopefully they took what all the students had to say and feel at least a little bit of pressure from the students to speak on behalf of us."
Although a draft of the proposed segregated fee policy changes were sent to each UW System school for feedback, Berquam said UW-Madison was the only school that had a public forum.
Input from the forum will be relayed to the UW System Allocable Segregated Fee Policy Review Committee that meets for a fourth and final time today.
Anonymous (November 27, 2007 @ 11:52am):
during the 4 years I spent as an undergrad in Madison, I never once was asked or had an opportunity to provide my "interests" to WisPIRG for consideration. I always found the clipboard-toting 'activists' to have a very poorly-informed perspecitve on the positions they were petitioning. They were rabidly, unabashedly ignorant. Essentially, they were overpaid signature collecters. They could rarely answer more than a single question, and when they did, it was an emotional claim, not an enlightened view. WisPIRG is merely an arm of PIRG. they shouldn't get money from Wisconsin Students if they're going to spend student's money supporting national campaigns to the exclusion of issues of specific concern. They don't poll students, but take their direction from the national mothership, and are thus unaccountable and irrelevant as a student organization at UW Madison.
Anonymous (November 27, 2007 @ 12:21pm):
Why do campus organizations think they belong off-campus? I understand that space is tight on this campus for meetings and the like, but shouldn't the university invest in more space, rather than sinking money into overpriced rental properties for groups that should be on campus anyway?
Anonymous (November 27, 2007 @ 1:18pm):
Actually, all of WISPIRG's campaigns are created, proposed, and voted on by UW-Madison students. We are not obligated to run any particular campaign or work on any particular issue. Also, be careful to not confuse UW-Madison's student chapter of WISPIRG with WISPIRG/Wisconsin Environment, which is a citizen chapter. The citizen chapter is the one generally "clipboard-toting" and asking for donations. The student chapter focuses on educatinoal events, skills trainings, and student activism. Please, before you make comments like that, take the time to talk to our dedicated student interns, volunteers, and coordinators. I assure you that they are highly passionate and knowledgeable about their work with WISPIRG and they pride themselves on providing opportunties for education and activism to the UW-Madison campus. Within the past 9 months alone, WISPIRG UW-Madison hosted a "Midwest Student Clean Energy Conference" and a "National Student Conference on Hunger and Homelessness", both which drew hundreds of students together to learn about these issues and how they can make a difference. Through our events and campaigns, WISPIRG touches thousands of students each year, inspiring them to be lifelong engaged citizens and leaders.
Anonymous (November 27, 2007 @ 1:28pm):
More important than bashing WISPIRG, the proposed policies to Student Segregated Fees will take power away from ALL student organizations and will diminish student power on the whole. If you want UW-Madison's students' priorities to be represented in an organization, what better way to do it than through student-controlled seg fees? That way, if a student org. is "supporting national campaigns to the exlusion of issues of specific concern", as you stated, the student seg. fee committee can cut their funding, etc... The overall point, though, is that these decisions should be in students' hands.
Anonymous (November 27, 2007 @ 1:31pm):
Good point! Too bad WISPIRG students at Madison aren't running any federal campaigns right now or even planning to next semester. We do have a number of campuswide, citywide and statewide campaigns we are working on though. The last time we worked on a federal campaign was last year when we worked with USPIRG to help win the greatest increase in Higher Education funding in over 50 years. So I guess it's not a good point after all. Although I would agree with you that not all students are professional advocates. Too bad they are not expected to be. This is college and a learning experience. WISPIRG students learn a number of organizing and advocacy skills that they use to work on issues they care about. Which I guess means I don't agree with you at all...
Anonymous (November 27, 2007 @ 1:47pm):
As a former WISPIRG member and a UW Alum, I can tell you that your claims in 11:52, are very ignorant and shows you lack of knowlegde of the organization despite what you might be trying to prove.
First of all all WISPIRG members that are apart of the student organization are unpaid, WISPIRG is one of the only student organizations funded by SSFC that has 100% student volunteers. Not a single member of the student chapter is paid.
The student chapter then decides what issues they would like to make campaigns, in the past there has been great debate within the organization in regards to what campaigns to run, and in the end is decided by a chapter vote at the end of each semester as to what the following semesters campaigns will be. Again 100% student direction.
SSFC dollars fund only the student chapter.
Wispirg does however run a citizen part that is all over the state, funded by citizens of the state, and that part recieves 0 dollars from SSFC. The citizen chapter does pay thier summer employees, and believe me their pay is very minimal, and yes some of the empoylees could use more formal training, but the good ones are well informed and very articulate about the issues, but the only way to become better at talking about the issues is to have them out their practicing. So when you are asked to sign a petition and donate money that is NOT funded by student dollars. If you decide to give them money to the citizen chapter is on top of the few dollars you give to the student chapter.
I have no problem with you taking issue with the organization and their ideology since I myself don't agree with their stances 100% of the time, but at least make your accusations with a little bit of knowledge. Educate yourself before you make baseless, uniformed, accusations.
Anonymous (November 27, 2007 @ 2:53pm):
The segregated fees here at UW are already astronomically high. Let's do everything we can to reduce the fees, while realizing that we can't change fees such as Union South.
Anonymous (November 27, 2007 @ 3:09pm):
Segregated Fees are such a bunch of malarky! Everyone Student pays them but only a few actually care about them. Long Live Apathy.
Anonymous (November 27, 2007 @ 3:11pm):
Please do the right thing ODOS! Students need you to be strong student advocates and to feel that you have heard them as the Office of the Dean of Students. You are key to student activism and student passion being protected and you must never reprimand students for that or try to squelch truth when it comes to the surface. You're going to be on the hot seat. It's your job but you also need to hear what the students are saying and make forward progress despite being held to the fire. I thought the students were extremely respectful last night and none of them disrespected you with the tough questions you were asked or truthful comments that were made. If yesterday was hard to handle...good luck with the rest of your career here at UW-Madison because it will be miserable. Yesterday was nothing compared to other things that will undoubtedly happen on this campus that you will be held accountable to and you will need to respond to much harsher comments and questions than last night. I'm no fortune teller...just been at this campus forever.
Forward Thinking!
Katrina Flores
kbflores@wisc.edu
Anonymous (November 27, 2007 @ 3:25pm):
Seg fees are going up at a faster rate than tuition on some UW campuses.
If ASM is really concerned about keeping the cost of education down, they should re-examine how they spend segreagated fees.
Anonymous (November 27, 2007 @ 3:59pm):
In response to 3:25 pm: The portion of segregated fees that are controlled by the chancellor (nonallocable) increased by 23% last year while the portion controllec by student (allocable), decreased by 26%. Clearly, students are showing that they can make the tough decisions and that they are completeley capable of managing this responsibility. If you want seg. fees to go down, limiting students' involvement is clearly not the way to do it.
Patrick Elliott (November 27, 2007 @ 4:29pm):
I would like to point out a major problem with the policy paper on segregated fees:
"C. Deposit of SUF in State Treasury. (1) SUF are state funds which are deposited and held in the State Treasury, and which are subject to same limitations on use as other state funds."
The finance committee and the student services finance committee on this campus are required to make decisions in a viewpoint neutral manner. Recently, the Chancellor's Office has said that segregated fees may not be used for certain types of speech (prayer, worship, proselytizing) because they are "state funds." This directly contradicts requirements of federal case law on the First Amendment, the ASM Constitution and the Bylaws of ASM.
Like those reformulating the segregated fee policy, I want a system that is sustainable long term and that best serves the students of UW institutions. Examining the viewpoints of particular groups (religious or other), will no doubt be challenged in court and will destroy the funding process. I hope that there is still time to change the wording of the policy.
Anonymous (December 6, 2007 @ 4:23pm):
When St. Pauls catholic church can set up a group and demand funding for off-campus space even though they have a church right across from the main campus library I think we know how student fees got so high. They sued the University and then demanded 200,000 dollars in funding claiming that the entire university is their parish. For what? Masses that can only be attended by catholics. They do no outreach, they do no good works of service on campus. All they due is sue us. What public good is this?
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.
