Student government’s Constitution Court approved the authority of the new ASUO committee designed to formally recognize student groups on Tuesday, but the court reprimanded the committee for what it said was an egregious lack of documentation.
The court asked the Recognition Review Committee to clarify its purpose and its appeals process, and said the unclear purpose of the RRC makes it “subject to suspicion by outside parties who may claim conflict of interests in the future.”
The appeals process shouldn’t involve sending complaints straight to the court, the decision stated.
“There is nothing explicitly stating the procedural processes established by the RRC or those that the RRC will follow,” the decision stated. “Even more disturbing is the lack of any formal appeal process for grievances filed against the RRC.”
The RRC will review student groups’ missions, goals and bylaws to ensure that services are not duplicated by other programs and that those programs are advantageous to students. Groups that are not recognized by the RRC are effectively defunded because they won’t be granted access to the Programs Finance Committee budget hearings, where they are allocated incidental fees.
ASUO Programs Administrator and RRC Chairman David Goward said the RRC is pleased the court recognized the ASUO Executive’s power to create the committee.
“We knew this from the beginning, but this just reaffirmed our belief,” Goward said. “I’m working with (ASUO) President (Adam) Walsh right now to get some sort of bylaws up and running that we can implement.”
Goward said the committee is going forward with the reviews, despite having no bylaws or an official appeals process. The bylaws will only be an attempt at transparency, a comfort to student program leaders, he said.
Currently, the RRC’s bylaws come from a memo drafted by former ASUO President Adam Petkun.
At Monday’s first RRC meeting, Goward said his goal is to have the bylaws out in “initial format” in two weeks. In two weeks, RRC will have already reviewed 30 of the 36 total groups intended for assessment this year.
Because RRC is a subcommittee of the ASUO Executive, its bylaws must be accepted by committee members before going to Gregg Lobisser, director of Student Activities in the EMU, Goward said.
Lobisser said he will act as liaison between the University and the ASUO by reviewing paperwork to ensure state and University rules are followed. He said he supports having a review process for student groups because they have gone unchecked for nearly 10 years. Goward said the by-laws will then be passed on to the ASUO Constitution Court.Constitution Court Justice Charlotte Nisser said any new policy warrants a discussion and that Goward has not yet submitted documentation to the Court.
The four new RRC members, Stephanie Carriere, Mike Filippelli, Kristin Kato and Scott Lu, asked a multitude of questions at the first meeting on Monday, one of which was how they will reassure programs leaders of the RRC’s objectivity while reviewing groups.
Lu, programs representative for the PFC, said he is worried that if bylaws are not created soon, program leaders may be skeptical of the new committee.
“One of my main concerns is that it’s a way that groups can really feel like this is a structured organization or committee with bylaws,” Lu said.
Goward announced at the meeting that ASUO Vice President Kyla Coy will serve as an ex-officio member on the RRC, voting only to break ties.
Former Senator Khanh Le, the only non-RRC member in attendance, expressed concerns over why Coy will be voting.
“My worry is that I didn’t know Kyla was voting,” he said. “I just thought the five memberswere voting.”
Le asked how a tie would be broken if Goward and Coy, who are members of the ASUO Executive, refrained from voting at the Executive’s hearing to avoid a conflict of interest.
“I don’t know what will happen,” Goward said.
Contact the campus and federal politics reporter at [email protected]