E-mail
Print
SHAC and SA negotiating override
Associate Dean of Students says takeover is prohibited
By Kevin Lessmiller
“If this all falls through, we’re still going to go with our first plan of action” – SHAC President Nikki Senrick
The UW-Milwaukee Student Housing Administrative Council (SHAC) is in negotiations with the UWM Student Association (SA) concerning legislation overriding a bill passed by SA Sept. 21.
SHAC President Nikki Senrick says SA is considering passing legislation at its next meeting, set for Oct. 19, that overrides the previous ‘A Resolution Defining the Student Housing Administrative Council’ bill, slightly modifying the first act.
“We’ve been able to basically negotiate some of the points they’ve tried making that we really strongly disagreed with,” said Senrick in an interview with The Post on Thursday Oct. 2.
“SHAC’s main concern was with the five office hours required by the SHAC president to be served over in the SA office,” she said. “[That] limits the access that you would have to the [University Housing] residents that you serve.”
In addition to the worry over office hours, SA’s power to veto SHAC legislation troubles the Senrick and her SHAC cohorts. SHAC believes that SA shouldn’t have the power to veto legislation pertaining only to University Housing residents.
“Our other concerns were with the types of legislation that SA would have the ability to veto,” she said. The legislation that SHAC passes, Senrick added, is “very housing-specific” and “has absolutely no impact on SA.”
SHAC’s initial plan of action was taking the matter to the University Student Court. However, the new negotiations with SA have put those discussions on hold.
“It’s out of the picture provided that this negotiation goes through,” said Senrick.
Should the negotiations falter, Senrick said SHAC would revert to its initial strategy.
“If this all falls through, we’re still going to go with our first plan of action.”
Senrick said that Mia Steinemann, SHAC Vice President and junior justice on the University Student Court, would have to excuse herself from a potential SHAC vs. SA student court case. The standard is five justices, but it would go down to three in that scenario.
Legality of takeover
On Friday, UWM Associate Dean of Students Tom McGinnity sent a letter to SHAC, SA and the student court regarding the legitimacy of SA’s envelopment of SHAC. In the letter, McGinnity wrote about Wisconsin shared governance law, Wis. Stat. § 36.09(5), and the Wisconsin Supreme Court Case S.A. v. Baum.
“Nothing in the plain language of § 36.09(5) nor the Wisconsin Supreme Court's interpretation of that statute provides SA the exclusive right to represent students at UWM for all purposes,” wrote McGinnity. “On the contrary, Baum specifically contemplates the existence of an organization such as SHAC. Thus, SA's legislation attempt to co-opt SHAC against its will is prohibited.”
On Sunday, SA Speaker of the Senate Tyler Kristopeit said SA will issue a formal response to McGinnity’s letter early this week.
Jonathan Anderson contributed to this report.
> Comments
UWM Alum on Oct 07, 2008 at 07:07 AM:
Tom wouldn't know shared governance if it smacked him in the forehead. Nice try Tom, you should definitely stick to surfing the web during the day.
If this was a serious matter, UWM Legal would have sent the letter. Tom is just sticking his nose into a place it doesn't belong - if he knew shared governance and ACTUALLY read the Baum case, he would see that student government should be run "FREE OF ADMINISTRATIVE INTERFERENCE". This would MOST CERTAINLY be administrative interference.
Stay out of student government Tom!
Esteemed UWM Alum on Oct 07, 2008 at 07:53 AM:
I sure hope SA sticks to its guns and doesn't capitulate to pressure. Sure, 36.09(5) might not say that SA is the sole governing body of UWM, but it does NOT say that they can't be.
Five hours in the SA office is too much? Give me a break! If you were a true student leader, Nikki, you would want to learn from the best and brightest leaders at UWM. President Draheim and Speaker Kristopeit are the two most compassionate student leaders I know. It would be a great way to serve in a leadership role and still have a chance to learn and be mentored.
My second comment is regarding Tom McGinnity's feeble attempt at circumventing 36.09(5) by using that same statute. Tom, stay out of student governance and look for more cost effective ways of maintaining your soon to be extinct department. I know last years SA was very, very generous with your funding and I'm not 100% sure this SA will be so much.
Keep up the great work SUFC!
concerned alum on Oct 07, 2008 at 02:23 PM:
Tom McGinnity has done more for student life at UWM than any of the supposed student "leaders" in SA has done. SA would accomplish more for its students if every once in a while its leaders actually stopped pretending they knew everything and listened to what Tom had to say. Just because the administration never has the backbone to stand up and back him doesn't mean he is wrong. I give huge credit to the man for repeatedly standing up for what is right even though he knows he'll get no support from his superiors or other students who know full well he's right.
As for the last two posters, you are clearly USV or SUFC cronies from the past few years (or, worse yet, the corrupt people who led the cronies). YOU wouldn't know shared governance if it smacked you in the forehead. 36.09(5) was meant to protect and empower students, not give SA an excuse to waste money and victimize other organizations. And anyone who calls themselves "esteemed UWM alum" couldn't be that "esteemed".
concerned alum = Ex-MKEer on Oct 07, 2008 at 03:18 PM:
concerned alum = Ex-MKEer I'd be willing to put $100.00 on it You know who you are, I know who you are :)
actual student.... on Oct 07, 2008 at 08:37 PM:
The point of Nikki's job is to help the residence of student housing...how the hell is she going to help the residence if she has to sit in the SA office looking at a bunch of ego-manic students who feel they have more power then they will ever have in their entire lives!
anynomous on Oct 07, 2008 at 08:59 PM:
SA is power hungry....
Closet Fan on Oct 08, 2008 at 07:42 AM:
Selkirk's new job is going to shining Mr. Draheim's shoes! Bwa ha ha ha!!!
Actual Student... on Oct 08, 2008 at 12:17 PM:
"Selkirk's new job is going to shining Mr. Draheim's shoes! Bwa ha ha ha!!!" ....WOW first of all learn to spell, second of all her names Nikki Senrick!
End the Corruption Now on Oct 08, 2008 at 01:27 PM:
This SA is a continuation of the past SA leaders, one word: corrupt! This SA is more of the SAME, which is insane! Doing the same thing over and over is insane. To steal an election is one thing, but at least you could, then run the SA effectivly and honestly. Watch out UWM Adminisration, SA has it's sights, set on you next, they'll try to replace the Chancellor with Tyler Draheim.
Outside Observer on Oct 08, 2008 at 02:46 PM:
I think Tyler Draheim would make a GREAT chancellor. He has all the fine qualities of a leader:
*Public Speaking *Power of words *A coalition of the willing *Good tipping skills (minus the time he stiffed the waitress at Ma Fisher's)
Vote Draheim '08
UWM Alum on Oct 08, 2008 at 03:28 PM:
How dare you stiff a waitress! I'd never vote for you!!!
Closet Fan on Oct 08, 2008 at 05:23 PM:
No joke, the physical embodiment of shoe shining will have Sinklick’s former position! Nifty Nicki has been outsourced to cheaper labor. (Disembodied manifestations of actions do not charge much for their services.) As for explaining Mr. Draheim’s apparently uncharacteristic conduct at Ma Fisher’s, my best guess would be: A) The waitress was inconsiderate, B) he “stiffed” her on break, or C) both. I wouldn’t know though because I spend so much time hiding in the closet from people who hate my guts.
James S on Oct 08, 2008 at 06:16 PM:
See this is why SA is a joke. You cant have your president stiffing waitresses at Ma Fisher's. That's bullshit. Go MKE
Pundit on Oct 08, 2008 at 06:22 PM:
Closet Fan, what are you on?
A REAL student on Oct 08, 2008 at 06:25 PM:
Have you heard the news? Draheim has taken our advice and has decided to run for President- of the US!
http://www.tsgnet.com/pres.php?id=370617&altf=Uzmfs&altl=Esbifjn
Pundit on Oct 08, 2008 at 06:33 PM:
OMFG, if I didn't know it was a satire, I would have fainted! ; )
Overthrow on Oct 08, 2008 at 07:05 PM:
Section 36.09(5) provides that students "shall have the right to organize themselves in a manner they determine and to select their representatives to participate in institutional governance."
Simply ignore SA and choose a new way to organize. Its about time. The government is de facto.
Re: Pundit on Oct 08, 2008 at 07:41 PM:
Weren't you going to assassinate Tyler Draheim?
what? on Oct 08, 2008 at 08:33 PM:
Pundit you have severe issues. You must be a UWM Post reporter.
Resident of Sandburg on Oct 09, 2008 at 01:45 PM:
Thank you for calling me a moron. Second, off your not my friend, don't try to pull a McCain. True, we as residence were screwed over by him, thanks for agreeing with me. But, this all has to do with Tommy Hughes; you don't think he doesn't want to keep an influence in SHAC. The number one reason why Tommy isn't talked about that much with this SA, SHAC take over, because it would be a red flag that Tommy Hughes is trying to reassert himself in SHAC dealings, he wants more power. Please don’t be ignorant about the whole SA, SHAC stuff you’re probably a really smart person and you shouldn’t be blind to SA politics, just like you should never be blind about National politics. But, it’s pretty clear that SA take over of SHAC is a power grab. After all the BS the SA has done over the pass years, with relatively the same people, this should be no surprise.
Go MKE? on Oct 09, 2008 at 07:51 AM:
Seriously...You have to be at least 30 to make that comment - The day MKE died was a good day for students. MKE was a joke.
The writing on the wall on Oct 09, 2008 at 01:04 PM:
"Resident of Sandburg"- you, my friend, are a moron. Not only do you go on the post website commenting about TOmmy Hughes when he's not the subject of the story, but you also admit that you were screwed over by him.
RAVE-er on Oct 09, 2008 at 07:57 AM:
Reform According to the Voices of Everyone (RAVE) > Milwaukee Party (MKE) --- SA should have a reunion of former SA officials! Then we could have a shared governance quiz to qualify them into the debate tournament "independently" judged by Tom McGinnity, Jim Hill, and a visiting Mary Roggeman (Vice Chancellor of Student Affairs when RAVE and MKE held office)!
Pundit on Oct 09, 2008 at 07:59 AM:
Make no bones about it, Jon Anderson is my role model. I'm sad this is his last year at the Post, but I'll always have my autographed Polaroid of us together.
Jon Anderson is a Joke on Oct 09, 2008 at 09:14 AM:
Jon Anderson is a joke. I've never read an unbiased news article by him. Ryan Cardarella was MUCH better.
Resident of Sandburg on Oct 09, 2008 at 09:43 AM:
I lived in Sandburg last year. My friends were in SHAC, and they would always talk about the VP Tommy Hughes. When ever they talked about him, it didn't sound good. He took control of SHAC even though he was the VP. The SHAC President for Semester II, didn't have a spine, he allowed Tommy to use SHAC as a way to garner experience, for his run in SA. Tommy Hughes is an opportunist, and smooth talking liar. Tommy came to the first SHAC meeting this year and swindled the SHAC Senate and Residence out of $2,000, for a program that the SA was already funding. Yes, not only did the residence pay for the program from SAC funds, but also from the SHAC fee. The program in all actuality is a good program but the residence shouldn't be double dipped. If you think SHAC is run by a bunch of freshmen you’re mostly right, that’s why you can’t trust anyone from SA to have control of SHAC. They will use the greenness of the SHAC government to manipulate them into doing anything they want. I don’t even trust Tommy Hughes to run SA, let alone leave him with millions of dollars, which as VP he presides over the SFC.
Dig Deeper on Oct 09, 2008 at 04:45 PM:
Why isn't anyone reporting about the sexual relationship between SA's VP and SHAC's VP? Isn't it kind of convenient that this whole mess started after they broke up. Interesting.
Tommy Hughes on Oct 09, 2008 at 05:53 PM:
This is getting a bit ridiculous and nasty. First of all it is silly for you to claim that you were not involved in SHAC last year... I am involved in student government and as much as I wish it was different, people don't care enough to share with their friends so much that you could comment so extensively about what was going on in SHAC last year. There were only 5, or 6, out of over 60 individuals in Senate who disliked the course of legislation enough to vote against it. Joe Kolbach (Last year's semester II president) definitely had a spine, there were plenty of occasions where we disagreed. Though I did play a much more involved role than other Vice Presidents, he held the cards in the situation and got his way most of the time, ask him.
I am sick of people bothering me about this... If you want to take issue with how SHAC was last year that's fine. If you didn't like the Grill Act, or giving RiverView's hall council a budget, all the power to you. I had no part in the content of this legislation past an advisory role on how different SHAC by-laws work so it would be coherent, and wouldn't mame SHAC how it stands. SHAC is a great organization, and the intent of this legislation has obviously been severely misunderstood.
Look guys, I think Nikki and the other execs are perfectly capable... I've said that before, and am saying it again. I have no part in SHAC, nor do I have time (or care) to. I have to preside over the allocation of a ten million dollar budget, take care of Union Policy Board issues, and keep up with my school work. Your conspiracy theories and comparing me to Russ Rueden (a criminal)are largely pointless. If you care so much, or want to know more about this legislation talk to Tyler Kristopeit, who wrote it. I won't comment anymore about this on here. If you have an issue you would like to talk to me about, or have questions; my office hours are posted. My e-mail is trhughes@uwm.edu if you would really like to meet up.
Also, my private life is none of your business. SHAC's VP and I dated, but that doesn't really add up either since we broke up in July.
Tommy Hughes
Knock Knock Redux on Oct 09, 2008 at 06:33 PM:
Why were the "Knock Knock" and "Re: Knock Knock" posts deleted? What ever happened to the free press...oh wait, this is the uber-biased UWM Post. Whatever!
Shedding truth to lies on Oct 10, 2008 at 12:49 AM:
Out of 60 Senators only 5 or 6 disliked the legislation. Your, memory is a little off, because I don't remember 60 people attending a single SHAC meeting last year. In fact most nights when SHAC met, SHAC barley met quorum. Also, people do care about student government; they care about it so much that they will raise uproar. Last year ASAP Pres and VP candidates lost by 115 votes out of 1187, and they staged a write-in campaign, shows how much they care. Oh, and by the way more than 5 or 6 people disliked the legislation and how the Senators were treated during discussion. I remember when the legislation didn’t go, Tommy’s way he would get red in the face and be really snarky. I wouldn’t be surprised if Tommy complains to the Post about the comments people leave, “It’s not fair, people were lying about me” Well, guess what Tommy the truth hurts! And your lies will not set you free.
I'm very happy with my prius on Oct 10, 2008 at 08:49 AM:
"Resident of Sandburg"...again you are a moron. I am a 100 times smarter and better than you in everything. Im also glad you got my Mccain reference- it's important to keep up with his speaking style because you will hear a lot more of during the next 8 years.
Anyway, Tommy Hughes is a great man. He's young, ambitious, and soon he will rule the world. It's only a matter of time. If I were you (so glad im not btw), I would warm up to Thomas R Hughes because soon there will be 42" LCD tv's in every hall with his face.
Disciple of Tommy Hughes on Oct 10, 2008 at 09:57 AM:
I went to UWM precisely to be mentored under the tutelage of the great sage youth Tommy Hughes! He's a kind of Ghandi-Churchill hybrid of shared governance!
SHREDDING truth into lies on Oct 10, 2008 at 10:30 AM:
Wherever my lies go, there I am.
Resident of Sandburg on Oct 10, 2008 at 12:09 PM:
Thank you once again for calling me a moron. But it's obvious that you are not as smart as I am. You don't offer any evidence to your argument. Also, it appears that you don't have a clue as to what is going on with Presidential politics, John McCain is losing and Barack Obama is winning, that's the real writing on the wall. Your right Tommy Hughes could rule the world. It's just everyone who got him there wouldn't be. I'll stay as far away from Tommy as I can, he and everyone else in SUFC are politically damaging.
Disciple of Tommy Hughes on Oct 10, 2008 at 03:05 PM:
It's high time for a Hughes Youth Movement (HYM)!
Crazy Critic on Oct 10, 2008 at 03:34 PM:
Why are so many people in a tizzy over this? It’s all scripted and predetermined anyway. You don’t get involved with shared governance without knowing there are certain boundaries you have to operate within. At UWM, WI statues, UW System and Board of Regents policies, university policies, and SA policies determine your flexibility and scope of authority in ANY student position of shared governance. Therefore, the SA sets policies and stacks committees to make it unfeasible to act against the will of the (not officially recognized but matter-of-factly potent) “SA Booking Committee” (aka known as “Creative Control”). If you want to change a student policy at UWM, don’t bother lobbying senators willy-nilly, just read who has been authoring the most successful legislation (in terms of pass-fail) and lobby those individuals because THEY are on the SA Booking Committee. This cadre has recently decided that they want to promote “shared governance entertainment” instead of the less broadly appealing “pure” format of shared governance (which typically features long meetings with complex exchanges of technical displays of Parliamentary Procedure), so they are holding more programming this year. But remember, although the outcomes are predetermined, the impact of the means and ends is very real, so don’t try this at home! All the University Relations Dept. needs is for a rash of unregulated “backyard shared governance” to occur.