Talk:Associated Students of Madison
From Badger Herald Wiki
%META:TOPICINFO{author="JasonSmathers" date="1214272875" format="1.1" version="1.8"}% %META:TOPICPARENT{name="AssociatedStudentsOfMadison"}% ---+ Student Services Finance Committee
Student Services Finance Committee (SSFC) is a core body of the Associated Students of Madison. It is responsible for reviewing and approving all segregated fee funding — including the ASM internal budget, travel/operation grants and eligible student groups and services.
%TOC% ---++ Allocable vs. Non Allocable Funds
Although all segregated fee budgets pass through SSFC at some point, those fees are broken into two seperate areas:
* *Non-allocable segregated fees* are those approved directly by the Chancellor and UW Board of Regents. SSFC reviews the budgets of non-allocable projects, but can only serve an advisory role before their review by the chancellor. Non-allocable fees fund operational costs for the Wisconsin Union, University Health Services, the Student Activity Center, Intramural Sports (including the SERF and Natatorium) and the Child Care Tuition Assistance Program. Non-allocable fees make up *roughly 80 percent* of all segregated fees.
* *Allocable segregated fees* are those directly under the control of students, with ASM and Student Council having the final say. They are divided into four sub-areas:
* *The General Student Services Fund provides* funding for certain student groups that demonstrate a unique service to the student body. These funds fall under the authority of SSFC in terms of eligibility and funding decisions and are approved as an entire slate of funding decisions by Student Council. The Chancellor and Board of Regents have the final say on these funding decisions, but usually serve as a rubber-stamp for SSFC (certain exceptions do apply in recent years.) GSSF funds account for *roughly* *7 percent* of all segregated fees.
* The ASM internal budget includes travel and operations grants for registered student organizations as well as the operational budget for the whole of ASM. The budget is first passed by Finance committee, then approved by Student Council before being forwared to SSFC for further review. After any changes are made by SSFC, the budget is sent to Student Council for final approval. ASM's internal budget accounts for roughly 2 percent of all segregated fees.
* The ASM Bus Pass is a service that allows students to use the Madison Metro for free. The financial decisions regarding the cost is usually fixed, but can be renegotiated at the request of Madison Metro. A Shared Governance committee deals with most of these negotiations. The bus pass accounts for *roughly 9 percent* of all segregated fees.
* A small portion ($2) of segregated fees go to pay for membership dues to United Council, the statewide student government lobbying body.
---++ GSSF Eligibility and Funding Hearings
SSFC spends almost the entire fall semester hearing presentations from potential GSSF recipients. Groups must first submit their application for eligibility, followed by a budget application outlining their expenses. Following submission of the appropriate materials, student groups are allowed to make their case in a presentation to SSFC. SSFC can choose to grant or deny eligibility. If eligibility is denied, student groups can either file an appeal with SSFC or file a complaint with Student Judiciary if they feel SSFC violated viewpoint neutrality. If eligibility is granted, their budget will be presented to SSFC for approval. The committee can strike line items, cut or increase amounts for certain items. From there, all final budgets must be submitted to Student Council for a 2/3 vote by December 7. ---+++ History
_For more information on the segregated fee process, go to the main article on segregated university fees or the article on UW Board of Regents v. Scott Southworth et. al._
Since the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 2001 that the process of segregated fee distribution was legal (as long the funds were distributed in a "viewpoint neutral" manner), eligibility and budget hearings for student groups have proven to be highly contentious from year to year. Complaints were filed early on by the Mexican/Chicano/a Association (MeChA), Collegians for a Constructive Tomorrow (CFACT) and MultiCultural Student Coalition (MCSC), among others. Although MeCha and CFACT were eventually denied eligibility, others have modified their services or fought SSFC rulings successfully to recieve funds. One of the most contentious disputes came with the eligibility application by the Roman Catholic Foundation of UW-Madison (RCF-UW), who contended their denials hinged on religious discrimination. Although several court cases eventually ruled that RCF-UW is eligible for segregated fees. ( _see article on Roman Catholic Foundation dispute)_
Many of the disputes over funding issues were seen as hinging on a vague criteria for eligibilty. With the introduction of the 2007-08 SSFC session, members including chair Alex Gallagher and vice chair Katrina Flores made efforts to clarify what constituted an eligible student group. RCF-UW, Jewish Cultural Collective and the Asian Pacific American Council we're denied eligibility under the interpretation of Criterion C, which asks for an "additional significant component." All groups appealed the ruling and Student Judicary ruled in their favor, with Vice Justice Shaun Hernandez writing that the additional significant compenent “has to be placed in the context of the educational benefit or service to the community,” and must “be applied in the content of your educational benefit or service and not in the content of your event programming and leadership opportunities, which is what SSFC had been doing before." SSFC reevaluated the group's applications with this new understanding of the criteria, yet denied them again. The series of rulings prompted disappointment with the criteria, with JCC spokesperson Alex Sheridan stating, "If we are held to a higher status of significance, it needs to be explained what that significance means."
Although a circuit court ruling regarding RCF's funding said the interpretation was viable, SSFC decided to modify the criteria to include a more specific definition of eligible service groups. After deliberation and confirmation with Student Council, SSFC revised their GSSF eligibility in 2008.
The new criteria focuses on the idea that a group must provide a "direct service," which must be provided throughout the year, to all recipients regardless of membership with a particular group. The criteria has yet to be used for any eligibility decisions. ---++ Criticism and Controversy
SSFC's criticism is often tied to dissatisfaction regarding the segregated fee itself. However, SSFC has drawn ire from some students on campus who seek a fiscally conservative philosophy for the group. ---+++ SFFC member stipends
On December 2, 2007, SSFC voted to institute a weekly stipend of $40 for members who attend both meetings each week. In an effort to ensure the SSFC members were not voting to pay themselves, the members decided not to institute the stipend until the 2009-10 academic year. Alex Gallagher, among other SSFC members, said the long hours may prevent certain members from joining due to time normally spent at part times jobs being consumed by hours-long SSFC meetings. Secretary Kurt Gosselin objected to the initial decision, saying he believed the committee should not be deciding it's own needs.
In an editorial, The Badger Herald lambasted SSFC for the decision, criticizing SSFC for needing financial incentive to do what was previously a volunteer position.
Students should not join SS]6tFC or any other bureaucratic arm of our student government because they're going to get compensation out of it; they should do it because they genuinely care about the state of this university. According to SSFC chair Alex Gallagher, in a Badger Herald news article, a position on SSFC requires just six to 12 hours a week. We do not think this is a tremendous burden, and accordingly, a stipend is not necessary.
If SSFC thinks its members need an extra incentive to do the job they were either elected or appointed to do anyway, then perhaps those members should step down — it certainly could make the committee more efficient.
---+++ ---++ 2008-09 SSFC Officials | Member | Title | Status | | Kurt Gosselin | Chair | Elected | | Adam Porton | Vice Chair | Elected | | Carly Fergus | Secretary | Appointed | | Zorian Lasowski | Representative | Appointed | | Ian Sundstrom | Representative | Appointed | | Joseph French | Representative | Elected | | Kyle Szarzynski | Representative | Appointed | | Jacob Victor | Representative | Appointed | | Ben Coggins | Representative | Student Council |
