OPINION & EDITORIAL
Send em’ APACing
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:
- Ignorance, irresponsibility doom broken segregated fee system (November 15, 2005)
- Overdue (November 17, 2005)
- Student orgs abuse SSFC fund requests (November 10, 2005)
- Responsibility a must for SSFC (October 10, 2005)
- The 'opt-out' option: a dangerous concept (April 9, 2003)
by Badger Herald Editorial Board
Wednesday, November 9, 2005
The segregated-fee distribution process is often a contentious subject among students on this campus. And the reasons are endless to question the judgment of those doling out the checks.
Once again, this board believes that some organizations have abused the segregated-fee funding they receive. One egregious example of such abuse comes from the Asian Pacific American Council. Let's just say that for those looking for a part-time job, APAC might be a good place to pick up an employment application.
Salaries comprise more than half of APAC's 2005-06 budget. More specifically, the organization received $206,935 in segregated-fee funding from SSFC for this year, and salaries account for $131,020 of this amount. To put this sum in perspective, the chair and vice chair of this group make $26,131 combined. Program coordinators collectively earn $24,840, and their publication editors take home $14,126.40.
We believe this money would be better put to use on programs intended to benefit the campus community.
Furthermore, we feel this organization's services overlap significantly with other organizations on campus — many of whom have also received segregated fees — such as the Multicultural Student Association, Diversity Education Program and Office of the Dean of Students. We aren't the only ones who hold this view.
This group was almost placed on the chopping block earlier this semester for the 2006-07 funding cycle when SSFC deemed the organization ineligible for segregated-fee funding because it did not provide a "significant additional campus service." SSFC believed that its services were covered by other groups on campus. After APAC appealed the decision, SSFC reversed its result and granted the organization segregated-fee funding.
This board questions the logic of the reversal.
Because this organization is reproducing services that already exist on campus, we urge APAC to demonstrate to the student body how its services are unique from those offered by other organizations on campus. If they can't, then we believe their funding should be returned to those who pay their salaries — UW students.
