MINUTES
Student Activity Fee Board Meeting
Friday, April 8, 2011
111 HUB-Robeson Center
Attendance:
Board Members:
Andrea Dowhower, Asst. VP for Student Affairs
Mary Edgington, Senior Director, Union and Student Activities
Careen Yarnal, Faculty Senate Committee on Student Life, Penn State University Park
Marika Merritt, CCSG Representative, Wilkes Barre via Polycom
Mohamed Raouda, CCSG President
Paul Ferrera, CCSG Representative, Altoona via phone
Jon Lozano, GSA Representative
Colleen Smith, UPUA Representative
Ken Miller, Sr. Director of Student & Enrollment Services Rep, Behrend Campus via Polycom
Mark Donovan, UPAC Chair
Christian Ragland, UPUA President
Jay Arcuri
Absent:
Matthew J. Swatchick, Director of Student Affairs, Penn State Schuylkill
Jimmy Baker, CCSG Representative
Welcome and Roll Call
Roll call was taken.
Adoption of the Agenda
A motion to accept the agenda was made by Mohamed Raouda and a second by Mary
Edgington. All were in favor.
Adoption of the Minutes
A motion to approve the minute from January 29, 2011 was made by Jon Lozano and a second
was made by Mohamed Raouda. All were in favor.
Announcements by the Chair
Andrea announced that we have collected 2011-2012 fee schedules from the campuses for the
budget office. Two campuses moved to the highest level and one moved away from the summer
fee. None of the campuses chose to move down to the lower fee levels.
An appeal from the UPAC process is anticipated and Andrea will need some people from the
campuses to review this appeal. The manual states that we have five days to respond to the
appeal.
Andrea also thanked the staff and students for serving on the board this year and sent well wishes
to those who will not be returning to the board.
Public Comments (10 – 15 minutes)
No comments from the gallery.
Discussion Items
Items to be discussed and voted upon.
1. Student Legal Services increase - Andrea pulled the past legal services proposal from
Jack’s files. The proposal is for a 25 cent increase from the newly increased fee to go
towards legal services at Univ. Park. According to the proposal, Legal Services is not
equipped to handle the large volume of clients that they are presently receiving
Jon stated that they are still in the trial period (second out of three years) for this program and
that it should not be reevaluated before next spring when the trial is over since that is what the
original proposal stated. Christian stated that he is torn whether to increase the funding because
the legal services program is more popular than expected.
Mark stated that the need for additional funds is there but that the program has broadened from
the original proposal therefore incurring more costs. Colleen said that this program is expanding
at a rapid pace and is concerned about their ability to continue if the funds aren’t there. She
commented that this may negatively affect students if they continue without additional funding.
Jon reminded the group that this was a trial proposal for legal services and that it will have to be
voted on to continue the services after that trial time. He had a hard time voting on the $3
increase at the last meeting. He feels that taking the 25cents from the increase to go towards the
legal services program instead of student activities which is the intent of the SAF wouldn’t be
good.
Mark stated that the total of the .25 cents per student would be $19,000 total. He asked was this
to help with the current situation or to help grow legal services. The answer was that this would
help the current situation. Andrea stated that this is to be used to increase the hours of the part
time attorney which would increase the hours of service to the students.
Christian stated that taking the money from good student programs and moving it to students
who are getting in trouble doesn’t make sense. This is a very difficult situation.
Mark again asked why the Law School wasn’t a part of this program as originally planned. Mary
read from the minutes the response from Philip Burlingame addressing this question when he
attended the SAF Board meeting.
A motion was made to approve a 25 cent increase for Legal Services by Colleen Smith and a 2nd
by Christian.
Call to vote.
Mark N
Mary Y
Paul N
Jon N
Marika abstain
Ken N
Christian Y
Mo abstain
Colleen Y
Careen N
N =5
Y =3 abstain = 2
Legal Services will NOT receive any additional money at this time.
Items for introduction and initial discussion only
1. Adult learners’ access to fee funded program for family members.
Careen Yarnal sits on the Commission for Adult Learners and they have asked that the
SAF board consider ways to include family members of adult learners in the events
including being able to get additional discounted tickets for programs for family
members of adult learners.
The definition of an adult learner is: A Penn State student who meets any of the
following characteristics; 24 years of age or older; a veteran of the armed services;
returning to school after four or more years of employment, homemaking, or other
activity; and a person who assumes multiple adult roles such as a parent, spouse/partner,
employee, and student.
Jon stated that he has heard this same type of request from graduate students and that they
may not attend events because they don’t feel a part of these types of events and aren’t
able to take family with them.
Christian asked what type of events Careen is suggesting that friends/spouses could
attend. Careen stated events like theatre, sporting events, etc. Andrea clarified that
athletics was separate from the SAF sponsored events and they would have to be
contacted separately. Andrea asked Ken how this request would pertain to other
campuses as well. Ken said that there are more adult learners at the various campuses
than there are at the UP campus. It varies from location to location as to what events are
available. His questions were, “what are the cost implications, what is the impact?” He
stated that Linda recently sent out a survey to the adult learners asking for input. Andrea
asked Ken what policies are currently in place at his campus for friends and family to
attend events. He stated that community members pay a higher rate for events than
students. Mo stated that at Altoona, there are a lot of theatre events and if he were
married, he would be discouraged if he couldn’t bring his wife after paying all this money
to come to this university. Wilkes Barre doesn’t have many ticketed events so this
wouldn’t affect that campus much. Marika didn’t see this as a problem at her campus.
Mark asked what the fairness would be to the students who do pay this SAF if this was
implemented. It may cause those students not to be able to attend the events due to
space.
Jon stated that this really should be discussed in a subcommittee meeting and not at this
level yet.
Mark asked if students who don’t currently pay the SAF could pay the SAF so that they
could be eligible for those tickets. Andrea said it is highly unlikely. This would be a
budget office nightmare.
Jay said this is an issue that could and should be benchmarked with other institutions.
This topic will be brought to a subcommittee meeting in the fall and more research is
required.
2. Subcommittee meeting
There was an article printed in the Collegian recently that questioned whether money
could be paid to lobbyists. The current language in the SAF Handbook on page 14 reads
as:
Appropriations to a legislative lobby or to a registered student organization whose
primary purpose is to influence legislation.
The subcommittee interpreted this to read that they could not hire someone to lobby on
behalf of another to influence legislation.
The subcommittee has agreed to the following clarification to that statement.
Appropriations to hire a legislative lobby or to a registered student organization whose
primary purpose is to influence legislation. Recognize student governments may request
or allocate SAF funds for travel costs (lodging, meals, and travel) involved with activities
to advocate on behalf of Penn State students' concerns.
Christian stated that the intent was to clarify this policy with regards to the student
governments. This will be given to the new SAF leadership in the fall to discuss and
present for a vote.
Mark stated that we need to be careful to identify the difference between advocating and
lobbying. No meals can be paid when meetings are held with legislators.
The board asked for public comment on this. TJ Bard stated that this clarification is good
for the governments. Jon does not have a problem with this clarification. Ken stated that
this needed clarification and he was concerned that people had been turned down for
funding in the past because of this definition.
This will be added to the board agenda in the fall.
Recommendations to the VP
There are no recommendations at this time.
Mark brought up that UPAC has changed the funding numbers to 90%/10% and that this will
need to be updated in the SAF Handbook.
Training for new members of the board will be held in the fall.
Meetings for 2011/2012 are as follows:
September 16, 2011
October 21, 2011
December 2, 2011
January 27, 2012
March 23, 2012
April 13, 2012
Meetings will be held in 111 HUB and polycom service will be available.
A question was raised as to what things are on a 3 year rotating cycle that will need to be
reviewed in the next year. Those items are: Legal Services and the funding models for UPUA
and GSA.
A motion was made to adjourn the meeting by Mohamed Raouda and a 2nd by Jon Lozano at
4:17 p.m.