Controversy surrounding the student organization Wisconsin Public Interest Research Group continued to stir throughout the weekend after University of Wisconsin Interim Chancellor David Ward issued a statement Thursday intended to provide clarification on his actions concerning the group’s funding. 

Ward’s statement is yet another facet of the ongoing struggle between WISPIRG and the UW administration. WISPIRG announced last week it gathered signatures of 10 percent of the university’s population in support of a petition requesting the chancellor respects its allotted funding. 

The Student Services Finance Committee approved WISPIRG’s budget in November 2012, including funding for professional staff. In its decision, SSFC included a sunset clause that would approve the positions and salaries for nonuniversity staff, until the chancellor either did or did not sign off to approve funding for these positions. 

In the statement, Ward expressed though the Associated Students of Madison initially approved WISPIRG’s budget, including a line for funding professional staff, he did not approve funding allocated for the nonuniversity staff because it violates F50, a UW System policy on governing the use of segregated fees that was created in 2007.

“Much is being made to suggest I have taken a grand departure from past practice related to funding of student organizations, and specifically, WISPIRG,” Ward said in the statement. “I write today to clarify that this is not the case.”

By the requirements of F50, segregated fees cannot be used for funding of nonuniversity employees except via contract. Since the contract did not meet provisions of F50, Ward said, he denied the contract request, thereby approving a budget for WISPIRG – with funding for professional staff removed – of $55,571.17.

ASM drafted a contracting process in the spring of 2012 to fund groups like WISPIRG that request funds for professional staff, according to the statement.

This agreement, the Campus Services Fund, was an addition to SSFC bylaws, according to ASM Press Office Director David Gardner. He said CSF was introduced to add a contract that can be paid through segregated fees in compliance with university and Board of Regents policies.

WISPIRG Board Chair Emily Eyck said in a way she felt frustrated with Ward’s response. She said in some ways, Ward inaccurately represented the case and did not provide clarification in his statement.

Eyck provided an example of this in her stance on Ward’s interpretation of F50. She said she feels Ward failed to provide specific details on parts of F50 WISPIRG has violated.

The presidents of UW System and the Board of Regents supported Ward’s interpretation of F50 late last spring, according to the statement. Ward said in the statement ASM did not appeal this decision.

This makes it seem like ASM did not care to appeal, Eyck said. What happened, she added, was ASM was not able to draft an appeal by the required deadline because Ward chose to not grant WISPIRG’s contract for funding professional staff at a time so late in the year that made it nearly impossible for student government to appeal.

Professional staff is necessary to WISPIRG’s operations, Eyck said. 

SSFC student leaders will meet with Ward next Wednesday to present the budgets for the next fiscal year, Eyck said. This is critical, she added, because they hope for a definitive response.

SSFC Chair Ellie Bruecker and Vice Chair Joe Vanden Avond will defend WISPIRG’s budget as passed by SSFC, according to Gardner. Bruecker and Vanden Avond will ask Ward to respect SSFC’s decision, he said, including funding for professional staff.

Campus will find out Wednesday, Gardner said, if Ward will do the same things as he did last year and refrain from signing the contract for funding of WISPIRG’s professional staff.

Gardner said SSFC passed a resolution last spring supporting its decision to fund WISPIRG’s budget, contrary to Ward’s actions. He said at the upcoming meeting Wednesday, Bruecker and Vanden Avond will present another resolution supporting WISPIRG’s contract and urge Ward to sign the contract in accordance with students’ decisions.