Some of you (hopefully) remember the preliminary hearing that happened on Tuesday, January 29 between Student Body, represented by John Petkus, and Student Government, represented by Brandon Zajac, Joe Cantwell, Eric Ciarkowski, and Ashley Brauning. As a refresher to your memory, the preliminary hearing was to decide if there would be an actual hearing on the matter at hand: Student Government accessing funds through the Discretionary Funding Committee (DFC). If you recall, the decision was to continue on and have an actual hearing on the matter.

The hearing, which was broadcast live on WLSO, was held at 9:00 PM on Tuesday, February 12, 2008 in the Cisler Center Anchor Room. Student Body was, again, represented by John Petkus, Student Government was represented by Brandon Zajac, Joe Cantwell, Eric Ciarkowski, and Ashley Brauning, and, of course, the Judiciary Board was present to hear both sides of the story.

The hearing started off slow with Doug Anger addressing those that were present on how the hearing would run; each side received twenty minutes for their side of the story, then each side would have five minutes for rebuttals and closing arguments. Prosecution, or the Student Body, would go first. Because John Petkus had received documents from the Defense just moments before the trial, he requested a few extra minutes to look over them before the hearing started. Once that was done, things flew.

Mr. Petkus addressed the Judiciary Board, stating that questions still remained about whether or not Student Government should be allowed to go to DFC. He stated that in doing so, Student Government is going against the Student Constitution. He referenced a meeting that occurred on March 31, 2003 in which the Student Government at that time decided that Student Government would not go to DFC for extra funding. He called a witness to speak about his experience with the meeting in question.

Edward Cheladyn was a student at Lake State from Fall 2001- Fall 2005. He was on Student Government and was also present at the March 31, 2003 meeting. He stated that he and the rest of the Student Government at that time felt that it should not be allowed for Student Government to go to DFC. They felt that there were no checks and balances in place, and not allowing them to go to DFC would serve as an informal check and balance. The voting turned up unanimous in favor of banning Student Government to go to DFC.

After Mr. Cheladyn spoke, Petkus reinforced what he said. Students do not want Student Government to be able to go to DFC. It is essentially them granting themselves money since DFC is a subcommittee of Student Government. Petkus closed his twenty minutes by stating that the United States Government has checks and balances, so Student Government should also have checks and balances in place.

Student Government was then given their twenty minutes to speak. Eric Ciarkowski spoke first. He stated that Student Government interpreted parts of the Student Constitution to mean that they can go to DFC. He stated that the wording says that Student Government cannot provide supplemental funding to itself, but no where does it say they cannot provide discretionary funding. Ciarkowski also stated that, “In the event money is needed, not being able to go to DFC is crippling.”

Joe Cantwell, Brandon Zajac, and Ashley Brauning also spoke on behalf of Student Government. Cantwell stated that the wording in the Constitution is not precise, but that if it was the intent of the Student Body to not have Student Government go to DFC, it should be clearly stated. Zajac backed this up by stating that Student Government felt they were taking the “common sense approach” by looking through the Constitution; when they did not see a ban on going to DFC, they felt it was permissible that they request the funding. Brauning pointed out that they did not go directly to DFC. She stated that they went through what they felt to be all the necessary people.

Once both sides had been heard, the hearing went into a five minute recess. After the hearing was called back into session, the rebuttals and closing arguments were heard. Petkus closed by stating that it is not the students desire that the money be returned, but that in the future, Student Government not go to DFC. Ciarkowski closed by stating that Student Government did what it felt was permissible and fair. While the two sides clearly felt that they were in the right, it seemed that both sides actually agreed on one point: the Constitution should be changed, if nothing else but for clarity.

After closing arguments were completed and both sides rested, the Judiciary Board went into closed session and made their decision. They then called all the students back into the room and opened the floor for questions. Student Government was bombarded with questions such as concerns about the number of Student Government members on DFC, how they intend on changing the Constitution, how they plan on notifying students of how their money is being spent, and how soon they intend on making these changes, if at all.

After Student Government answered all the audience questions, the decision was revealed. The Judiciary Board found in favor of the Prosecution. This means the Student Body “won.” What does this mean, though? It means that in the future, unless the Student Constitution is changed, Student Government will not be allowed to go to DFC for extra funding. If you are curious about what Student Government is up to, they do encourage students to attend their meetings. The meetings are held on Fridays at 5 PM.

Be first to comment this article

Only registered users can write comments.
Please login or register.

Powered by AkoComment Tweaked Special Edition v.1.4.6
AkoComment © Copyright 2004 by Arthur Konze - www.mamboportal.com
All right reserved