â??If it turns out that we violated state law, we may have to throw out the SFC portions of the Senate meeting. That is not something that I want to do.â?

Funding decisions made at the Jan. 28 Student Association Senate meeting are now being challenged, as some say they may violate state law.

At least two senators who voted at the meeting also serve in one of the centers that received funding eligibility. The Senate granted several student organizations and centers funding eligibility through the Senate Finance Committee (SFC), eligibility that had been previously denied by the committee itself.

Sen. Papa-Kwesi Coleman works for LINKS, the peer mentoring center at UWM, and Sen. Antwan Jones works in the Center of Volunteerism and Student Leadership. Their votes on deeming the center eligible for funding may have been cast in violation of state statutes.

Senate Speaker Amanda Voigtlander identified two main options in dealing with the voting issues. One possibility is that the votes will stand, as there has been some precedence of senators making votes pertaining to organizations or groups they are employed by.

The other option is more ominous for groups who gained eligibility at the Jan. 28 Senate meeting.

“If it turns out that we violated state law, we may have to throw out the SFC portions of the meeting,” Voigtlander said. “That is not something that I want to do.”

Throwing out the SFC decisions would mean that the eligibility votes would have to be redone, with the violating senators abstaining from the decision-making process. With most of the votes at the meeting being dangerously close to falling short of the two-thirds majority necessary for eligibility, those two votes could ultimately swing the funding decisions back toward deeming the centers non-eligible.

The situation is expected to be heard by the University Student Court, which will decide whether the SFC votes can stand.

The segregated fee allocations made by the SFC also need to be submitted and ratified by SA President Samantha Prahl before any funding decisions are made official. She is allowed seven days to review and ratify or deny the allocations once she receives them.

> Comments