New Video: MSC Funding Board In Fight for Its Life
News, UCF SGA — By Cliff Jett on March 30, 2010 at 2:03 am TweetKnightNews.com has uncovered new video and audio evidence showing the Multicultural Student Center’s fight for its funding board stretched back to the controversial Activity and Service Fee Budget meetings held in the middle of winter break.
Some of the most in depth discussion about the board happened during the December 15 A&SF Budget meeting, where the MSC presented a video obtained by KnightNews.com, below, explaining why they want to keep their funding board, and discussing the tensions between SGA and MSC.
KnightNews.com has also posted some of the audio from the meeting SGA fought to keep from being released after KnightNews.com put in a public records request for it in February, along with the $15 million budget recommendation.
The above audio clip includes excerpts from the December 15 A&SF meeting. The first portion includes some words of advice to committee members from SGA Advisor Christa Coffey to not “assume you know things about agencies,” be “courteous” to agencies, and “ask the agencies to come back if you do have questions.”
Coffey went on to explain that they should get the questions out of the way during the winter break meetings, because “obviously we’d rather it come out now and have debate over it now than wait to the senate meeting where it could be really bad.”
Coffey added: “Everybody hear me on that?”
Shortly thereafter, the committee heard presentations from OSI and other agencies. KnightNews.com cut the audio at that point and restarted it when MSC members gave a presentation and let it play out unedited until the issue was over. During the audio, you can hear the MSC play the video above.
During the winter break meeting, A&SF budget committee members discussed the MSC funding board at length after Senate Pro Tempore Joshua Miller made a motion to “strike the MSC funding board.”
Then, SGA Speaker Patrick Stauffer said, “In the end this is an issue that needs a lot more examination.”
Stauffer explained that the decision to kill the funding board should not be made quickly during the winter break meeting. He explained how the funding board was created during a similar winter break in a meeting in 2008, when a motion was made to put it in the budget, and “it passed and that was it.”
“Fast forward until today,” Stauffer said in December, “and we obviously see issues with that decision, because we made it quickly, we made it without fully consulting everyone, we made it without going through all the steps that we need to, to make a fully informed decision about this.”
A female committee member, whose voice appears to be that of Sen. Sarah Bishop, argued in support of the MSC during the December meeting, and wanted to know why some felt the funding board wasn’t working.
“I don’t understand how this isn’t working,” she said. “They’re funding the organizations. What’s not working about that? The organizations are getting their money, the events are occuring, what’s not working?
“I dont understand,” she continued. “Just because we don’t like to see them funding money — is it we don’t want to see them with the money instead of us?”
Then-presidential candidate Michael Kilbride also came out in strong support of the MSC in December.
“We can make it work,” Kilbride said.
“We need to sit down with them and make it happen,” he added. “I think we can. And if a few people from this committee step up and sit with them and look at their process, I think it’s possible.”
Miller’s motion to kill the funding board failed in December, but a similar motion made by SGA Comptroller Shane Chism passed in March, effectively destroying it unless the Senate reverses the decision before approving the budget.
It does not appear that any serious meetings happened between A&SF and the MSC in between that time, because MSC member Jerry Johnson told KnightNews.com Chism’s March 19 motion, “was pretty much out of nowhere, it was a surprise.”
SGA Sen. Kevin Wolkenfeld presented a resolution to create a special senate ad hoc committee dedicated to having in depth meetings with the MSC before the Senate votes to approve or deny the A&SF recommendation. The resolution required the special session be pushed back until April 8, so the Senate wouldn’t have to rush to make a decision on April 1.
Speaker Stauffer did not put the resolution on the agenda, and refused to answer KnightNews.com’s questions about why he decided not to allow it on. He later commented below. Stauffer set the special session for April 1, even though Senate rules don’t require it to be presented until April 15. KnightNews.com is investigating whether the senate could postpone passing the bill until April 8, if they don’t feel comfortable doing passing it on April 1 without the chance to get all the information.
Check back for updates on this developing story.
—————Our original Sunday story on the MSC’s Fight for Its Life
Members of the University of Central Florida’s Multicultural Student Center met Sunday to coordinate their final efforts to fight off a Student Government Association attempt to slash the MSC’s funding board’s budget to zero dollars, effectively killing it.
Members of the MSC plan to rally support this week with petitions. SGA Director of Student Advocacy Aleisha Hodo said she encourages MSC members to ask senators and cabinet members directly: “Do you have a problem with multicultural organizations funding other multicultural organizations?”
KEEP READING BY CLICKING NEXT PAGE BELOW:
Tweet This
Digg This
Share on Facebook
Stumble it
RSS Feed
25 Comments
By the way… Even Peterson apologized for the way MSC was handled. He apologized because he acknowledges how this happened is wrong.
SGA could have done some good for its reputation and relationship with MSC by having the meetings Wolkenfeld’s resolution would have created. Maybe everyone could have come to an understanding and there would not be so much hatred and racial tensions filling the halls of the student union.
If Stauffer would have done the right thing and waited more than a couple days after the ASF committee voted to approve it on Friday, maybe Kevin wouldn’t have had to rush to get a measure through that could block the Speaker from ramming the bill through so quickly by putting out a memo and denying the Senate a vote on when they’d like it heard.
The problem is ASF passed it on a Friday and Stauffer was determined to ram the bill through Senate less than 1 week after ASF approved it, even though he had until the 3rd week of April.
You blame Kevin for filing it last minute, but maybe you should be asking why Stauffer rushed it through. If he waited a week, Kevin would have had more time. Think about it…
Oh, my bad @STEPHEN… apparently, with all of your infinite wisdom, you think Stauffer should put a bill on the agenda when it was filed just before the Senate is supposed to meet. “Us SGA insiders” also know that the Speaker is only lenient when the bill is submitted 48 hours beforehand. Senator Wolkenfield’s bill was given to Stauffer hours before the Senate meeting, after the entire Senate agenda had already been printed and copied for all Senators and meeting attendees. Bills need to be received so far in advance so that Senate Secretary, Speaker, and Advisor can all review the bill beforehand. Even with Stauffer’s “leniency” of 48 hours, that is enough time to go through those motions – 4 hours is not, it’s virtually impossible at that point. My apologies for not breaking it down even further… I guess I had assumed that anyone who understood how “SGA insiders” work would have known something as simple as that.
Stephen,
Either you are really stupid or really naive.
The whole reason this is a scandal is because Stauffer breaks the rule all the time when there is shit he wants to see on the agenda. This is why he REFUSED TO ANSWER the knight news’s question about if he’d done it before.
All of you SGA insiders know that when the Speaker kept it off the agenda, he doesn’t support it. Had he put it on the agenda, as he has done with things he wants to see pass, there would have been no need to suspend this rule:
4.04(C): Agenda Deadline and Publication:
1.All new measures to be included on the Agenda for a session of Senate shall have been filed with the Chair of the Senate no later than seventy-two (72) hours to the beginning of that session, or twenty-four (24) hours for a special session.
WANT TO KNOW THE REAL REASON STAUFFER DID IT?
He’s trying to shove this bill down the senate’s throat. Now that Knightnews (and the Future) have exposed the ASF meetings, he wants it rammed through senate tomorrow, even though by the rules you point out, it doesn’t have to happen until 2 weeks from tomorrow.
Stauffer didn’t let the senate vote on when the special session would be, he forced them to do it April 1.
The resolution Kevin wrote would have let everyone take a breath, examine the issue… and not consider the giant A&SF bill until next week.
It’s a shame he can’t trust the senators that were actually elected by the students to decide this bill… instead we are stuck relying on scum like Shane Chism, who shouldn’t even have a say since he isn’t a senator.
Even your own advisor said she didn’t want the senate to debate on it. … sad.
i think KNIGHTNEWS.com should replace the future. the central florida future sucks. KNIGHTNEWS.com get the really stories
Typo in my last post in second-to-last paragraph (corrected by ***text***):
“A motion to suspend Rule 4.04(C) was made, and though it passed by a majority vote, it did pass ***NOT*** by the 2/3rds margin that is required by Robert’s Rules of Order.”
Hey @Fernando,
You looked up a Senate rule that applies to the introduction of measures, yes, but not one that applies to the circumstance at hand. You only selectively pasted the rule; here’s the entire section that matters:
———————————–
5.02(B):
“B. The Speaker of the Senate shall rule on the acceptability of any filing, and who may reject any filing because of:
1. The unacceptability of the form in which the measure is written.
2. The incompleteness of the form in which the measure is written.
3. The unsuitability of the measure for consideration by the Student Senate.
C. If the Speaker has rejected a filing, he/she shall notify the introducer of the proposed measure. If the Speaker of the Senate and introducer cannot reach an agreement on the acceptability of a filing, the introducer may appeal the ruling to the Senate, and a majority vote shall determine the matter. If the Speaker of the Senate is overruled, the measure shall be placed on the Calendar and it shall be considered in its original form.”
——————————————-
As you can see, the rule you cited only applies if the Speaker feels the legislation is “unacceptably written, incomplete in form, or unsuitable”. However, the reason Speaker Stauffer ACTUALLY did not put the legislation on the agenda, not the fairy-tale reasons you scandal-monger commentators claim, is because the legislation was submitted later than 72 hours before the Senate meeting and thus would violate the following Senate rule:
—————————–
4.04(C): Agenda Deadline and Publication:
1.All new measures to be included on the Agenda for a session of Senate shall have been filed with the Chair of the Senate no later than seventy-two (72) hours to the beginning of that session, or twenty-four (24) hours for a special session.
—————————-
The Speaker does not have the authority to break this rule and put a piece of legislation that was submitted late onto the agenda. In order for this to happen, the Senate must vote to suspend Rule 4.04(C). In order to suspend any rule of any deliberative body, Robert’s Rules of Order requires a 2/3rds vote; please see Robert’s Rules of Order Newly Revised, 10th ed., p. 252–253 for more information.
So the upshot of the deal: The resolution was submitted later than the 72-hours prior to a Senate meeting that Senate rules require. The Speaker does not have the authority to break this rule, but according to Robert’s Rules of Order, the Senate must suspend Senate Rule 4.04(C) to place the resolution on the agenda. A motion to suspend Rule 4.04(C) was made, and though it passed by a majority vote, it did pass by the 2/3rds margin that is required by Robert’s Rules of Order. Thus, the resolution was not placed on the agenda.
I hope this has been educational for you all. Now shut up and stop your scandal-mongering… just wait to see what happens this Thursday.
I agree, people should give knight news a chance. The local news does… when they break bar stories.
And maybe Stauffer needs to learn Senate rules better. When he refuses to put something on the agenda, it only takes a 50% vote, not a 2/3rds. That resolution should have passed last week. So, this special session meeting Thursday shouldn’t even be happening.
Why is the speaker so scared to let the senate vote on when they hear this, instead of him shoving it down everyone’s throat?
Check out this rule:
C. If the Speaker has rejected a filing, he/she shall notify the introducer of the proposed measure. If the Speaker of the Senate and introducer cannot reach an agreement on the acceptability of a filing, the introducer may appeal the ruling to the Senate, and a majority vote shall determine the matter. If the Speaker of the Senate is overruled, the measure shall be placed on the Calendar and it shall be considered in its original form.
I like how this discussion on MSC has been swept under the rug to bash Stauffer and/or KnightNews.
First of all, I feel like KnightNews has gotten a bad rep from the start simply because of the people involved in starting it. People do not talk to KnightNews because they don’t view it as a credible news source. KnightNews prints stories that, truthfully, may not be entirely well-informed (as is apparent in Stauffer’s response describing his power as Speaker of the Senate). Then, everyone bashes KnightNews for not being credible. It’s a vicious cycle and nothing can be done about it until people give KnightNews a chance and KnightNews becomes more informed on stuff like procedure and, specifically, SGA’s procedures.
Now back to MSC,
I don’t understand why some people think the Funding Board is in a culture war with everyone and could not fund a cultural event (by a cultural or non-cultural RSO) because of the culture they represent. That’s absurd and insulting to these student leaders. Second, I agree with MSC when they say that SGA can be more involved. How many people are involved in the funding board and the allocations they give out? I agree that SGA should wait to hear from MSC and not make a brash decision, but that proves that something is fundamentally wrong. Why is it that SGA is not already more aware of their fundings? Isn’t someone on SGA responsible for attending the meetings and shouldn’t they report back to SGA and let them know?
I would like to take the time to allow anyone to respond before I write for ages.
Boo Shane Chism you suck
I like Knightnews as they do go out and cover a lot of great events that the future doesn’t. But I do agree that Stauffer is being wrongly attacked here just because Knightnews loves bashing anything to do with the Kilbride campaign.
This website is half amazing, half a piece of shit news source…but we all still come read it because it’s entertaining.
As for the comments, EVERYONE PLEASE GROW SOME BALLS AND PUT YOUR NAME IF YOU ARE GOING TO BASH SOMEONE WITH UNCREDIBLE GARBAGE. At least that way I can contact you and make you feel like an idiot.
P.S. Knightnews, come to El Corral for the Empanada eating contest. It’s gonna be amazing.
I guess you want Knight news to be the SGA newsletter, where SGA decides what goes up … and anything negative is ignored.
REALITY CHECK! Life isn’t perfect, learn to deal with it and maybe you’ll survive the real world.
And for as much as you attack knight news, they actually spent time doing a whole thing on your precious Knight-Thon and had Kilbride all over it. There is not even one peep of it on the Future. You are just too small minded to realize credible news sources cover ALL issues. Doing that makes you worthwhile, not tmz.
Yall are WACK!
1. Stauffer didnt answer knightnews because of the reason most intelligent people dont answer knightnews….there UCF’s TMZ. They are not a credible source and they write stories for the shock value, while skipping the true facts.
2.If the MSC wants to their funding board to stay next year, I suggest they stop employing the help of knightnews….because they are not helping their case.
3.Get over yourselves! Stop trying to make the people who actually care about are school into bad guys. What was the last thing you did that represented our school in a positive way? Do you know the UCF Creed without looking it up? Probably not. If you want to make a difference in our school, I suggest you get involved with something, other than Lambda Cry or any other Greek organization, and have your voice be heard. Thats a better way to go than typing out your opinions on UCF TMZ.
Stauffer is a silly goose! Silly geese are corrupt and shouldn’t run SGA!
Why didn’t the speaker answer the damn question last week when KN emailed him? Why the hell should we have to wait until after the story comes out to hear his side? He was trying to hide from the truth and KN called him out on it. Keep it up guys!!
You guys are hilarious. Do you have nothing better to do with your lives than sit around and try to twist facts and arguments to try to make Speaker Stauffer look bad for no legitimate reason even after he addressed your concerns with his comments? Are you really that bored?
My advice: Go out. Get drunk. Get laid, or at least try to for once. Get a life!
Stauffer,
You are quick to attack the media, but that does not mean everyone doesn’t see through how you ignored the questions.
We all know if you wanted that resolution to pass, you’d have put it on the agenda. Because you didn’t, your supporters voted no. In the past we’ve had resolutions to set the date of the special session, but you are taking total control to ram this through without giving the senate the chance to decide when to vote on it.
We have until the third week of April to begin considering this bill. There is no need to rush. No need to vote Thursday, and no need for you to mislead UCF by ignoring questions and trying to BS your way out of what you did.
You clearly must be in SGA. KN did try and give both sides… Stauffer knew he was being a typical corrupt SGA politician, because HE REFUSED TO COMMENT … JUST LIKE SHANE CHISM.
They are a coalition of corruption.
How many rso’s do we have? Like 400?
The MSC is just one of many being screwed over by SGA.
How many other were zero funded so the Union can get new carpet and the RWC can get new tv’s… even though they have millions in the “repair and replacement” account that should be going to this anyway.
Once again you make SGA look like the “Big Brother Bd Guy”.
How about you act like a real news outlet and give some kind unbiased outlook on at least one of your subjects.
I do not agree with A&SF’s decision, but I do think that MSC can fight their own battles. I actually am a student who enjoys the programing that the funding board funds, and the last thing that I would want to help from is knightnews.
Also, you keep bringing up the fact that A&SF had a meeting during Winter Break. SO WHAT?!?! How many A&SF meetings have people, that are not involved with SGA or UCF TMZ (aka knightnews), gone to this semester? People chooses not go to these, so stop making it a bigger deal then it is.
GO MSC!!!!!!
BOOOOOOOOOOO Knightnews
Not sure what wolkenfelds doing but hes sooo cute. He should be the face of sga hes like Senator McDreamy. He had the sickest campaign with that Daniel kid but when he lost he didnt disappear I feel like he really is here for the students.
Speaker Stauffer did not in any way block my resolution. It was a very close vote and he remained neutral and unbiased as the Chair of the meeting is supposed to be. I have the most respect for him he is an honorable man with integrity and Im proud to say I look up to him.
Why is the speaker forcing this to go through April first when he can wait until the third week?
Why is he refusing to answer questions?
What problem does he have with multicultural groups funding other MSC groups?!??
Why is the ASF committee almost all white?
Maybe if you didn’t refuse to comment, you could have told your side.
Are you going to answer their question? Why did you block it from getting on the agenda? Don’t you think that because the senate knew you blocked it from even getting on first reading, that your supporters stood by you in blocking it from going further?
The notion that the resolution would have moved forward had I “made an exception and added the resolution the agenda” is simply false. My only ability to place legislation on the agenda is to place it under “Notice of Legislation on First Reading”. Placing such a resolution on first reading would only have gotten the resolution remanded to a committee so it could be dealt with the following week. Because this week is the scheduled A&SF Special Session, that would have done no good.
Senator Wolkenfeld intended to make a request to the Senate that a resolution he had drafted be placed on second reading, which would bring it directly to the Senate floor for consideration that night. Placing such a resolution on second reading is entirely outside of my powers as Speaker of the Senate. Such a motion can only be passed by Senate. Because that bypasses the normal process for proposing legislation, it requires that we suspend one of our internal rules with a 2/3 vote. The motion to suspend this rule was the only motion that was actually heard by the Student Senate; it failed 24-13. Furthermore, even after that rule is suspended, placing legislation directly on second reading (i.e. proposing it directly to the entire senate) requires a 2/3 vote, not a majority vote. My role as Speaker has no influence on that. The fact that, as you stated, “more than half of the Senate voted for it to be heard” was irrelevant to its passage, as it requires a 2/3 rather than a majority vote.
If I may also make a recommendation to Knightnews: if you truly desire to be considered a legitimate news source, you should begin by proofreading your work prior to posting. Apart from the above errors I have noted in your understanding of how Senate legislation works, there are numerous typos and grammatical errors. You would do well to correct them.