OPINION & EDITORIAL
ASM violates Open Meeting Law
Looking for a print version?
Simply choose ‘Print’ on your computer and a printer-friendly document will be generated.
Also by Badger Herald Editorial Board:
- A security fee-for-all (December 11, 2007)
- Farewell, Chancellor (December 10, 2007)
- $$FC (December 6, 2007)
- In a bind (December 5, 2007)
- Entitlement Town (December 4, 2007)
Related Stories:
- Full Disclosure (September 29, 2005)
- Trimming the fat (January 30, 2006)
- $$FC (December 6, 2007)
- Gross incompetence (October 18, 2004)
- Elect ASM officials (September 22, 2005)
by Badger Herald Editorial Board
Monday, April 25, 2005
Last Monday’s Student Services Finance Committee meeting was classic Associated Students of Madison: one step forward, two steps back.
SSFC member Brad Vogel introduced an excellent proposal limiting salaries of student leaders in segregated-fee funded organizations to $1,000. Unfortunately, this rendered Monday’s council session a violation of the student government’s own open meetings policy. A bombshell of a proposal, Vogel’s legislation never made it into the publicly-available agenda set forth 24 hours before the meeting. Subsection 1.04(B)(I) of ASM’s own by-laws states, “ASM bodies must post an agenda outside the ASM office and notify members and those with business before the body via e-mail of a meeting 24 hours before a meeting of the body.” While this clause appears to have been satisfied, subsection 1.04(B)(III) was clearly failed, “Every public notice of a meeting of an ASM body shall set forth the time, date and place of the meeting, in such form as is reasonably likely to apprise ASM members thereof, identify all bills, resolutions, main motions, or other legislation that will receive a vote at the meeting by number …”
Vogel’s introduction of this proposal may have been allowable under certain loophole-heavy readings of these by-laws but that the legislation was voted on (and defeated no less) clearly renders Monday’s session in wanton violation of the open meetings policy.
Further muddying the situation, ASM has long insisted it is entitled to participate in shared governance. This is an entirely debatable matter and one with which we have often taken issue. But should ASM be right in this insistence, a string of thought would dictate it is, in essence, a government body within the state of Wisconsin. Should this be true, Monday’s SSFC meeting would not only be in violation of by-laws accountable to the student government’s own kangaroo court, but also state open meeting laws accountable to a court system not entirely comprised of résumé.
These open meetings rules make sense. Had this proposal been announced in advance, any number of bodies would have been able to effectively lobby for its passage or defeat. But instead it was dropped at a fairly quiet meeting, defeated before word leaked and never given due consideration within the public sphere.
Anonymous (April 24, 2005 @ 11:59pm):
SSFC does have to abide by the State Open Meeting Laws. The issue never should have been brought forward for a vote. A resolution with that much potential impact on leaders of student organizations should be debated and the input of those leaders should be sought (though not necessarily followed).
Anonymous (April 25, 2005 @ 2:36am):
Seriously who the hell cares about ASM and their stupid laws. Why does the Herald dedicate so much space to such useless banter. All ASM is a bunch of young adults who can't let go of 7th grade student council glory.
Anonymous (April 25, 2005 @ 6:05am):
The person you ought to blame is Vogel. If he really wanted to pass this, he would have built a coalition around it and made sure people knew it was coming up.
Anonymous (April 25, 2005 @ 6:47am):
The Herald doesn't seem to understand is that it is legal for a body to add an item of business to it's agenda at the beginning of a meeting in new business. If action is taken on those items, they must be ratified at a subsequent meeting (at least in ASM), which is a sensible requirement.
Perhaps the "no" vote on Vogel's proposal should be ratified at tonight's SSFC meeting.
Really, this piece seems driven entirely by spite. At base, the Cardinal managed to scoop the Herald on a story and the Herald didn't like it.
Anonymous (April 25, 2005 @ 7:23am):
Hey, ed. board (and Journalism 559 students in particular) - miss something in the open meetings statute perhaps?
(5) Departments and their subunits in any university of Wisconsin system institution or campus and a nonprofit corporation operating the Olympic ice training center under s. 42.11 (3) are exempt from the requirements of subs. (1) to (4) but shall provide meeting notice which is reasonably likely to apprise interested persons, and news media who have filed written requests for such notice.
Anonymous (April 25, 2005 @ 7:39am):
SSFC doesn't operate the Olympic ice training center, thankfully, so it is not exempt. Any items for action HAVE to be noticed 24 hours in advance or else the meeting is invalid.
Whomever made the previous post is an idiot. Gosh, I hope that wasn't offensive.
Anonymous (April 25, 2005 @ 8:15am):
"Departments and their subunits in any university of Wisconsin system institution or campus AND a nonprofit corporation operating the Olympic ice training center under s. 42.11 (3) are exempt"
notice the and. close reading of statutes is important. You are an idiot. That was meant to be offensive.
Anonymous (April 25, 2005 @ 11:36am):
The 4th poster is correct. New business can be added and passed if it is ratified at a subsequent meeting. There is no violation unless this subsequent ratification does not take place. The proposal could be brought up again for consideration at the next meeting.
The only harm done here is that this good measure did not pass. Otherwise, I'm not sure what the issue is here.
Anonymous (April 25, 2005 @ 11:44am):
"Really, this piece seems driven entirely by spite."
It's probably because the Herald is mad at Vogel and others for starting the Mendota Beacon.
Anonymous (April 25, 2005 @ 12:24pm):
This editorial is absolutely ridiculous for the reasons stated by the posters above. Did anyone at the Herald even check with an outside source to make sure your interpretation of open meetings law wasn't completely innaccurate?
For your information,new business can be added to an agenda at the beginning of a meeting before it is adopted by the body. So, a proposal like Brad's can be debated and voted on and if passed, must be ratified at a subsequent meeting before any action can be taken regarding the business in question.
So, if Brad's salary policy had passed, it wouldn't have actually legally been able to take effect until it was ratified at another meeting. This process still gives those who would be inclined to lobby for its passage and defeat an opportunity to voice an opinion at a meeting, etc. This is legal and in fact happens at the meetings of EVERY shared governance committee on campus that follows Roberts Rules of Order
This editorial was indeed written purely out of spite. Rarely if ever does the Herald actually even check any of the meeting agenda's. More often than not they send a reporter to the meetings and this time they Herald got lazy, didn't send a reporter and the Cardinal scooped them. Too bad
Anonymous (April 25, 2005 @ 12:49pm):
Can ASM take several more steps back - into Lake Mendota.
What a crock.
Anonymous (April 25, 2005 @ 1:19pm):
To all those saying new business can be added, you are missing the point. It can be added, but it must be debated and voted on at a future meeting. Re-read the statutes, you idiots. And pay careful attention to the last paragraph of the column, the Herald has a good point.
Anonymous (April 25, 2005 @ 1:32pm):
If ASM is as useless as the Herald claims it is then why do they bitch and moan about them every other day. Even if they are useless I'd rather deal with their incompetance than to listen to more Badger Herald diatribes about them. Get over it.
Anonymous (April 25, 2005 @ 3:22pm):
the badger herald is lazy journalism that isn't worth the paper it's printed on.
it's nothign more than complete garbage.
you're all shit.
Anonymous (April 25, 2005 @ 8:56pm):
holy shit. the herald broke news. fuckin' a dude
