NEWS
UW to pay for security costs
Looking for a print version?
Simply choose ‘Print’ on your computer and a printer-friendly document will be generated.
Also by News:
- Police find burned body of student (December 7, 2007)
- State's 'No Call' deadline coming up quickly: Dec. 1 (November 28, 2007)
- Study: Loopholes skew test results (November 15, 2007)
Related Stories:
- Security bills rile UW GOP group (December 11, 2007)
- CAN criticizes Horowitz funding call (December 13, 2007)
- Jihad speaker draws concern (November 30, 2007)
- Muslim students respond to Monday's Horowitz talk (October 24, 2007)
- Horowitz event sparking protests (October 22, 2007)
by News
Wednesday, December 12, 2007
The University of Wisconsin decided Tuesday to cover nearly $1,300 in safety fees recently charged to a student group.
The College Republicans had been charged for extra services provided by the University of Wisconsin Police Department for an event featuring conservative speaker David Horowitz.
But College Republicans chair Sara Mikolajczak said Monday the group was unaware of the price when the event took place and would be unable to afford the bill.
Casey Nagy, executive assistant for the chancellor, met with Mikolajczak Tuesday and said UW will cover the security costs in full because College Republicans had other additional costs to hold the event, which were not originally included in the group's budget.
Mikolajczak said the group had to relocate from Grainger Hall, which is rented at no charge to student organizations, to the Union Theater, which cost nearly $1,000. Additionally, the group spent about $300 in publicity.
The number of students interested in attending Horowitz's lecture was much higher then expected, and College Republicans rented the Union Theater so they would not have to turn anyone away, she added.
According to Nagy, the bill was expensive because UW police had to call additional staff and pay several police officers overtime.
"I don't expect to be picking up the tab time after time," Nagy said. "But there's going to be times when that's just not fully predictable, and I think it's in the campus interest to make these events go forward."
Nagy said student organizations should seek assistance from UW when a situation like this happens.
"Part of the problem I see in this case is that it wasn't necessarily avoidable," Nagy said. "They had a level of interested people and they had to last-minute relocate, which resulted in added cost."
Sen. Glenn Grothman, R-West Bend, publicly criticized UW last week, saying security fees are being used to silence conservative voices that come to UW, adding the university "has been unable to name any similar fees charged for left-of-center speakers."
"I don't necessarily think we were attacked because we're a conservative group," Mikolajczak said. "It could be, but I would like to think that this university wouldn't do that."
In a list of recent security fees obtained by The Badger Herald, several groups were charged for events in which extra security was necessary, including a previous event featuring Horowitz and a 2004 campaign event for Democratic National Committee chair Howard Dean.
"I think Sen. Grothman was concerned this need to impose security costs might discourage some speakers to come to campus," Nagy said. "That's a legitimate concern, and I think we have addressed it."
Mikolajczak previously said a Union employee had informed her the security fees would "probably be no more than a couple hundred dollars."
Nagy said Union staff is not responsible for the fees, and there was a miscommunication about pricing between police and College Republicans. He added the current security fees policy does not require revision.
"I know it's university policy, but I think it's a bad policy," Mikolajczak said. "It's not really feasible for a student group. I would like to see it changed."
Anonymous (December 12, 2007 @ 6:59am):
If nothing else, this will result in a written policy for security fees, which is a good idea.
Anonymous (December 12, 2007 @ 8:48am):
"I don't necessarily think we were attacked because we're a conservative group," Mikolajczak said. "It could be, but I would like to think that this university wouldn't do that."
Get off your high horse Mikolajczak. They paid your 1300 dollars so the university clearly is not attacking you. Stop your whining.
Anonymous (December 12, 2007 @ 10:38am):
Just like Republicans--running up a big bill for a lot of bullshit and then passing the cost onto someone else...
(Alright, it's a low blow.)
6:59 is right on. I would have favored making the CR pay the few hundred they expected to be charged for security, but in any case, the more important issue is implementing a uniform policy for this sort of thing, so groups bringing controversial speakers to campus know what they're getting into ahead of time.
Anonymous (December 12, 2007 @ 11:00am):
Typical Goopers preaching personal responsibility while demonstrating they have none.
Anonymous (December 12, 2007 @ 11:07am):
"I don't necessarily think we were attacked because we're a conservative group" / "security fees are being used to silence conservative voices that come to UW"
Instead of Islamo-fascism awareness week next year, they could hold a conservative self-victimization conference.
"unable to name any similar fees charged for left-of-center speakers."
Maybe that's because "left-of-center" is a fantasy on this campus, and the left that does exist doesn't bring in exorbitantly expensive, controversial speakers?
Anonymous (December 12, 2007 @ 2:53pm):
"Maybe that's because "left-of-center" is a fantasy on this campus, and the left that does exist doesn't bring in exorbitantly expensive, controversial speakers?"
left-of-center IS this campus. and they don't bring speakers because their speakers have nothing to say that's worth the high prices they charge. plus, it's kinds hard to have a controversy from the left when 95% of campus agrees with you.
IDIOTS.
Kyle Szarzynski (December 12, 2007 @ 4:29pm):
What a disgrace.
So because Sara bitches loud enough and gets her anti-UW friends in the legislature to join her cause, the student body and taxpayers now have to foot the bill. It was the College Republicans' choice to bring a notorious bigot like Horowitz to this campus, not ours. It should be their responsibility to pay for his security cost, not the student body and certainly not the racial minorities of this campus who Horowitz has repeatedly insulted.
If the CRs want to bring guys like Horowitz - who, unlike Howard Zinn, preaches a hateful message that requires extra security - the least they can do is pay for his appearance themselves. I also find myself outraged at the administration's receptivity to the CR's complaint, especially in light of the consistent cold shoulder they always enjoy giving to leftist groups like SLAC and CAN.
Anonymous (December 12, 2007 @ 5:42pm):
It is about time the UW took some responsibility! When the left brings in a speaker, those who disagree (for the most part) stay home and watch American Idol in the name of free speech. When someone from the right is brought in, those who disagree throw childish tantrums, break things and are generally out of control (or have been), thus added security is needed. Of course, this is all in an attempt by the left wing nut jobs (and not all left wingers fall into this category) to quiet those who disagree.
Kyle, can you show anyone an example of the hate in Horowitz's message? I hear a lot more hate on the left than I do on the right. Actually, give us an example of a single message of hate from the right... I have to hear this...
Anonymous (December 12, 2007 @ 11:23pm):
again, maybe that's because SLAC and CAN are IDIOTS.
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.
