6:38 – I got here late, in the middle of open forum. Polygon went up to speak, realized they actually confused eligibility hearings with open forum. Four less speakers. MCSC just spoke on their dialogues program. no questions. Moving on. Alex Gallagher speaks about Tenant Resource Center – they need to reapply after the Student Judiciary ruling. Discussing the agenda. moving on. 6:41 – we’re actually seperated by about…half a room. Division, why is this necessary? Come together, SSFC! Motion to add an agenda item for Students for Tenant Resource Center. confused, but moving on. Eligibility hearings – starting with Polygon. 6:45 – Emilee Siverling explains the benefits – Engineering Bash, used for Welcome Week. allows student org to recruit for new members. FUSE dinner that has industry professors, staff, etc meeting with students to discuss diversity issues. Also have Freshmen set up dinners with the Dean. Do a kids day on campus for middle and high school – gives leaders a hands on rule with “service.” General meetings monthly – hoping to improve the quality of education (ie the differential tuition increase) and have announcements on leadership opportunities. Career connections – “I’m sure you heard about the Halliburton thing in the paper.” Jessica (?) explains openness to all students – all students and services are open to engineers and non-engineers. Ok, here’s my question – why is this funded by Seg Fees? I still haven’t heard why this is NOT funded by general tuition, especially when formed so close with a specific school/college. Polygon is tied to the Student Leadership Center – different bank accounts, different procedures. Umbrella group to RSO groups, a lot of them are competitive engineering groups. Still represent the whole university. Liason between college of engineering and the rest of the university. Getting tired of trying to connect lines yet? 6:54 – Q and A. First question regards SLC, how do you deal with them? – Sec. Gosslin How to use SLC fees, etc. Flores – Must provide additional “significant componants” to leadership and events. Can you elaborate? Siverling: Engineering Bash – help students get used to campus, upperclassman and the college – help them know where classes are, etc. FUSE dinner talks about diversity issues and an open forum to help problem solve on diversity issues. Improve the quality of education in engineering. Robert’s rules? that’s a burden, not an additional component. Brings companies (289) to the university to recruit. Again, why do students do this? Why not the college? 7:02 Flores: Asking them to outline leadership development components and event components. Man. Should have asked for a flow chart. 7:04 – rephrasing the original question, Could you highlight what your “substantial” additional components other than events? Woa. they’re tough. Jenny responds: general meetings are networking components. The polygon people keep mentioning diversity dinner, kind of hinting, “that’s additional.” Jenny: did that answer your question? Alex: you can’t ask questions. Rep Lee: If I’m majoring in marketing, what can I expect from Polygon? Jenny responds by saying they could be part of the polygon board. Also, if you’re a member of an RSO, you could recieve advice from them on SLC and otherwise. Rep. Porton: you are an umbrella org for other RSO’s. What is your relationship with these other groups? Siverling: our general meetings are the main way we act as an umbrella. A lot of our members have time to exchange ideas and contrast events to improve their own RSO’s. But mainly, distribute funds. Jenny clarifies: wait, we don’t recieve money from SLC, we are the “segway” between that. Maybe you just shouldn’t have any hands on that money, eh? She also clarifies that RSO’s come to them for advice. They have still not listed and student orgs. I’m waiting. 7:11 Followup from Porton- What the hell is SLC? (ok, not put like that, but close enough.) Jenny responds, to be an RSO, you have to register with the SOO. Don’t know why the SLC started. (nor do I.) You don’t have to be an engineering group, you just want to “affiliate” with that group. Try to work with SLC to explain extra benefits from that group. So what, when the SOO doesn’t give you money, they can? Jesus. Porton: final question, many of the groups in SLC are competition based…any specific SLC org rules as opposed to a general RSO? Jenny mentions services…leadership…goes beyond a normal org. Talks about concrete canoes… Those organizations are run very differently. Help them to deal with a competition based org. Flores: When you say WE help them, is that SLC or Polygon? Jenny doesn’t want to explain the competition aspect, but emphasizes the same talking points: advice, etc. Hmm. By the way, if SSFC wants to clarify what the hell is going on here with further comments afterward, please do. Just because, this is pretty confusing at times. Flores askswhat Polygon provides with these RSO groups…what would you catagorize this service as? Jenny: Liasons. Siverling: we’re not planning an event by helping the competitive events, ok, maybe it’s a leadership component. Rep Wiegand: Are there services that are seperate from SLC or do both organizations do all these same things? Siverling: all the events we’ve mentioned, other than career connections, are purely organized by Polygon. Jenny: The SLC isn’t an organization, it’s a group within the university within the SOO. Seems to be arguing that SLC fails occasionally and Polygon picks up the slack. Additionally – SLC doesn’t troubleshoot with RSO’s, Polygon does. Around and around we go… 7:25 – we’re extending Q and A by 10 minutes. Porton – did Polygon recieve GSSF funding for this past year? Polygon: no. Porton: Could you guys function…well…have you ever recieved a GSSF grant? Can you describe why you can’t operate at the same level without GSSF? Polygon explains – ever since we started in 1925, we ran career connections, and companies would pay us money to come to campus. We also recieved SSFC funding until…somepoint…Career Connections took over that service, took away the funding they were getting. For the past two years we’ve been denied funding. Now, we’re only getting the funding from career connections. Siverling: We operate around a 10,000 dollar budget – includes what we’ve talked to you about before. Yes, we’ve had other sources of funding in the past, (industries), to continue functioning and continue to provide our services, it would not be feasible without the 10,000 dollars. If we don’t get the funding, we could probably get some funding, but not all. Ok, but if you raise a little through Finance grants and other through industry…you’re good, right? 7:30– Porton: How do you advertise events? Siverling – we flyer, chalk, email the goes out to engineering students – Every new student should recieve funding for that. “We have not advertised via the Cardinal or Badger Herald…” Anyone want to check that, Herald? 7:32 -“We do abide by the rules…” No shit? 7:33 – Damn, Porton really is hammering them for details. He’s asking for details of attendence at their events. My question is – if it’s open to the public, does this really matter? Maybe for funding, but not for eligibility. Jenny ends on this point: the reason we were able to operate at full capacity last year was because we “were lucky” and had extra money left over. Well, what do you know? Fiscal responsibility, hello? Hey, business majors, there’s your in – work for Polygon! 7:39 – they keep extending discussion for two more minutes because they keep getting cut off mid sentence. Hit the breaks, don’t pump them. Alright, Polygon is done. They’ll vote Thursday. MCSC is up next. 7:41 – here we go – can’t hear their names. Great job, Smathers great job. Their are two of them, so we’ll just collectively refer to those two as “MCSC Reps.” MCSC – serve as a vessal to other student orgs, offer free flyer design for under-represented audiences. Serves as a bridge to increase diverse dialogue. “UW-Madison is a decentralized campus, especially when conisdering multicultural dialogue.” Involved in writing workshops with writing center, served about, one love series, Dating Mating and Relating, etc. Housing requests these services… MCSC is citing our racist rants on Gerald’s column, a few Lambda things, etc, for their emphasis on needs for change. Hmong human rights campaign, after the “alleged” comments made by Kaplan. UW Police and Union meetings to stop profiling at hip-hop shows… I have to admit, they have a lot of programs going on here…Don’t really think we can argue that they don’t provide a service to campus. I mean, why wouldn’t they be eligible? Funding levels, now that’s the trick. 7:49 – “DEP no longer exists.” It doesn’t? I knew they were taken off the funding list, but…it’s just gone? We need some education on diversity issues, but should MCSC really be doing this alone? Time for Q and A. 7:50 – Anyone taken this “Multicultural Dialogues” class? How’d it go? Porton – What is your role in conflict mediation services around campus? Good question. MCSC – with the Hmong issue, we actually stepped, gave them an open forum to discuss and “facilitate dialogue.” Follow-up: You say you’ll take over DEP, if you could really explain that more specifically. MCSC – really served more as a “Human Resources,” we’ve taken on that role. With a lot of our dialogues and workshops, we really help. Well. That was concise. Rep. Wiegand: What are your significant additional components. MCSC: We respond to student inquiries. We provide trainings for groups, staff and individuals on LGBT issues, grant workshops, program workshops. Serve communities through “networking.” Ok, specifics, please? Gosselin: for the sake of continuity, please talk about your accessibility to all students. MCSC: We are always open, we table at student events, etc. Also, networking, gotta have the networking. Man, they can make a better argument than this! Porton: If you don’t recieve GSSF funding, what will you lose? MCSC: Staff. We need trained and reliable staff to operate. Follow-up: Is intercultural dialogues part of a fig? Or are their certain sections? MCSC: created with some FIG coordinators and a think tank. Student run, but facilitators taken. Porton is still hammering it home: You talk about working with Plan 2008. How did you work with the administration and in what way do you work with the administration? MCSC: We usually work with administrators monthly, in “Alphabet Soup” meetings to discuss the plan and diversity initiatives. 8:00 – End of Q and A for MCSC. Wow, that was quick. Now it’s time for the Campus Women’s Center. This better go quick. I don’t see how you could argue against this group being eligible. Oh, bias, bias. oops. Lets go. 8:02 – Education, support, etc. on sexism, racism. We are the campus women’s center, but we target the whole campus. Got it. Easy. Umbrella organization? Stop using that term, it makes you seem like a shell of a group. They give a story about a man who needed condoms because his girlfriend was coming into town. They gave him advice, resources and, of course, condoms. Also mention the safety whistles. Jesus, those things do NOT work. They made that clear during House Fellow training. Still, they hand them out. Oh well. At least you have a new whistle out of the deal. CWC is the only org on campus that provides FREE child care on campus. Woa. That’s one hell of a “additional substantial service.” 8:18 – took a brief break. Now they’re on Q and A, talking about duplication of services. It’s unique because it has a different atmopshere, it’s a “discussion group.” Follow-up: How do you conceptualize the center as a safe space. Mention of a poster that was moved because it was described as “offensive.” Yawn. 8:25 – proceedings still boring, but let me make this point. Rep. Porton really does his best to direct the same questions to the same groups. Good job striving for VPN. 8:35 – Women’s Studies is done. Time for a recess. YAY! 8:51 – Just talked with representatives from Sex Out Loud and Rape Crisis Center, and both stressed that they’re on edge about this year’s standards, which seem “stricter.” Also saw Alex and Katrina inbetween breaks, who said they think they’ve been very true to Viewpoint Neutrality. “We’ve denied about five groups so far.” Too true, but is denial equal with viewpoint neutrality? I’ll have to think about. Especially considering the SJ views. Should make a column on Wednesday. Reconvening. 8:56 – Students Tenant Union. Voting? Flores: talks about additional significant components. Seems to support additional components. However, if you fund both tenant groups, there is a duplication of resources. So, really should just fund this group. 9:03 Call to question on eligibility. Student Tenant Union. Flores: Aye Gosselin: Aye Oh: Aye Porton: Aye Done. 9:04 – Rape Crisis Center. Porton: It’s not an RSO! I’m looking for what people are feeling. Can we work around that? Flores: Can’t answer that question specifically, but considering what they provide, it meets criteria. However, it’s not an RSO. Have to follow the guidelines. Sec. Gosselin: What she said. Porton: Why aren’t they an RSO? The group spoke extensively about how the service they provide serves tons of students, but can’t be provided BY students. Need to see where a group can’t be funded. I really appreciate the fact that they didn’t try and finagle their way into it by changing the group into a student one. It seems like there is no leeway on this point. 9:08 – Call to Question. on Rape Crisis Center. Flores: Abstain. Gosselin: Abstain. Lee: Aye Oh: Nay Porton: Nay 1-2-2 – Rape Crisis Center denied. This RSO business…tricky, but needed. 9:09– Sex Out Loud decision. Flores: Biggest area of inquiry has been criteria C – significant additional components. Four core programs: Meaning, “Safety,” “Pleasure,” “Pleasure II,” “Relationships” Porton: I see additional significant services, but not in the same area. More in the office, with information, condoms, etc. Oh: Programming can be considered educational, especially condom demos. Question! Flores: Aye Gosselin: Aye Oh: Aye Porton: Aye Lee: Aye Sex Out Loud makes it. In. Funding decisions should be interesting. 9:14 – motion to reconsider Students for Tenant Resource Center. Not eligibility, only puts it on the agenda for next meeting. Vote passes. 9:16 – Student Tenant Union – late budget application. They submitted their budgets on time, but realized the budget was flawed. Excel file was taken to a meeting with SSFC. Made revisions on another laptop. Printed out new version, whoops! It was the older version. Just a note, the rep. from the Rape Crisis Center passed me her information. Might call her tomorrow. Question. Motion passes. Allow a budget hearing? Question. Sure. 9:23 – letter regarding JCC, RCF and PREA 9:29– CFACT decision means they need to provide a structure and guideline for contract status. Doesn’t deal with viewpoint neutrality. Gallagher has rewritten guidelines for contract status, gave the SSFC members the document as bedside reading. Will give them criteria. They’re talking about contract status like it might not survive this year. Sounds good to me. Absurd status for a group to have. 9:38 – Flores is yawning, and so am I. I think it’s time to go.
Categories:
SSFC – the live blog
September 24, 2007
Advertisements
0
Donate to The Badger Herald
Your donation will support the student journalists of University of Wisconsin-Madison. Your contribution will allow us to purchase equipment and cover our annual website hosting costs.
More to Discover