You are currently browsing the archives for the Wisconsin State Assembly category.
Rep. Gottlieb’s office has sent us the updated version of his bill to require UW-System student governments to follow open records laws. The relevant language has been changed to read:
I and those I have spoken with are pretty pleased with the new wording and think it definitely fixes some of our previous concerns. From what we have heard, this will likely be the final draft of the legislation and is the wording that will be introduced when the legislature is back in session.
As the Sconz has already pointed out, yesterday I met with Rep. Mark Gottlieb (R-60) about the legislation he is going to introduce that would require
be subject to state open records and open meetings requirements. Also with me were WSL Services Director and ASM Secretary Kurt Gosselin and ASM Vice Chair Tom Templeton.
In general, students both within our organization and in ASM that we have spoken with about the issue have been in support of idea that the portions of student government that oversee the allocation of seg fees be subject to state open records and meetings laws and we expressed that sentiment to Rep. Gottlieb. In fact ASM has had a policy dating back several years of acting as if they were already subject to open records and open meetings laws.
We did however have a couple of issues with the way the specific language of the provisions was written. In particular we felt that the word “direction” could potentially be interperted to include groups that are on the recieving end of segregated fees, like the WSL. One of the primary reasons for scheduling the meeting with Rep. Gottlieb was to figure out what groups he intended to require to comply with the open records laws. He indicated to us that his orginial intentions were to just require those parts of student governments that actual oversaw the allocation of seg fees to comply. (Sidenote: for ASM that would be SSFC, Student Council, Finance Committee etc. Every UW school has a different student government structure, hence the need for the vague language.)
He also promised us that if the bill was going to move forward that he would certainly reconsider the specific language that was used to clarify exactly which student groups he was intended to subject to the open records and meetings laws. We also suggested the language be reworded to read
any association created by students at the University of Wisconsin System or the technical college system with one of its explicit purposes being the supervision of the expenditure of revenues derived from mandatory student fees
I also spoke yesterday afternoon with Michael Moscicke, who is with United Council, and he informed me that Rep. Gottlieb’s office was already working on revising the language to take into considerations our concerns on that subject.
We also expressed concern that the legislation would require Student Judiciary to not only have open hearings, but also to deliberate in an open meeting as opposed to their current closed door deliberations. Rep. Gottlieb was not as sympathetic to our concerns in this area. He was initially very opposed to the idea that Student Judiciary should even be allowed to deliberate in a closed door session. After some explanation from Kurt about the types of decisions being made by Student Judiciary and the desire for them to not have to deliberate in the same room as the individual or groups about which they are deliberating, he was a bit more open to the idea and said that he would have to think about it.
A final potential objection that we brought to his attention was the relationship between student governments and the University and how that affected the privacy of students protected by FERPA. Right now there is not really any sort of clear precedent as to whether or not student governments are subject to FERPA restrictions. As actually figuring out the answer to that question would require going through all of the relevant University, state open records and FERPA laws, it will take lawyers actually looking into the subject to answer the question definitively. However, UW-Madison senior legal consol Nancy Lynch has told us that she believes that the way the legislation is worded it definitively makes it clear that student governments are not a part of the University and thus open records requests of ASM would not be subject to FERPA. That of course assumes that the relevant records are not being kept by professional staff hired by the University, who would be subject to FERPA, but rather by someone like Tyler Junger or Tom.
Rep. Mark Gottlieb (R-60) thinks so. He is currently circulating proposed legislation for co-sponsors that would do just that.
Here is a pdf of the proposed legislation and the summary from the Legislative Reference Bureau.
Analysis by the Legislative Reference Bureau
Currently, students at the University of Wisconsin (UW) System and the Wisconsin Technical College System (WTCS) have the right to organize themselves in a manner they determine and to select their representatives to participate in institutional or technical college district governance. Upon consultation with the appropriate chancellor and subject to the approval of the Board of Regents of the UW System, UW students have responsibility for disposition of revenues from those student fees that constitute substantial support for campus student activities. Upon consultation with the district director and subject to the approval of the district board, technical college students in each technical college district have responsibility for disposition of revenues from student activity and incidental fees authorized by law. Currently, coverage of the public records access and open meetings laws is determined in part based upon whether a governmental unit or body is created by the constitution or a statute, ordinance, rule, or order. Currently, no statute creates a unit or body of students at the UW or the WTCS.
This bill provides that any body created by students at the UW System or the WTCS that has supervision or direction over the expenditure of revenues derived from mandatory student fees is covered under the public records access and open meetings laws. Under the bill, except as otherwise provided by law, any person has the right to inspect or copy a public record of a covered student organization unless the custodian demonstrates that the public interest in withholding access to the information contained in the record outweighs the strong public interest in providing access to that information. In addition, with certain exceptions, meetings of covered student governmental bodies must be preceded by public notice, must be held in places that are reasonably accessible to the public, and must be open to the public at all times. If a meeting is properly noticed, a body may, by recorded vote of a majority of the members present, convene in closed session for the purpose of considering certain matters specified by law.
We are currently talking with ASM leaders about what the potential implications of this legislation would mean for ASM and have also spoken with UW Senior University Legal Counsel, Nancy Lynch, to discuss what the effects of the legislation would mean were it to pass. There are still many questions about the legislation and its implications that still need to be answered. We are meeting with Rep. Gottlieb next week in order to hopefully clear up some of these questions.
