Attendance:
 Sarah
 Reggie
 Calvin
 Joe
 Jim
 Stacyi
 Megan
 Thomas
 Matt
 Quin
 Kurtis
 Nathan Koffke
Call to order at 4:00pm by Sarah
Bylaws update
 OSA made ad hoc committee with 3 allocations members and 6 senators
 Major change made on Sunday was the controller can no longer vote
o Reasoning was paid position and not a standard position
o Hiring process means it is not open to all students
 3 allocations and one senator voted against it
o If we decide to go through with that we would put an alternate onto the
committee
o Tuesday they decided to put that the chair cannot hold two positions
 They cannot hold another chair position on campus
 Have to notify if they are going to be holding a president or vice
president position
o We need to decide as a committee how we feel
 If we move it through senate would pass it three weeks from today
Kurtis enters
o Questions comments or concerns.
 Megan: three weeks at earliest which means we won’t deliberate
until January
 End of November

 Jim: not a fan of OSA driving our bylaws. I just emailed Petra to
ask questions. It should be this group writing them. I think there
should be a few minor changes but I don’t get a vote. My
recommendation if she supports it is to tell OSA these are our
bylaws
 Matt: how is it written, I’m trying to understand
 I cant find in OSA bylaws that they have that power
 I’ve looked at seg fees, and a few other bylaws. And I can’t
find it
 Not sure where this approval power
 Matt: have they produced something that says that?
















 No
Bylaws should be done by our meeting next week
I am part of OSA I think they have an important role in campus. I
think that the bylaws should come from this body (allocations)
Matt: OSA appoints people to this group
 Members and alternates yes
Reggie: This process is going to take awhile
Jim: we need to start getting down to business
Sarah: I want to follow the rules now and in future years so as we
go through the bylaws
Jim: how do the rest of you feel about this kerfuffle
Quin: what were their reasons
o Paid, and hiring process
o Jim: if anything its open to more students because it is on titan jobs
o
Sarah: I don’t think that they understood the two position
Quin: so they don’t know anything about this and they are making the rules for it
Sarah: The two position there… the time commitment was a concern.
The other chairs don’t have those stipulations.
Jim: they didn’t want two positions to be mismanaged and then have two
committees tank
Sarah: but their example was irrelevant because the person that mismanaged the
office was only on one committee
Reggie: there is OSA and us if there is an issue with the chair having two
positions… I’m not seeing the issue…
Megan: what didn’t they like about how we rewrote it and our thing about it being
easy to vote them out
o All the issues the committee had were brought up but they didn’t agree.
Because it was already written it seemed like they didn’t like it.
PPM
 Last week we made decisions on travel
 Rents and lease are where we are now. Do we feel there should be limitations
o Jim: most of that goes back to Reeve
o Quin: how much of this is off campus? Do we want to restrict that
o Sarah: we could specify on campus
o Jim: its also hockey team renting space at the Y
o Tom: it seems like a broad category
o Sarah: we could just leave it open
 Maintenance and repairs
o A lot of time its for unexpected repairs maybe that should have to go
through one time request
o Tom: A lot of them were asking for money that they may or may not need
o Kurtis: I don’t see an issue. If something breaks on the radio then they
need to wait until their one time request approved…. Its not like we are
losing that money because they can only use that for specified things

o Tom: that’s still money that can’t be allocated to others. But it is such a
small amount
o Sarah: no objections to just leaving it the same
o
Service and Professionals
o Reggie:…
o Tom: many are asking to cosponsor with another club and they don’t
know any of it. Speaker series that is fine because that’s what they do but
they others I think the cosponsor should be more regulated
o Matt: This allows smaller groups to join with other groups… Most groups
wont know a year in advance. ... but it still needs to be a reasonable
amount
o Quin: we generally say we want to know specifically where the money is
going…. It seems we are treating it differently than others
o Kurtis: I think it is difficult to know a year in advance… I don’t think we
should be saying
o Megan: can’t they submit a one time request once they know what they
specifically want
o Jim: some bring in annual speakers and its more traditional… I think there
is some benefit for that but as for the co sponsor most UW schools do that
through one time request
o Tom: I’m not opposed to cosponsor. But they could go further and sponsor
more together. I think we need to be careful with the idea of allocating
money and if they don’t use it will be returned
o Quin: I like the one time request idea…
o Calvin: I think one time sounds good but as for speakers….
o Jim: speaker series has a little money they set aside for cosponsor
o Cal: so does RUB
o Sarah: lets talk language
o Matt: just think of groups that have to plan ahead a year. What is enough
to qualify for getting money from this group
o Calvin: are you saying included in the proposal
o Matt:…
o Sarah: Speaker Series goes for the speakers they can afford because of
what they are allotted. The cosponsor was more vague than groups that
wanted to have a speaker. Next year we want to make it easier and also to
have more money in one time request
o Tom: I think they should have to have a plan to coordinate and use that
money
o Calvin: … would one club just apply or both
o Tom: They have the idea to spend that… they would split the cost and ask
for it.
o Reggie: what if what is happening now and we have no bylaws and cannot
approve one time requests I think we just need to have it included in a line
item


o Sarah: I agree…. I think that is not the strongest reason to do that. What
Tom is saying is that if we allocate the money and they don’t use it then
other groups cannot use it…. The amounts that they were asking for was
400-1000 and just we would like to do this
o Calvin: it seems like this line item is very fuzzy.
o Matt: what he is saying is who’s money is being spent. It’s a logistical
question.
o Sarah:
o Calvin
o Joe: is the money going to the people they cosponsor
o Reggie:
o Sarah: It seems odd that we are allocating money and then the other org is
allocating their money to another org.
o Quin: isn’t that what I already said
o Matt: …. Is it within the purpose of the money and that is why they can do
that
o Sarah: ideas
o Quin: motion to not fund non-specified co-sponsorships. That can be done
through one time request
o Reggie: my concern is how quickly can the one time request be processed
o Jim: It generally doesn’t happen that you need money for a speaker in one
day
o Sarah: my goal is two have a one week turn around in one time requests
o Megan: seconds motion
o Matt: I think you will run into problems with your one time request pool
o Sarha:… If this were to go through we would up the one time request pool
o Reggie: how much would go into pool
o Sarah: we won’t know that until next year
o Jim; we can make an itemized budget for our group.
o Sarah: that is something we could do. If we pass this we can discuss that
o Reggie: I think that is a good rule…
o Vote
 Favor: 6
 Opposed: 1
 Abstentions: 1
o
Services miscellaneous
o Jim: matt what kind of expenses fall under that
o Matt: I’ll look into it but…. Mostly services on campus and other things.
o Sarah: I think we can leave it open
o Matt: from my experience they have to be pretty specific to be there
Services internal
o Sarah: $4500
o Matt: services across campus. Maybe for specific groups.
o Sarah: I thought we could put some of those definitions into the PPM to
make it easier
o Jim: I would ask admin services
o Sarah: I’m looking for easy definitions
o Matt: you should be able to limit this to 20
Matt leaves
 Printing duplicating State
o Jim: my problem is with state vs non-state. State is campus and non-state
is off campus. I think sometimes how stuff ends up on this budget
spreadsheet depends on who puts it into spreadsheet
o Sarah: … we have quite a few dollars going to this. … do we want to have
restrictions on how we fund it.
o Reggie: that could be restricted. Then we could give that to other areas
like travel….
o Sarah: do we want to limit it on a per club basis
o Quin: seems difficult
o Calvin: RUB prints a lot. Limiting printing I don’t think its our place to
decide.
o Jim: is the printing relevant to org. can they justify the cost. Some it
clearly makes sense and others not so much
o Sarah: some things printing seems more justified than others
o Quin: seems difficult to limit in terms of amount.
o Sarah: we can still judge in deliberations too we don’t have to put a rule.
o Joe: I think we can determine that during deliberations. Case by case
o Sarah: lets leave it out and if we see patterns we can add it in spring
o
 Services and janitorial
o Joe: how much is that one 3600
 Supplies
o Reggie: what is supplies
o Sarah: office, crafts,
o Jim: RUB sponsored events and activities. Big orgs that need stuff for
campus events.
Joe leaves
o Sarah: hard to cut down because it is a wide array. So just keep it in mind
 Software
 Food and food service contracts
o Quin: what were some of the requests
o Jim: food for meetings, banquet and ceremonies. Mixed feelings
o Sarah: on meeting level, we can make it strict. 2 meeting costs, at like $3 a
club member or whatever. Additional events will be considered on a case
by case basis.
o Sarah: for example when speaker series goes to dinner with speaker. Pay
for speaker yes but all 15 members too. I don’t think we should cover that.
o Reggie: couldn’t they eat there. I don’t see why they need to do it before
hand
o Sarah: personally I don’t think we should be covering meetings like that,
but some meetings, and cultural nights.
Kurits: I don’t see a huge issue with that. Its not like every org does that
Megan: but If you let one group do it then you have to let them all
Sarah: do you want to pay 700 for food
Quin: how do you word that
Reggie: … why do they need it
Kurits: …
Reggie:…
Jim: they have it here on campus.
Kurtis: I don’t have an issue because the money is being spent on campus
Sarah: I think they could use that money for other things.
Jim: when speakers come to campus they want to have time to talk to
students on campus and thoughts.
o Sarah: then fundraise or have student pay.
o Reggie: they you may get too many students going to dinner with speaker
o Sarah: its just for members but lets not get so specific. …
o Reggie: 2 meetings a year at $5 per person
o Sarah: funding for food at regular meetings is limited to 2 meetings a year
and a maximum of $5 per person
o Funding for food at events shall be determined on a case by case basis
o Reggie:…
o Quin: If we phrase it like that I think it discourages groups from applying.
o Sarah: add unless the funding is essential to the clubs purpose or mandate.
o Quin: do we think people will try to get around that.
o ….
o Kurits: …no issue with wording
o Sarah: any other restrictions on food –seeing non
Nathan Koffke enters
 Equipment and furniture
o Jim: the majority is TV and radio
o Nathan: and art wanted art
 Insurance
 Postage and freight
o Sarah: last year was 3600 and requested this year was 13000
o Quin: well art had a lot of paintings from South Korea
o Sarah: with no restrictions on that are we encouraging them to get people
from far away
o Quin: distance ups the value to community
o Jim: case by case
 Subscriptions
o Reggie: academic purpose
o Sarah: some we found in the library but highest cost was encyclopedias
o Jim: isn’t that what Wikipedia is for
o Nathan:
o Reggie: Model UN needs factual info and its important
o Kurtis: just adding only fund if they can’t be found on campus
o Nathan: don’t want to double fund
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o


o Sarah: Funding for subscriptions is limited to resources not currently
provided to students through university channels, such as Polk.
Dues and memberships
o Same as language in travel
o Jim: I think we just weren’t paying individual dues but paying group
memberships
o Kurts: lets do a diff one for this
o Sarah: … pay collective fee. … no individual dues or memberships to
professional organizations.
o Kurtis: why professional orgs and not just individual dues or
memberships.
o Sarah: I don’t know if there are individual dues for sports. Separating from
travel
o Kurits: can we specify…. I don’t see the benefit of professional
o Jim: most that come up are looking towards professional memberships.
The point does make sense it may come up
o Calvin: leave it
o Sarah: others will be case by case and then
Advertising and notices
o Calvin: what determines printing from ad
o Jim: buying space in newspapers and mags and websites
o Sarah: agendas and schedules printing. Posters for advertising purposes
o Jim: that is printing. Groups that buy space in local paper
o Nathan: I think people put it in wrong place
o Sarah:…
o Nathan: put in a description
o Sarah: limits or no
o Jim: case by case
o Sarah: sometimes flexibility can be a hindrance. Its helpful to point to
policies and say we fund it or not.
o Kurits:
o Sarah: what about stuff like pens or balls.
o Jim: I think that swag comes from supply line
o Sarah: can we change that it seems confusing
o Jim: that is admin services. We could ask them to code it that way but they
probably wont’
o Sarah: could we ask students to do that
o Jim:
o Sarah: now they added the student does code
o Jim: then yeah that would work
o Sarah: do we think there should be a limit
o Quin: how would you begin to limit. Can anyone think of something that
wouldn’t be flawed
o Sarah: my idea would be a cap of like $100 per event
o Jim: that won’t buy you a whole lot in a newspaper
o Sarah: case by case

o Quin: after we review budgets it may be easier to think back and see what
we could have done better. After deliberations it may be easier
Prizes and awards
o Sarah: one PPM said that no funding for prizes and awards for campus
community members and should we put a cap on speaker?
o Jim: already a cap in W50
o Calvin: why would we not put that in services and professional
o Jim: I think that requires contracts
o Sarah: we could say like any gift beyond
o Calvin: any compensation
o Sarah: any compensation beyond what is contracted is limited to
o No gift cards. We may want to be over arching.
o Calvin: does that include reeve gift cards.
o Jim: once you buy a gift card you are converting state money into cash and
that’s how they embezzle
o Reggie: why do we need to limit it
o Sarah: ….
o Add max. of $25 (moved to services)
o NO PRIZES AND AWARDS
 ….
 Calvin: outstanding member they get a reeve gift card and
certificate. Its good for people to be recognized
 Kurits: certificates are good. case by case
 Sarah: we need to make cuts and we need to look for benefit.
 Calvin: incentives to some to meetings, recruitment and retention.
 Sarah: I think people make better choices we their own many than
club money.
 Calvin: this is limiting internal recognition.
 Sarah: I don’t think it limits that I think it comes down to if we
want to fund that
 Reggie: limit that
 Sarah: like $20 per club
 Megan: funding individual prizes is similar to individual dues
 Quin: benefit to community is motivation to do better but I motion
no prizes and awards. Seconded by Megan
 Reggie: if someone gets recognized for an award doesn’t that up
confidence and motivate to do more.
 Sarah: there is benefit but does that stem from the plaque or
because he was just said he was recognized. Not because of the
plaque
 Nathan: for bowling the award is a brick. It means a lot but it
doesn’t have to be an expansive plaque
 Quin: it’s the symbol that matters. I still have the matchbox car not
the plaque. If money were no object then yeah awesome but we
need to cut 300,000
 Reggie: but we are in the generation that needs a pat on the back







vote:
 Favor: 4
 Opposed: 1
 Abstentions: 1
Royalties
o Jim: permission to use rights like music
o Calvin: people that produce the license
o Jim: and those fees are going to go up
o
Computer equipment, audio visual and media, and domestic
Reggie: how much does RUB spend on prizes
o Calvin: I don’t know exactly. They are used to get people to attend and
then to stay there. We give out great prizes.
Sarah: no gift cards
o Everyone okay with that wording- yes
Sarah: no funding for things exclusively academic in nature
o Jim: take that wording
o Reggie: I think we should cite that too. Then people will question it less
 Sarah: I will look that up on W50 and include it when I’m writing
it
o We don’t fund T-shirts
 Jim: unless they are a uniform
 Sarah: and will remain with the group
o Capital and expenditures- requirement and criteria
o Add student employment in spring
o Fundraising
 If they raise it they keep it.
 Kurtis: should report to SAC during budget process.
 Sarah: a lot of clubs report their revenue and some raise such small
amounts. That is why I think we should just include the first two.
 Any objections to putting fundraising in with the first two bullet
points. – no objections
o Sarah: I will have this typed up for you guys by the weekend and you can
look over it
Motion to adjourn by Kurtis and seconded by Reggie.