SUFAC Meeting
December 7 th
, 2009.
Members Present:
Nick Herro
Ryan Shervey
Karl Krogman
Carly Cappozzo
Brock Bennett
Dr. Jeffrey Bryan
Lindsey Polzin
Eric Schmidt
Laura Lauderdale
Dr. Nick Nicklaus
Cheryl Roland
David Wermedal
I. Meeting called to order at 5:33pm. a. Approval of Last Week’s Minutes (11/30/09) -approved b. SUFAC neutrality discussion
II. Budget Presentations: Athletics Committee (Kim) -There are 17 different sports that were considered. They broke it down into 4 options: a.1.7% increase wanted enough money to cover a graduate assistant. The $9,000
stipend to fund this assistant would be for aiding in all programs. Their main
function would be to act as an event manager here at UW-L. They currently
have two assistants, however they are loosing the funding for their second TA.
This is the highest priority, because it would benefit the Athletics department
the most. It is unreasonable to ask one individual to cover all these
responsibilities alone. b. includes a programming increase of 1.9%. Athletics took the given 1.9%, and
certain sports are basically in a different category. The Inc coulomb is the
increase given to certain sports. Some sports have to spend a majority of their
budget, just to have games. They tried to apply this increase to sports, which
are having difficulties, and are spending a majority of their budget on games. In
every single sport, allocable and non-allocable funds are listed. The non-
allocable funds include transportation, official’s fees, and things that they
cannot control. The 4% travel number is based off of 2008-2009 travel, what
they had minus 4%. For 2009-2010 the committee is trying to keep their fingers
crossed that they’ll meet it. Events are planned a year in advance, so it is harder
to cut certain events to meet this reduction.
What is Athletics policy on spending 136 account funds? -There conservative guess is that there predicted revenues will be close. c. Option three is an interesting topic. This option is giving back the assistant
directors 25% salary cut. If they loose that 25%, then there down 2 staff

members. This basically gives the option to ad a GA and pick up that 25%,
after the ESS portion is terminated. This option also includes options a and b.
This would total a 6.57% increase over last year. There are planning on putting
their “name in the hat” to host a NCAA or WIAA tournament and nationals here
at UW-L. This 25% increase would also allow them to do this, and focus on
providing the staffing needed for future programming. As of now, we are
hosting wrestling nationals for next year. Correction to budget: non-allocable
was $35.
40
, and allocable was $27.
59
, totaling $62.
99
not $64.
18
. d. Option d includes the first three options, and would add some extra resources to
the sports information department. This would help the sports information
director to continue to get student aids. Most of his funding came from the ads
you see in programming; however, the programs are just not selling. $5,670.
would be sufficient to allow his to continue operating.
These options are listed in order of priority and are up for SUFAC to decide.
00 e. Discussion: The GA position helps all program.
Why wasn’t there an option to take the extra help and 25% increase, and not the
1.9% increase? -The individual sports need that extra 1.9% increase to make the
student athletic experience what it needs to be.
What is going to happen with Men’s Tennis? -We should know by may if they
are going to make their fundraising goals for a 5 year plan.
III. Orgs. Committee (Chair: Jenny Lynn, and VJ) a. GSO –they did see an increase in this request by about 300 dollars. This
request would allow them to have an extra workshop next year. GSO is very
essential for training workshops and professional skills that graduate student
will need for their careers. Individuals who seek funding to attend a conference,
dollars. Last year the supplies were paid for out of VJ’s office. 136 account
funds are used for masters’ thesis. This helps cover the cost of the editors and
professional publications. b. Org. Grants account –the numbers are from an average of the past two years.
The org grants group is sort of like one-shots, but for things we don’t fund.
generally can’t get the full amount of funding. The Orgs. Committee did not
know about the 4% account, and the amount would only be reduced by 8
They also set aside funding to obtain the rights to show certain films. SUFAC
wishes to address the 4% situation, and to make sure that the orgs committee is
following that guideline. c. Leadership programs –no increase in funding, and there is no travel related to
this account. d. CAB –their travel was not down by 4%; however, everything is related to the
cost of bringing performers to our campus.
What is the faculty lump sum under wage increases for CAB? They have paid positions in their organization where faculty members attend.
They are expecting almost 9,000 dollars less in revenue, and it is a hard subject
to predict based on student interests from year to year. e. Distinguished lecture series –they bring in someone every other year. The
actual request is 6,588.
00
.

IV. Student Services & Buildings (Chair: Kate) a. Club Sports budget –there are 17 clubs that cover 400 students. Weight lifting
was asked to be dropped, but ultimate Frisbee was added. They really need an
additional staff member to stay on top of staffing needs. They lost the
weightlifting and Aikido clubs. The Equestrian club was denied a significant
increase for this year. They wanted close to $68,000. The club sports
supervisor position will run $885.
00
. b. Club sports (post-season) – there is no change to this budget. They plan on
picking up a registration fee. Every team can request travel; however, only
teams who have gone in the past were funded this year. c. Intramural Sports –last year they had 7500 people participate. Their budget
decreased, mostly due to the fitness classes being under the rec. department, as
well as not encoring cost from Coate field. They have also raised the team entry
fees by $5.
00 . There is a large decrease in revenue’s due to the loss of the fitness
class’s revenue. d. Scholarship Program budget –there is no change from this year. e. Racquet –they had grossly misjudged their revenue, but now they are back on
tract. They have growing subscription revenues, and changed the salary and
wage expenses. They do not plan on traveling this year. Nick Herro is
employed by the Racquet. They are predicting almost $16,000 less in revenue,
per semester, to offset their deficit. Parents and Alumni tend to subscribe to the
Racquet. f. Radio Racquet –this was sent in by Larry. It is the same as last year’s budget
and was approved by the sub-committee. Their budget was straight-forward;
however, they could use some training on how to properly fill out their budget.
This is a good way for student organizations to advertise.
V. Cultural Affairs Committee (Micah Brown and Megan) a. They approved everything below a 1% increase b. OMSS –they decided to reduce conferences and speakers to cut costs. By
reducing the costs to students, more students feel they are able to attend, and
allows folks to have a unique experience without encoring a lot of cost. c. Marching Band –Tucker is here to talk about travel, and wants SUFAC to know
that in years past the cost of travel was less due to the cost of the U-hauls not
being included. Being able to play at big venues is very important to the
marching band program. They have a huge opportunity to play for the Brewers
vs. Cubs game as well as a marching band competition the next day in
Milwaukee. The $4,604 for supplies is absolutely necessary for the program to
continue. They were told not to ask for replacements in their budget. Are One-
Shots the only time they can ask for new instruments? -If there is a good
justification, and the cost of the instruments are necessary then can be budgeted
for.
The types of instruments provided are specific instruments, and not the
student’s personal equipment. The university provides many instruments for the
128 students currently participating in marching band. As far as the sound

system goes, marching band feels that they need this new system to that they
can incorporate all of their instruments.
“Nick, I’ve got a plan man.” –Tucker i. They plan on trying to get a graduate student to help aid. Most
university’s have 7 or 8 assistants to help cover the 128 students. Our
university only has one instructor. ii. They are not covered by the (ASCAP?) license. iii. Tucker is working on a five year plan for purchasing new instruments.
The sub-committee decided to deny the speaker system and instruments in exchange for allowing the travel. d. Ability Awareness Programs –did not have an increase. e. Theatre –had a 0.9% increase. They have not had travel in the past, so they had
trouble trying to budget for that. This group normally receives aid from the
Dean’s office; however, this year they are not going to receive this funding.
They share a bus with River Falls for a conference. f. International programming –last year they were given $4,400 dollars in seg. fee support, why was there such an increase? This year it was increase to $5,800, with a
$500 revenue support. g. Korean percussion –they can’t justify $5,115.
00
for a group that doesn’t have a
lot of student members. The number of members should not be influencing the
decision to give funding too (viewpoint neutrality). The actual budget for next
year includes the carryover budget for this year. It was set up this way, because
they are not spending much this year, so that they can attend a program in
Knoxville next year. What do we do about the 4% travel reduction? It’s an
exception –Larry h. LGBTQ -0.93% increase. Some people do not feel that tassels are necessary.
Men do have different color gowns then females; all students were the
university colors and the tassels represent their chosen disciplines. The travel
increase includes conferences. i. Orchestra –approved at a 0.99% increase. The supplies increase is for
instrument replacement. j. Jazz ensembles –increase of 0.95%. What is the 35X70? k. Art exhibitions –did not have an increase for next year. l. Choral Music -1.04% increase. The CD’s were denied, so why is it included in
their increase?
VI. Discussion and Approval of non-allocable budgets a. Rec. doesn’t have anything about the fitness revenues for this year. b. In 2002-2002 UW-L’s student cost per child was at $1,810.
50
, which was much
higher than any other university in Wisconsin. Perhaps, we are not getting “the
most bang for our buck”. GPR is state funding, which is typically reserved for
administrators. Why are we paying more than any other university? Our fee this
year is $24.
28 .
SUFAC would like a explanation from the childcare center as to why it is that high.
SUFAC is supportive of the childcare center, but wants to know why it is so high.

c. Motion: To approve the Student Health Center, and Counseling and Testing
Centers budgets (Shervey, Dr. Nicklaus)
Shervey resends motion d. Motion: to deny the childcare center budget, we request that the childcare
center comes in to talk with SUFAC about their high seg. fee, and the budget
will be reconsidered when there is a valid reason. (Bennett, Wermedal) i. Motion to postpone until next week. (Schmidt, Cappozzo) ii. Tabled until next week. e. Motion to approve SHC budget (Shervey, Schmidt)
Approved
VII. Budgets a. We have never paid for a salary out of an allocable account. d. We have to draw the line at some point. If the university cuts something, they
can’t expect the student fees to pick it up. c. Next week we will discuss the budgets, and funding capital items in budgets.
VIII. Meeting Adjourned at 9:50pm.