E-mail
Print
Student Association threatens SHAC with student court suit
SHAC has until noon Tuesday to reply
By Savannah Hunnicutt and Jonathan Anderson
The Student Association (SA) sent a letter late Sunday to the Student Housing Administrative Council (SHAC), threatening a student court suit unless SHAC complies with an SA directive making SHAC a subunit of the Student Association.
The letter, which was signed by SA President Tyler Draheim and SA Vice President Tommy Hughes, comes two days after a temporary restraining order against the SA expired. The restraining order prevented the SA from implementing its legislation that placed SHAC under the umbrella of SA, but expired because SHAC did not file a complaint with the student court.
“We expect, as no case was filed, that the legislation now is no longer disputed, and that SHAC and its Director will follow the guidelines set down for them by the Senate,” read the letter. “Seeing as this has been in the making for over a month, for the utmost clarity, we request that this position be confirmed in no uncertain language by the Director of SHAC no later than noon on Tuesday. If no reply is submitted to the Student Association office by that point, the Student Association will assume that SHAC does not intend to move forward with the legislation passed by the Senate and a case will be filed with the University Student Court to resolve the issue.”
Also on Sunday, SHAC President Nikki Senrick said SHAC is preparing to file a suit in student court, telling the Post that the paperwork is “ready to go.” However, Senrick said a majority vote is still needed among the SHAC Executive Board to move forward with the action.
When asked if cooperation and agreement could be facilitated without a merger, Senrick referred to the student government the University of Wisconsin - Green Bay (UWGB). Senrick explained how UWGB’s SHAC and SA equivalents, the RHA and SGA, have liaisons between the two organizations, making for an open door for communication, but still maintaining two individual systems that cater to students in two unique ways.
“I think it’s a great idea for student governments to have open communication,” Senrick said.
But SA Vice President Tommy Hughes said the Student Association is puzzled as to why SHAC is fighting the measure and has accused SHAC of being unresponsive to attempts at discussion.
“We're completely baffled and confused by SHAC's actions,” said Hughes, speaking on behalf of SA President Tyler Draheim on Friday.
“After resolving the situation informally, as we had hoped to nearly three weeks ago, we were surprised to hear nothing from SHAC and to be ignored repeatedly in our requests for further discussion,” read the letter to SHAC that Draheim and Hughes both signed.
Senrick did not return a voicemail Sunday evening requesting further comment. To view the contents of the SA letter, click here.
> Comments
SHACite on Nov 03, 2008 at 07:41 AM:
Come on exec board, comply or get run over by the SA Bus AGAIN! Gee whiz, are you dissenters masochists?!? Perhaps you think, "I dissent, therefore I am." You shall be assimilated!
Michael Knaapen on Nov 03, 2008 at 01:46 PM:
This situation is out of hand, and I am proud of the SA leadership for following the letter of the law and exercising their rights according to the established process, as they have done throughout this absurd ordeal. Hopefully their example will inspire the other participants in this discussion and due process can finally be respected. Additionally, I completely sympathize with SA officials' confusion: SA has taken pains to encourage dialogue on this issue to expedite a conclusion amenable to all parties, and our efforts have been met--WHEN they have been met--weakly. Hopefully this will take us one step closer to a mutually beneficial end to this nonsense.
Ryan Carpenter on Nov 03, 2008 at 02:45 PM:
As somebody completely unfamiliar with student government (i didnt even know we had a student governtment until last month), I believe the SA is doing what it has every right to do- excercise control over its organization. Have you ever heard of the phrase "too many chiefs, not enough indians"? That's what comes to mind, but thats just my opinion.
Pat K. on Nov 03, 2008 at 07:15 PM:
SHAC is not representative of the residents. They date eachother and cross breed. It's crazy and so are they. Maybe when SA takes them over the nonsense will end. Finally!
Get over it on Nov 03, 2008 at 09:00 PM:
So two candidates dated eachother...GET OVER IT!
Pat K. on Nov 03, 2008 at 09:38 PM:
"Get over it" you obviously like to hide behind a veil of anonyminity. Why shouldn't it matter if the two candidates running against eachother dated eachother?
Get over it on Nov 04, 2008 at 02:04 AM:
It shouldn't matter because only one of them won. And as far as I know, the other is not on the exec board. There was no harm done by them dating. No bylaws nor the constitution was breached. It has no effect on SHAC and is no longer relevant. So why does it matter?
SHACite on Nov 04, 2008 at 07:49 AM:
The SHACites would be less distinct from other groups if they had less endogenous dating practices. Draheim and Hughes, thank you for leading us SHACites to the Promised Land of Shared Governance!
Yup- on Nov 04, 2008 at 07:51 AM:
I personally know (and HATE) both of the parties in question for having dated. It doesn't have anything to do with this situation "Get over it" is right... GET OVER IT!
REALLY.... on Nov 04, 2008 at 09:17 AM:
Must I bring up the fact that when MR. Hughes was the V.P. of SHAC he had a thing and was openly dating the Admin of Finance in SHAC. And just to bring that to light that is S.A.'S new V.P. after a very crooked election! CONGRATS S.A. you have a real winner!!!
Reggie Harris on Nov 04, 2008 at 09:36 AM:
I think that while there were some issues with the election last year, SUFC ran on a campaign of reform and is living up to it. I think this year they should bring in an IEC that doesn't go to UWM to keep things fair. They should also be a graduate student as well. That way, there will be checks and balances
SHACite on Nov 04, 2008 at 03:57 PM:
I would propose a memorial shrine commemorating this codification, but I don't want to encourage pork spending of student fees, and alas private donors are scarcer than those donors were for the Bronze Fonze...
Re: SHACite on Nov 04, 2008 at 09:27 PM:
Sycophant! I wouldn't be surprised if "SHACite" is hired as some SA director next year.
Will on Nov 05, 2008 at 09:43 AM:
Maybe they should have an IEC from the outside...hmmmm...