The Weekly Rose has received transcripts of two group chats implicated in the ongoing KU Student Senate drama relating to allegations of collusion by members of the Required Student Fee Committee. Is it still a ‘nothing burger’?
Bush Jr. graces the Leg Leaders group chat as its profile picture. Photo: Reuters
The Weekly Rose has received transcripts of two group chats implicated in the ongoing KU Student Senate drama relating to allegations of collusion by members of the Required Student Fee Committee. Specifically, The Rose has been able to review parts of the “Leg Leaders” iMessage chat, screenshots of which can be seen in the Kansan’s previous ‘reporting’ on this matter, as well as parts of the “Fee Dream Team” Microsoft Teams chat, which was referenced in Student Body President Andrew Murga’s Officer Report last Wednesday but was not previously public.
The messages The Rose received can be reviewed in full* in this article. The Rose also received statements from several involved parties as well as draft articles of impeachment which are based largely on the contents of the Fee Dream Team group chat.
Leg Leaders (iMessage)
Nathan Binshtok Saturday, Jan 31 at 12:04 PM
So... anyone incredibly bored and free this weekend and wants to help me sort 2627 free response answers from the survey???
I know you're all jumping at this opportunity
Simrah
2627 😱😱
Robert Eppler
Yeah, I'll be in the office today
🩷
Simrah
i would but i have family that flew into town 🥲
Robert Eppler
Hell yeah family
Kenna McNally
If you share it with me I should be able to have some time to help
Simrah
give me some and i can help chip away at it from home
Robert Eppler
POV sorting fee responses
🩷
Nathan Binshtok
Ok I'll send it here soon, gonna automate so much as I can before
I have automated sorting for "SafeRide", "UDK", and "Watkins", anything else yall think I should add?
Once we all start doing it manually I can't automate anymore which is why I'm asking
Kate Eckert
caps?
Nathan Binshtok
I'll add that and buses
Simrah
maybe student support and case management 🤓
Nathan Binshtok
Lol
Simrah
i think those are the heavy hitters everything else can get boiled down
Robert Eppler
Based on the survey student wages and the rec should also be automated
Nathan Binshtok
You think it's safe to say nobody wants to decrease wages? Lol
Kate Eckert
I think student senate employees are getting paid too much
‼️
Robert Eppler
Maybe if Jeff Dewitt filled out the survey
🩷
Nathan Binshtok
Ok here's what I think would be most helpful rn
IMAGE OMITTED: RSFS result spreadsheet
Don't make any edits for now, just skim the rightmost summary column and the free text responses they're based on to their left, and let me know if you see any major or repeated errors
The ones with just numbers are ones my filters didn't catch, meaning we'll sort manually
Kate Eckert
this is absolutely cray
‼️
Nathan Binshtok
There's some funny ones I've seen already lol
❤️
Kate Eckert
I'm certain I've found Robert's contribution
Robert Eppler
Shouldn't there be more Colums for whitch of these services have you used last year since you had to do a colum for each of the name 3 arrived you prioritize?
Kate EckertI'm certain I've found Robert's contribution
Send pics or it's not real
Nathan Binshtok
Robert EpplerShouldn't there be more Colums for whitch of these services have you used last year since you had to do a colum for each of the name 3 arrived you prioritize?
I haven't rlly checked anything but the last column bc RCC exported it all so weird
Kate Eckert
Kate EckertI'm certain I've found Robert's contribution
literally who else is advocating for defunding hilltop and udk 💀
Nathan Binshtok
From my understanding there's a column for each choice on the multiple choice ones and it's just blank if they didn't choose it
Kate Eckert
IMAGE OMITTED: RSFS response implying the student had never been to Kansas
❤️
This one was me
Robert Eppler
Laugh out loud
How do we sort if the comments are positive or negative after we code them by fee entity
Nathan Binshtok
I'm just doing by keywords ngl
This is a good point tho, maybe just an extra column? That becomes complicated for ones that discuss multipl tho
I really have no idea how to do that without using AI or manually one by one
Robert Eppler
This may be a lot of work but you could double the codes to be like UDK+ UDK-
Kate EckertI'm certain I've found Robert's contribution
I'm jsut salty that mine is being coded as funding the UdK
😭
Nathan Binshtok
Robert EpplerThis may be a lot of work but you could double the codes to be like UDK+ UDK-
Yeah I had the same thought, that would make the visualization step easy (can code positive as green and negative as red) but still means we're doing this manually or trusting AI
Kate Eckert
I think if there's four of us or whatever that's manageable
Robert Eppler
Control f "UdK+" vs control f Udk-"
Sorry I don't understand sheets functions if there is a better one
Also a lot of these responses seem to be about decreasing the fee witch could be coded as "Less"
Nathan Binshtok
Ok let's try this, let me make a few more edits then we'll dive in
Look for like 5 more mins and see if there's any other common responses I missed
Kate Eckert
could we do "mental health" in addition to caps
maybe Edwards campus?
Nathan Binshtok
Oh shit yeah I missed Edward's
‼️
So you mean separate mental health from caps? I feel like they're typically in the same response?
Robert Eppler
IMAGE OMITTED: RSFS response critiquing the RSFS, suggesting that wealthier students ought to pay more, and arguing that professors need to be paid better
Sasha?
Kate Eckert
Nathan BinshtokSo you mean separate mental health from caps? I feel like they're typically in the same response?
no just add mental health bc there are quite a few that are about that but don't say caps
👍
Robert Eppler
Then we can jsut choose to code them as Caps?
👍
Kate Eckert
Robert EpplerSasha?
Sasha is too smart to say this
Nathan Binshtok
Robert EpplerIMAGE OMITTED: RSFS response critiquing the RSFS, suggesting that wealthier students ought to pay more, and arguing that professors need to be paid better
Lmao what 😭
Robert Eppler
IMAGE OMITTED: RSFS response suggesting what appears to be a forumla for determining how fees are paid; image too blurry for further detail
I desperately want to ability to respond to some of these people why can't I tell this person it is 6 credit hours half fee and they can opt out of wellness
Kate Eckert
did you see the one that thought the fee was monthly 🫤
IMAGE OMITTED: RSFS response crtiqiuing stadium construction costs.
🤕
Robert Eppler
Not a high priority but an option could also be "0" as in didn't use any fee services. This may be too close to less student fee tho
Simrah
Robert EpplerI desperately want to ability to respond to some of these people why can't I tell this person it is 6 credit hours half fee and they can opt out of wellness
thats very rich and privileged of u 🙄
❔
im abt to open the spreedsheet wish me luck
Nathan Binshtok
Ok I have it in a place where we have 750 fully unsorted responses
❤️
And if we're adding + or - or = (for neutral) we have to go thru each individually anyway
Robert Eppler
We jsut sort the ones that are labeled the student id right
Nathan Binshtok
Ok lemme explain rq
Robert Eppler
Fingers crossed we can get the canvas page that will make fee trnapserncy and engagement so much better
🗣️ ❤️
IMAGE OMITTED: RSFS response implying that Student Senate is stealing money instead of funding campus parking
Nathan Binshtok
Column AF is the only thing we'll edit. Let's start with the entires that have numbers and sort them to fit the existing identifiers. Make sure everything is spelled the same and column separated or it will break. You can check the comment at the top of the column for more details
If you need to make a new label put exactly how you've spelled it in this GC
Don't worry about + or - for now, let's try this and see how it goes? I get first and last 500 rows, kate you get 500-1000 robert you get 1000-1500, simrah 1500-2000 if you can
👍👍
Just focus on the ones with numbers in them for now
Robert Eppler
Can you drop a list of all the codes/labels
Nathan Binshtok
Uh yeah this might take a sec
The full list is in AG:4. Please add any new labels you make there
Robert Eppler
Kenna McNallyIf you share it with me I should be able to have some time to help
Kenna last 500 nathan first 500
Nathan Binshtok
Oh bet
Kenna McNally
Huh
Nathan Binshtok
Or actually kenna do rows 2000-2500 and I'll do the last couple
If you're available that is, we're just sorting the 750 values my filters didn't catch rn (the ones in column AF that are numbers)
Fuck I should've added graduate
HA HA
One sec gang I'm resetting column AF
👍
Simrah
😭
Nathan BinshtokFuck I should've added graduate
thats going for best oneliner for superlatives
🩷
Nathan Binshtok
Ok we're good now unless I forgot anything else
Btw I think the biggest thing most unsorted values will be is "Student Fees" bc there's so many ways to say fees are too expensive
Robert Eppler
IMAGE OMITTED: RSFS sheet showing how to format and code responses
Now when I try to edit it just pulls up code, chat what am I missing
Nathan Binshtok
Refresh
What cell is that?
Robert Eppler
1003 AF. Refreshed again and it didn't help but it's only th is cell so nvm
Nathan Binshtok
IMAGE OMITTED: RSFS response suggesting the Committee should give some things more money
I'm so dead
HA HA
Kate Eckert
why didn't we think of that?!?!???
Nathan Binshtok
Robert Eppler1003 AF. Refreshed again and it didn't help but it's only th is cell so nvm
Oh that's kinda my fault you had it selected while I replaced it so it didn't flatten the equation
Kate Eckert
what about people complaining about the form itself
Robert Eppler
Put this person on RSFC immediately
🗣️
Nathan Binshtok
If anyone has that just replace the equation with whatever its output is
Kate Eckertwhat about people complaining about the form itself
"NA" if it has something to do with the last option being required
Kate Eckert
specifically the use of services question being required
Still na?
Nathan Binshtok
Yeah that one has to be required it's only the last one that we messed up on
Oh like if they don't use any of them at all? Still NA but that's good to know
👍
Kenna McNally
I can't work on this for awhile so if you're all on the doc and can finish it th
Nathan Binshtok
Yeah all good, I might have Shawn get started on your section if he's free
Oh Robert I didn't add Bands but I haven't seen anyone mention it so far
😭
We've added "Fee Education" for any responses where ppl wanted to learn more
🩷
Robert Eppler
Tempted to add "Admin" for those iMessage about chanclor getting too much money
Nathan Binshtok
lol
If you see 5 more you can add it
Like 20 of mine have been “Student Fee” and 5 NAs
Robert Eppler
It's kinda jsut student fees but maybe we need an inflamatory package 😈
It’s kinda jsut student fees but maybe we need an inflammatory resolution to kbor at the end of fee package 😈
Kate Eckert
remember when we had an inflammatory resolution about Edward’s campus? And notice how many responses are how about Edward’s campus shouldnt pay?
Robert Eppler
I do actually!!!
Nathan Binshtok
Hey let’s add “Online” too
👍👍
Robert Eppler
Accessibility?
Nathan Binshtok
If you've seen it more than once sure
👍
Kate Eckert
what are we doing with the ones that we aren't seeing more than once
There's one about dining and I'm tempted to classify it as fee education bc it has nothing to do with us
Nathan Binshtok
Kate Eckertwhat are we doing with the ones that we aren't seeing more than once
Leave for now, I got a weird one about pharmacy too
We should probably just have a Misc option or maybe label them as NA? Fee education is a good option too but let's wait until we get more labels
Kate Eckert
I vote admin label
Nathan Binshtok
Ok add it but don't put it on unrelated things
👍
Robert Eppler
I added Saftey to include accessibility bc people complain about stairs and Saftey is somthing we can actully do
Kate Eckert
hopefully spelled safety?
❤️
Nathan Binshtok
IMAGE OMITTED: RSFS Response Suggesting campus should sell Monster Energy
Nathan Binshtok
Only thing I'm gonna push right here
🗣️HA HA
Kate Eckert
how can we make this happen
Robert Eppler
Engagement for sec but also clubs and "actovities"?
Nathan Binshtok
How about just Clubs?
❤️
Robert Eppler
Low key can be interpreted into funding the union or sec but clubs is easier and we someone can make that argument in deliberations
Added sus for sustainability.
I know I'm adding a lot of code but that is also a separate fee entity
Nathan Binshtok
Just fully spell it out please
Robert Eppler
We have already broken him
👍
Nathan Binshtok
IMAGE OMITTED: RSFS response passionatley suggesting that cuts to SafeRide are responsible for the shooting outside The Hawk bar in January
Holy
Robert Eppler
IMAGE OMITTED: RSFS response saying that money should go towards student services
Write that down write that down
Nathan BinshtokHoly
Esperanza
Kate Eckert
Nathan BinshtokHoly
I have read three about student senate's pizza and I have never once gotten free pizza from student senate 😠😠
🤧
IMAGE OMITTED: RSFS response advocating for the defunding of the Student Senate
right to the point I like this one
HA HA
Robert Eppler
IMAGE OMITTED: RSFS response telling senators to spend less on pizza
Kate Eckert
Robert Eppler
I'm including pharmacy in graduate
👍
1 for SSCM! Adding it as label too as the acronym
👍
Nathan Binshtok
Accessibility = safety right?
Robert Eppler
Yes
Robert EpplerIMAGE OMITTED: RSFS response saying that money should go towards student services
IMAGE OMITTED: RSFS response appearing to suggest spending more on certain, unspecified things
Robert EpplerIMAGE OMITTED: RSFS response saying that money should go towards student services
Some of our students need to take more history/writing based classes
Kate Eckert
IMAGE OMITTED: RSFS response looking for more spending on block and line funding
any guesses as to which senator wrote this?
Robert Eppler
That might have been one of the band kids
Was this survey locked to only students bc I've had 2 reposes form full time staff or faculty who very clearly aren't student s
Nathan Binshtok
It should've been but I had no way to confirm
I had someone who was faculty and a student
Robert Eppler
Maybe it's bc you get free classes as fac staff
Nathan Binshtok
Yeah prolly
Ok I finished my 500 and I'm gonna take a break, only 472 unsorted remaining! Thanks for the help so far
Robert Eppler
IMAGE OMITTED: RSFS response suggesting that Robert Eppler should have his pay doubled
🩷
Help 😭
💀
Kate Eckert
Nathan BinshtokWe should probably just have a Misc option or maybe label them as NA? Fee education is a good option too but let's wait until we get more labels
I'm done, I left some weird ones blank
Nathan Binshtok
Yeah I wasn't able to find something that fit for all of mine too
Well go back over it later, perhaps to add + and -
Robert Eppler
IMAGE OMITTED: RSFS response encouraging senators keep up the good work
🩷🩷🩷
Kate Eckert
IMAGE OMITTED: RSFS response suggesting that senators who value diversity should focus more on reducing cost of living than on recruiting 'white people' (implied) and paying the Chancellor
🗣️🗣️🗣️
Nathan Binshtok
Kate EckertIMAGE OMITTED: RSFS response suggesting that senators who value diversity should focus more on reducing cost of living than on recruiting 'white people' (implied) and paying the Chancellor
"Housing" 🔥
Kate Eckert
that wasn't me!!!
Can you add bad spray tans as a label thank you
🩷
Simrah
Robert EpplerCan you drop a list of all the codes/labels
am i tripping or is lss not on there
Nathan Binshtok
Simraham i tripping or is lss not on there
Yeah but it's an option on an earlier question
Nathan BinshtokYeah but it's an option on an earlier question
The labels are just for free response
Simrah
ah okay it's just not in the list
what label would u put grant programs under
Robert Eppler
We could have an EOF label for grants and scholarships or jsut put it all under senate since there are other ones talking about pizza and block
Nathan Binshtok
Robert EpplerCan you drop a list of all the codes/labels
I did see a good amount about scholarships but I feel like the EOF label is kinda misleading
^ Didn't mean to reply there that's for robert
Simrah
IMAGE OMITTED: RSFS response saying the 'other thoughts' field should not be required
i agree
Kate Eckert
IMAGE OMITTED: RSFS response arguing the Senate gives too much money to 'authoritarian' groups rather than student living
🩷🩷
????
Nathan Binshtok
That's what I told Mataia to do 🤷
Simrah
SimrahIMAGE OMITTED: RSFS response saying the 'other thoughts' field should not be required
im receiving a couple that say they dont know much abt fee so they have no opinion
is it ok if i code it as “fee education, N/A”
Nathan Binshtok
“Fee Education”
👍
Yeah
Simrah
its like a cry for help
Nathan Binshtok
Well just put Fee Education
👍
Robert EpplerWe could have an EOF label for grants and scholarships or jsut put it all under senate since there are other ones talking about pizza and block
Yeah maybe we should just add a "Student Senate" tag looking at some of the things we have left
Kate Eckert
I don't know if that's helpful tho💔
what are we supposed to do with that information
Nathan Binshtok
Cut the student senate activity fee 🔥
🗣️‼️
Simrah
IMAGE OMITTED: RSFS response asking where to find a Student Senate financial report
guys we are getting audited
🩷
Nathan Binshtok
Only 33 left!!!
‼️
Simrah
how are we coding sleeping pods
or study places
Nathan Binshtok
Uh
Should we add like a “Renovation” one since I saw a few about buildings/construction too?
Simrah
yes
👍
or campus infrastructure
cause some talk abt cardboard floors
Nathan Binshtok
“Infrastructure” then?
👍
We prolly don't want multiple here since there's only a few
Simrah
im good with infrastructure
Kate Eckert
I put the infrastructure ones in the safety/assessibility Channel
‼️
Nathan Binshtok
True I think I did a few like that too
Simrah
ill just keep safety
safety of our students sleep 😌☝️
ok im done w mine🧍♀️
IMAGE OMITTED: RSFS response suggesting that the Kansan has low readership and could be cut accordingly; previously leaked by the Kansan
cut udk pass for anyone that says we arent following the will of the people
HA HA
Nathan Binshtok
Good news: All the free response are sorted!!! Thank you for all the help
❤️
Bad news: I didn't realize column O was also free response... there's like 300ish responses there so I'll try to sort them out. These should be simpler
👍
Leg Leaders
As we previously reported, the “Leg Leaders” chat is a text chat that includes the Senate’s legislative officers, namely Required Student Fee Committee and Finance Chair Nathan Binshtok, Student Rights and Affairs Chair Simrah Javed, Community Affairs Chair Kenna McNally, Student Speaker Robert Eppler, and Internal Affairs Director Kate Eckert. The Rose obtained these messages with the consent of the group via Eckert.
To the best of our knowledge, the transcrippt includes all messages between the group pertaining to the required student fee, including the messages shared previously by the Kansan.
*In the message sent to The Rose, Eckert relayed that Binshtok had privacy and consent concerns around the publication of unredacted individual Required Student Fee Survey (RSFS) responses. While students who responded to the RSFS consented to share their data in aggregated form with members of the Committee, though their responses are anonymous, they did not consent to sharing their individual responses openly. As such, in The Rose’s transcripts, photos of individual RSFS responses have been redacted and annotated. These privacy concerns also raise questions about reporting by the Kansan, who shared an unredacted screenshot in their reporting, which has remained up for nearly a week at the time of reporting. This would not be the first time the Kansan wrongfully shared sensitive student data.
These messages provide new context for texts shared by the Kansan.
First, Eckert’s message, which read “literally who else is advocating for defunding hilltop and udk [skull emoji],” was in a thread of messages about Eppler’s supposed response to the RSFS. The thread began with Binshtok sharing the 2627 responses to the RSFS, asking for help categorizing the data, or ‘coding’ it, to aggregate it for presentation to the Committee. Eckert observed that the data is “absolutely crazy”, then suggested that she was “certain [she had] found Robert [Eppler’s] contribution.” Eppler jokingly challenged her, telling her to “send pics or it’s not real,” to which Eckert replied with the message asking who else was asking to defund the Hilltop Child Development Center and the University Daily Kansan. The implication is that Eppler felt that both should receive a funding cut, which Eckert poked fun at. The Kansan’s previous reporting missed the context that Eckert’s message was not mocking anyone on the Committee, nor was she poking fun at supporting the Kansan.
Second, Eppler’s message, which read “I’m jsut salty that mine is being coded as funding the UdK,” was sent shortly after Eckert’s. Following Eckert and Eppler’s previous exchange, Binshtok continued to discuss how to format the data to accurately reflect the responses. Eppler suggested separating the code for the Kansan into those who supported increasing its funding and those who supported decreasing it. Eppler then replied in the thread about Eckert ‘finding’ his response with the message about him being salty about his responses potentially being coded as supporting the Kansan. This context accurately reflects our previous reporting on the situation around Eppler’s message, specifically in Eppler responding to how his responses were coded. These additional messages in between Eckert’s message and Eppler’s are not reflected in the Kansan’s reporting on this matter.
Third, Javed’s message, which read “cut udk pass for anyone that says we arent [sic] following the will of the people,” responding to an unredacted Survey response which suggested that “Lowkey nobody reads the Daily Kansan,” appears to be a joke about the response. This type of commentary on a particular entertaining response is similar to over a dozen other such exchanges in the chat shared prior to Javed’s message. In a message attached to Eckert’s transmission to The Rose, Binshtok explicitly clarified that the message Javed was referencing was a response to a question on the RSFS which read “please provide any additional thoughts or feedback you would like the [Committee] to consider.”
As we previously concluded, each of the items shared by the Kansan were nothing worth problematizing. In fact, having reviewed the hundreds of messages in the chat, it seems odd that the small handful that mentioned the Kansan were the only ones to make their way into the Kansan’s report.
Beyond the messages problematized by the Kansan, the rest of the chat was likewise mundane. Members of the chat made jokes about Among Us, bad spray tans, and Eppler’s ever-common typos. They referenced responses that made them think of Binshtok, Sasha, and championer of SafeRide Esperança Monteiro Henson. They poked fun at responses suggesting the Senate defund itself, bring in Monster Energy, and several which they categorized as “fee education”, implying the comments came from students unfamiliar with the scope of the Required Student Fee (RSF) process. While some of these comments may be a bit tasteless, it is also understandable how someone familiar with the process could express impatience with a response suggesting that they are failing your students for not doing something they are not legally allowed to do.
The contents of this chat are not particularly interesting, let alone implicating or damning. However, this is not the only group chat.
Fee Dream Team (MS Teams)6 participants
Robert Eppler Thursday, Feb 5 at 7:09 PM
RSF coalition
Robert Eppler Thursday, Feb 5 at 7:09 PM
IMAGE OMITTED: Link to Fee Allocation Spreadsheet
Guys remeber when I said Kate would definitely join the coalition? Yes is super for it. Angel Kate and I came to agreement , Student support and case management can be zeroed out because Angel and Kate will be on Block and will fund it there and it's egregious the university circumventing the constitution to add more burden for students.
Therefore we have 4 dollars to play on top of the 10 taking away the union. (We realized th Union itself rather than Burge would be easier to cut) giving us 4 more dollars to put towards safe ride so 16 instead of 12. If safe ride is funded everyone else will love us and it will make fee easy, plus Fredrick Kate and all the safe ride fans are happy like Esperanza Tanya ect
👍
Fredrick Wamai Karanja
Let's go. Glad Kate could join the 'Dream Team coalition'! The plan sounds solid. Am expecting a lot of debate with the Union cut but we'll be ready to argue
👍 2
Robert Eppler
Hell yeah
Olaleye, Omowunmi Abiola are we in consensus?
Also high key Tanya will vote with us too so easy W. God willing fee is 3 hours now
👍
Omowunmi Abiola Olaleye
Robert E.Olaleye, Omowunmi Abiola are we in consensus?
Of course!
I'm glad that we are getting more people to join in the coalition!
❤️
Robert Eppler Friday, Feb 6 at 9:22 AM
Also the union effectively killed jayhawk junk with thier remodel of jayhawk ink because they took all the books, written by professors, out and they had to be moved to the press warehouse where all the furniture we were giving to international students and habitat for humanity is
Fee pays for 7% of unions budget yet they account for about 20% of fee allocations
Fredrick Wamai Karanja Friday, Feb 6 at 10:48 AM
The burge union row, why is it being highlighted that it can't be changed? We changed it by lowering it by $6, will that be an issue?
Robert Eppler
No bc we will cut it from the Union proper instead. Low key we can change the Burge but that is not a fight we are prepared for today
Robert Eppler Friday, Feb 6 at 12:58 PM
advisor agenda determining our fee instead of us fr fr
ⓘ
Fee Review Committee Called to Order
Kate A Eckert
im pressed
Robert Eppler
SAPEC was just bc the finace chair liked it
ⓘ
Advisors cite SAPEC as precedent for adding Block Entities to Fee
there are plenty of block entities been there for 3 years that not on fee
Kate A Eckert
what stake do they have in protecting case management??
is it just bc its student affairs money?
👍
Robert Eppler
the constitution states § 05-03-01. In General. The Student Senate authorizes the Required Student Fees listed under this Article
Kate A Eckert
I know I have a big doc
Robert Eppler
Robert E.the constitution states § 05-03-01. In General. The Student Senate authorizes the Required Student Fees listed under this Article
this is new from constitutionsla committee. we wrote this in to protect ourselves from this
this is forcing us bc not a single student senate member had this idea, Kaci said in the fist training "there will be another fee entity"
ⓘ
Advisors state "We did not force this onto you guys, ok, this is just a process that has been know to us for years".
its not even about if RSF can add a "recommendation for a new fee". there is no reason SSCM should come back every year to fee. it is bc SSCM is under Studnet Affairs like us
Vote yes
ⓘ
Robert motions to limit individual speeches (and questions) to 5 minutes.
Fuck being here alll day and night when people like me are jsut gonna yap. We shouldn't be asking questions to soeakerslow key
ⓘ
Second from Shawn Lawson, Simrah Objects.
Fredrick Wamai Karanja
Tranquilo
Robert Eppler
Vote yes
We start winning!!!!
ⓘ
The motion passes 8-4
Kate A Eckert
calm down
Angel Rivera
thoughts?
Kate A Eckert Friday, Feb 6 at 2:02 PM
guys start talking
Robert Eppler
kinda dont know what i wnat to say on rececueling to start off. lets table that ish
👍
ⓘ
Nathan outlines the rules on motioning to enter discussion.
Fredrick Wamai Karanja
haha me too, what were our grounds of reasoning yesterday
Omowunmi Abiola Olaleye
There is no systemic process yet on how this entity helps support student efficiency on campus
Robert Eppler
recyceling is symbolic and why are students payng for this
Fredrick Wamai Karanja
i remember there was the aspect of it's not benefiting students in terms of the worforce working for it
Robert Eppler
also 1/3 contamination rate sucks
Angel Rivera
TRUE
Kate A Eckert
Fredrick do you care about this
im ready to move on tbh
Fredrick Wamai Karanja
I think the need of a resolution isa good idea but not cutting funds. Their FY2028's balances is really thin so if we do so we will apply pressure on next year
👍
Robert Eppler
Robert E.its not even about if RSF can add a "recommendation for a new fee". there is no reason SSCM should come back every year to fee. it is bc SSCM is under Studnet Affairs like us
also, the entire fee package is a "recommendation" nd) Justification for Reducing or Zeroing a Fee. The Fee Review Committee may recommend reducing
Fredrick Wamai Karanja
Yesss!!!!
Robert Eppler Friday, Feb 6 at 3:11 PM
And it's ok that only Kate gives a positive speech. We have the votes to hold the rec We make up 7% of unions budget We make up 100 of rec
Kate A Eckert
exactly
Robert Eppler
based framework from simrha, shes ok with cutting union
Kate A Eckert
im glad your glass is half full
❤️
Robert Eppler
Long live Rec and LSS for being senate started. I am glass half full bc im confident in the dream team to vote for 1.90 increase
Kate A Eckert
you better give a speech if mia is flaming me
im glad your glass is half full
❤️
i want to hear this edwards campus rep speak
👍
we've lost casey too
Robert Eppler
confirmd by kaci "majority is RSF"
Kate A Eckert
what
Robert Eppler
the majority of fudning for operations is funded from fee. get wrecked mia
Fredrick Wamai Karanja
vote yes
❤️
Kate A Eckert
well you need to say it for that to be tru
WTF NOOO
Angel Rivera
should I motion to do lowered increements?
Kate A Eckert
UGHHHHH
we should go higher
Robert Eppler
Im so lost where we not approving funding 1.90 and it pass majority
Kate A Eckert
same
wait but we're voting to appeal the chair?
Robert Eppler
vote no
Kate A Eckert
VOTE NO
Robert Eppler
majority dream team
Fredrick Wamai Karanja
lol, okay, i guess
Kate A Eckert
big vote right here
Robert Eppler
i will play so nicely if we cn just follow the rules
Kate A Eckert
good one robert
LETSSS GOOOOOO
who did we add
Robert Eppler
thank you thank you thank you
Angel Rivera
Good Stuff!
Robert Eppler
clutch wamlink
i love you all
Kate A Eckert
man i really thought we might give the rec more money
Angel Rivera
we can always revisit at the end
Kate A Eckert Friday, Feb 6 at 4:14 PM
should we take the L on lss or see what the rest of the group thinks
Robert Eppler
see what the gorup thinks then take the L
👍
Tanya Singh
huh
Kate A Eckert
on LSS
Tanya Singh
what do we think
for Union
do we grant Union?
Robert Eppler
Cut Union by 10 dollars
👍 2
Tanya Singh
word
But we should have a resolution with that to fund KJHK?
Kate A Eckert
yes
Robert Eppler
hey do we get 4 dolalrs from KJHK then another 6 from union itself or 10 all the wya. vote yes if yes vote no if you wnat the whole 10 on the unoin proper not kjhk
👍
Kate A Eckert
save KJHK
we can tell them get on line/block??
👍
Fredrick Wamai Karanja
Save KJHK, resolution for KJHK to do
Tanya Singh
wait i'm lost
Kate A Eckert
im going to message you privately
Fredrick Wamai Karanja
Cut 10$ still though since KU memorial union is a $45 million revenue business
👍2
Robert Eppler
mb i added confusion bc i ot opututnittic off murga casey wanting to cut . neither of them have votes lol
Tanya Singh
support entirety of 3.93 for KJHK
Fredrick Wamai Karanja
bet
Tanya Singh
I will move to cut $10 from Union + Resolution to fund KJHK
❤️ 2
Kate A Eckert
It will allow funding for SafeRide
Angel Rivera
theres a resulotonb attached to it and thats the UDK
Tanya Singh
huh
Angel Rivera
The funding decrease would have the resulstion of consideration of absorbing the UDK
Robert Eppler
wait didnt they confirm they would apply for block
Kate A Eckert
who
Tanya Singh
UDK?
Applying for Block
Robert Eppler
yeha if we zero them. so yeah a resolution of considering abosrbign udk perhaps
Fredrick Wamai Karanja
So am I getting you correctly, zeroing on UDK?
Angel Rivera
yes, we'll get there
Robert Eppler
yeah. they will get block. ANgel can also talk about them moving to the Union after we "talk him dwon" when we tlak about udk?
Kate A Eckert
VOTE NO VOTE NO
👍 2
i'll talk about burge
Tanya Singh
oh i got it
i can make the motion
Kate A Eckert
pause pause
Tanya Singh
huh
Wait
This part is violated
"The Union's program goals to be pursued in the Project are: the establishment of retail services sufficient for the community, the creation of lounges conducive to student activities and events, the development of meeting and event space of an open, flexible nature capable of accommodating groups of up to 1200 (to include the Union's largest career and exhibit fairs and commencement gatherings with associated breakout rooms), access to ISB classroom space when not in use suitable for student group meetings, establishment of Legal Services for Students offices on the second-level mezzanine, a "reflection room" space for students on the second-level mezzanine, a KU Info help-desk to compliment the KU Info help-desk and offices in the Kansas Union, housing of the Emily Taylor Center for Women and Gender Equity on the first level below the second-level mezzanine, housing of the Campus Sexual Assault Prevention and Education Center on the first level below the second- level mezzanine, and the building of an appropriate production kitchen and service system to serve events in the space. Green commons space east of union and plaza space north of Union will be designated for student event use. The Program should allow for expansion as the site becomes the campus center in the decades ahead."
Kate A Eckert
let me talk about it
Tanya Singh
ok!
Robert Eppler
pop off queen
Fredrick Wamai Karanja
Robert Eppler
ok we need to drop the Edwards part tho
dial in on Affordability and not representing Studnets 7% budget and only give rooms to 26% of students and why are Stundets paying an affiliate
we must make clear we are cutting the Union not the burge despite our qualms wit the burge
Kate A Eckert
were on it
👍 2
Tanya Singh
is $5.00 okay, or $10.00?
Kate A Eckert
6 is our econd choice
👍 2
Tanya Singh
well we have a majority
we can do $10.00
Angel Rivera
we can settle on 6
Tanya Singh
okay!
Fredrick Wamai Karanja
I feel like $10 is feasible, radical but feasible
Their finances highlight they had a million lying in their bank account. This
I feel like $10 is feasible, radical but feasible
Their finances highlight they had a million lying in their bank account. This is just a $420,000 cut, they can survive
❤️ 2
Tanya Singh
i would look unfavorably upon a legal opinion
Angel Rivera
honestly to speed this up and get simrah on board and call it a day with this, we may just move to 5
Kate A Eckert
idk we might have everyone on 10
Tanya Singh
we can push through with $10.00
Kate A Eckert
minus simrah
Angel Rivera
okay
Robert Eppler
lets try 10 then fold to 6
👍
Angel Rivera
im down
Robert Eppler
amara?
Tanya Singh
can we bully Nathan into speeding up lowkirkinuinely
😂
Robert Eppler
lets goooooooooo
Kate A Eckert
can we get on a doc and type out a resolution
anti union
Tanya Singh
Doc for -Committee on MOU discussion -Fund KJHK
Kate A Eckert
fuck union we need representation and bookings
Add to doc
Tanya Singh
is that good enough?
Kate A Eckert
yup lets go
Tanya Singh
when do we add the resolution
Robert Eppler
good work
Fredrick Wamai Karanja
Its a win, saferide here we come
❤️ 2
Kate A Eckert
at the end apparently
❤️ 👍
Tanya Singh
gonna move for Watkins
👍
wtm on CAPS
Kate A Eckert
give as much money as possible
Tanya Singh
worm
Robert Eppler Friday Feburary 6, 5:11 PM
Tanya Singh
LMAOOO
Kate A Eckert
Watkins goes in full??
Angel Rivera
yes
Robert Eppler
no question
Kate A Eckert
lfggg
Fredrick Wamai Karanja
yeah
Kate A Eckert
im almost satisfied
❗
Tanya Singh
Almost?
Kate A Eckert
Case management and saferide and im done
Robert Eppler
im projected at us reducing at least $1 witch is a win for me
Dream Team supreme we the mightly fee machine
Tanya Singh Friday Feburary 6, 5:15 PM
TRUE
Robert Eppler
WORM
Kate A Eckert
ITS TIME TO TALK SAFERIDE
Tanya Singh
what's next
Kate A Eckert
PLEASEEEEEEE
Tanya Singh
which scenario?
$17?
Kate A Eckert
yup
12.55 increase
Tanya Singh
okay!
Are we funding $3.00 for CAPS or more?
Robert Eppler
i dont know depends on how much we have. I kinda don know what they would do wiht it but its poular and a good look and based
❤️
Tanya Singh
can we do HillTop next?
Kate A Eckert
no we're hungry
❤️
Tanya Singh
worm
Kate A Eckert
that'll take forever
😮
i really like when you call us colleagues
👍
makes me feel important
Tanya Singh
this is so fucked
Kate A Eckert
lowk agree
Tanya Singh
i am not voting for anything short of a full increase
Let's do Bus Procurement after recess
procurement
Grant the $1.00
Angel Rivera
Casey is complaining to Nathaniel about the group stuff
Tanya Singh
lol I heard
girl that's his problem
he can leave if he's so up in knots about it
Robert Eppler
This is not contentious we are just better at politics agreeing to compromise between ourselves. How do you think budgets are made irl
👍 2
Kate A Eckert
Hate us cause they anus
what was Nathan's verdict?
Tanya Singh
Amara left because Casey is angry
And Nathan will "have a conversation" with us
Kate Eckert
lolllll
Tanya Singh
lol
Karanja, Fredrick Wamai where are you? I would like to discuss Hilltop with you
Fredrick Wamai Karanja
Here
Omowunmi Abiola Olaleye
Are we back from recess?
Tanya Singh
Yes
Omowunmi Abiola Olaleye
Thank you
Robert Eppler
real we need to give people full attention
Tanya Singh
i am so disrespectful 🔥
what do we think?
Fredrick Wamai Karanja
am open for any adjustments based on our stance on saferide,
Angel Rivera
I think that is fair
Tanya Singh
yeah, I am fine with $3
Angel Rivera
2.50 is fine
Tanya Singh
Karanja, Fredrick Wamai r u fine with me zeroing out Hilltop?
Fredrick Wamai Karanja
Yeah, if they have additional funds and not just depending on us
Angel Rivera
EPIC
Tanya Singh
They are just an affiliate and have additional funding
Fredrick Wamai Karanja
me zeroing out Hilltop?
cool
Tanya Singh
What about SAPEC?
Kate Eckert
in full imo
👍
Tanya Singh
what do we think of $4?
Angel Rivera
Yes
Tanya Singh
BERT
Robert Eppler
we need to cut someone else to have an overall deficit i fear
Tanya Singh
Recycling
❤️
Fredrick Wamai Karanja
am worried abou the total
Robert Eppler Friday Feburary 6, 6:25 PM
if zero recyfloing than year
Tanya Singh
We gotta increase LSS and SAPEC and then I'm happy
Are we zeroing out UDK, Reclycling, and Hilltop?
Kate Eckert
yes
👍
Tanya Singh
And Case Management?
👍 2
Kate Eckert
lfgggg
Robert Eppler
this is big if we cut full 4 yes yes yes
Tanya Singh
we can
Fredrick Wamai Karanja
Increase LSS, I agree
Robert Eppler
we arre still a dollar over, even without increasing LSS
Kate Eckert
yeah i didn't care for the transportation vehicle increase
Tanya Singh
we can re-review that
I wish I knew that
Kate Eckert
its okay its a dollar
yeah I didn't care for the transportation vehicle increase
not your fault
Tanya Singh
what is student program funding admin?
and CSS?
Kate Eckert
mataia and victoria
Tanya Singh
OH
Robert Eppler
CSS is Willow Bert Nash Headuarters...
Tanya Singh
oh
Do we grant CSS in full?
Kate Eckert
we might cut
Tanya Singh
bert
Kate Eckert
bert
Robert Eppler
we cut eveyhting but bert
Tanya Singh
I'll cut Hilltop
now
Robert Eppler
Fredrick?
Tanya Singh
he said okay
Fredrick Wamai Karanja
yeah
Robert Eppler
agenda agenda
Kate Eckert
i think we might need to grant lss flat
👍
the advisors have an agenda and we have to pick our battles
Robert Eppler
yeah. im jsut concerned why the advisors are saying not to fund it
Kate Eckert
exactly my thought
look at jennifer
Fredrick Wamai Karanja
am okay, hard compromise
Robert E.yeah. im jsut concerned why the advisors are saying not to fund it
since apparently they did not offer a plan on how they could spend such an additional amount, if i get wamelink correctly
Robert Eppler
Especally if your goal is to keep whole fee package lower
Kate Eckert
yeah that too
Tanya Singh
i'm worried
Kate Eckert
ohhh i understand now
theyre pressed about CSCM
Tanya Singh
huh
Robert Eppler
Student support and case management
Tanya Singh
oh
Kate Eckert
this is lowkey crazy the way the advisors step in
its our money
Robert Eppler
ys
Kate Eckert
decision i should say
Robert Eppler
lss also did say "if you hae etra cents thriw it to us"
Tanya Singh
i want to get the $2.00
Kate Eckert
i know!!! it sucks because we cant win this
against the advisors
Angel Rivera
I think we might just keep it flat
Tanya Singh
ok
Robert Eppler
flat
Fredrick Wamai Karanja
yeah, with the fact that they have 1/2 million in bank
Tanya Singh
ok
Angel Rivera
Flat all the way
Tanya Singh
i will keep voting with you guys, even if i disagree with this
Kate Eckert
sorry tanya didn't expect the advisors to screw up
Robert Eppler
simrah and MiA admits the advisors have a agenda
Tanya Singh
WHAT
hell naw we are cutting cscw
what
Robert Eppler
SSCM is going to get block funding 100%%%
Tanya Singh
yeah
i'm cutting hilltop now
wtm
Kate Eckert
bert nash fs
Robert Eppler
and now they are hiding Community Suportive serives togehter
Kate Eckert
lollllllzzz
Tanya Singh
I think we should just fund Bert Nash
Kate Eckert
us and simrah on the same page for once
Robert Eppler
wait wait wait. jsut to be clear, this 1.60 isn't just to bert nash
Kate Eckert
no i think we can say 1.60 Just to Nash
ask tho
ADVISOR ADGENDA
ADVISOR ADGENDA ALERT
❤️
Robert Eppler
its actually not our job to fufill fee
Kate Eckert
retweet
Angel Rivera
interesting to emphasis KU ENTITIES
❤️
Tanya Singh
$1.60 or $1.60 + .35?
Robert Eppler
all the adviosrs do is say htat student gorups need to do more to get their money, why arent they extneding the smae thing to rnadom NGOs
flat 1.60
Tanya Singh
1.60?
Kate Eckert
second
Tanya Singh
bert
Kate Eckert
what the hell are my tax dollars going to
Robert Eppler
I might neg speech honestly
Kate Eckert
honestly im down the middle on this one
if casey is right about haskell funding these i agree
Tanya Singh
I looked it up
There was no such claim online
Also STA Care paused its care randomly last year
Kate Eckert
cool figures
Robert Eppler
I also dont understnad why its a state law that we cant fund NGOs with WNF Bock ect but we can use Fee for it
Kate Eckert
you should say that
Tanya Singh
you should
vote yes?
wait are we still voting to keep it flat?
Kate Eckert
up to your discretion
I dont think our coalition has a take on this
Tanya Singh
ok i'm still voting to defund Hilltop
afterthis
Angel Rivera
Lets jsut do it
Robert Eppler Friday February 6, 7:32 PM
Zero people cared about this in the fee survey or last year when we zeroed it out
Kate Eckert
yep not a single udk article
Robert Eppler
ive siad my peace
We must recycle
Tanya Singh
We must cut Hilltop
what is happening
with Murga and Casey?
Robert Eppler
im seeing 530 if we cut recyeclying and hill top
Tanya Singh
bert
do u want to move next?
Robert Eppler
3% of their funding from senate for 52 students and they cut student jobs in half
👍
Kate Eckert
woahhh folks
Fredrick Wamai Karanja
booo
Kate Eckert
i think if we're cutting lets just go all the way
Tanya Singh
is recycling next?
Angel Rivera
UDK
or wait last?
Tanya Singh
zero out?
👍
Angel Rivera
Yes
Tanya Singh
i'm lowkirk glad that nobody is complaining about politics anymore
Kate Eckert
looks like we're zeroing from here on out
❤️ 2
Fredrick Wamai Karanja
Tanya S.zero out?
this is going to be fun
Tanya Singh
LOL
Fredrick Wamai Karanja
Tanya S.i'm lowkirk glad that nobody is complaining about politics anymore
I agree.
Robert Eppler
time to hold dimoand hands at 530.30
Kate Eckert
TEAM
we need you here
Tanya Singh
WE MUST ZERO OUT EVERYTHING ELSE
👍
Kate Eckert
whos giving a speech on recycling
Tanya Singh
you
or Bobby
Robert Eppler
angel?
i can
Kate Eckert
Go Robert
Angel Rivera
yeah, im fully taking on UDK
but will back up any vote
Robert Eppler
alright ill go
Kate Eckert
need voices here
Tanya Singh
i just need the rationale
i'll speak on anything and everything
Fredrick Wamai Karanja
Are they getting additional funds?
Kate Eckert
they asked for flat
Tanya Singh
yeah
Angel Rivera Friday February 6, 8:35 PM
then we don't recycle and see how
Robert Eppler
zero it
its also only for academic buildings not housing not unions
Tanya Singh
which one next
Angel Rivera
UDK
👍
Tanya Singh
what resolution(s) do we need?
Kate Eckert
we have to get through this one guys
👍
Tanya Singh
We have to cut BOTH to zero
Robert Eppler
udk justification is inefficant bc it should be on block and the burden is greater than the service
hey kate forward email to Nathan i dont have his responses jsut your reasoning letter
Kate Eckert
i did
Robert Eppler
Contrarian to be contrarian ?
Kate Eckert
fork found in kitchen?
Tanya Singh
has that email be sent?
been*
to RSF?
Kate Eckert
yes
Robert Eppler
email not the most improtnat piece all good
we did make a 2 increase to block I thought
what the sigma shawn cut udk
Kate Eckert
i thought that too. is that from sscm?
Tanya Singh
oh, can you bring that up Robert?
Robert Eppler
or am i wrong
Kate Eckert
im checking
Tanya Singh
I lowkirk asked Charlie
Robert Eppler Friday Feburary 6, 9:03 PM
Tanya Singh
was it decreased?
Robert Eppler Friday Feburary 6, 9:04 PM
Kate Eckert
confused
we're down two?
Robert Eppler
charlie siad yesterday he increased block and decrased overall
Tanya Singh
i be the goat
what noise do goats make
moo?
MAAAAAA
what is our argument
Robert Eppler
kate are you saving for a positve speech
Kate Eckert
idk what to do
Robert Eppler
i have a speech worth to say so im not
Kate Eckert
understood
maybe ill go then
Angel Rivera
I think we should compromise here, we've already zeroed so much and we need the support for the bill as a whole
Robert Eppler
no angel
Kate Eckert
no no noooooo
Robert Eppler
angel this is hte most egrigious
we have won so much. we jsut need this and you
Tanya Singh
no angel
Angel Rivera
alright, you've sold me
Tanya Singh
Shawn agrees too
Angel Rivera
sold it to me*
Robert Eppler
thank you
Tanya Singh
there's a large pot of money for them
Kate Eckert
PLEASE DO NOT COMPROMISE PLEASE
Tanya Singh
we shouldn't fund something that is required by the government
NO COMPROMISE
Kate Eckert
I literally dont care about anything else
Tanya Singh
do not VOTE in the slightest
NO MONEY
Robert Eppler
Why not military affiliated student cneter, graduate studies, alternative breaks, lied center, Writing Center at wingspan, there have been other block entities for three years
ⓘ
The Fee Committee is discussing adding Student Support and Case Management as a Fee Entity. It was formerly on Block.
Kate Eckert
agree
Angel Rivera
Next UDK article, who are these shadow committee memebers
Tanya Singh
STOP BAHAHAH
i'm so glad marissa isn't here
i'm tired i started tearing up like Robert
VOTE ZERO
👍
Angel Rivera
ZERO
Tanya Singh
HARDLINE ZERO
Robert Eppler
here here
Fredrick Wamai Karanja
Yess
Tanya Singh
LFG GUYS
I LOVE YOU SO MUCH
❤️
Kate Eckert
woof
Robert Eppler
thank you all. sorry for the dealy and the frustration. turley thank you
Kate Eckert
great great job everyone
Robert Eppler
and if they screw us up the line then we did our best
lets secure this bag
Tanya Singh
i b the goat
Kate Eckert
lets go lets go
Angel Rivera
AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
Fredrick Wamai Karanja
So proud of this team
❤️ 2
Kate Eckert
i cant even imagine how long this would've taken if we hadn't gotten together
Robert Eppler
and to an extend the entire RSFC
Fredrick Wamai Karanja
Kate E.i cant even imagine how long this would've taken if we hadn't gotten together
Ikr
❤️
Robert E.And to an extend the entire RSFC
True
Robert Eppler Saturday February 7, 2:58 AM
Now we need to convince finance council senators
Kate and Angel have been reached out to by the udk to talk about fee. Like this message if you were also reached out. Let's get our talking points straight
Kate Eckert
i actually read their message wrong, they're only asking about the udk fee
TRUE
i actually read their message wrong, they're only asking about the udk fee allocation, i would highly recommend turning their request down
we should write an oped on sscm or the unions
Tanya Singh
Oh I already messaged back, I just said UDK belongs on Block because it's unfair to try to debate UDK vs. healthcare on student fee lol
Here's what I said to Marissa
👍
Angel Rivera
If anything, I was just going to discuss my idea of resolutions and the union exploration idea and that's it. Nothing further.
Tanya Singh
As far as resolutions go, we'll need one for funding KJHK in its entirety ($3.93)
Kate Eckert
should we hold off until the resolutions are passed?
Tanya Singh
Yeah probably, my bad for the response to them LOL, she reached out to me mid med school and I was agitated as-is
Kate Eckert
no youre good we should've said something before they got to us
Tanya Singh
I don't think my response was bad per se, but an op-ed would be nice! Especially discussing what we envision for student fees and the undue pressures placed onto us (cough SSCM cough) plus the improper entanglement of having KU students pay for fees that the university should cover
👍
Angel Rivera
Sounds good, I'll hold off until after our meeting on Friday. I've also sent my possible resolutions to Nathan on the UDK matter. Do you want me to paste them into this chat?
Kate Eckert
yes im excited to see what you wrote!!!
Angel Rivera Tuesday February 10, 2:20 PM
I do not recall if this is proper formatting and phrasing, but I'm sure we'll change aspects of it on Friday:
Attached to the Union cut:
That the Kansas Union be encouraged to explore the feasibility of absorbing the University Daily Kansan under its operational structure, consistent with the model previously implemented for KJHK.
Attached to the UDK cut:
That the University Daily Kansan be encouraged to explore supplemental funding mechanisms, including but not limited to Block Funding, to support its long-term financial sustainability.
That the University Daily Kansan remain open to good-faith discussions with the Kansas Union concerning the potential integration of services, resources, or administrative functions. (Optional)
Kate Eckert
love
Angel Rivera
Solid
Fredrick Wamai Karanja Wednesday February 11, 8:50 AM
What was the total fees that we finalized on during deliberations? Was it 530?
Kate Eckert
Yeah 530.30
❤️
Omowunmi Abiola Olaleye Wednesday February 11, 11:29 AM
Student Support and Case Management:
Case Management can develop a clear framework that shows how their service prioritizes the needs of students with unique, complex, and severe problems, creating a model that effectively manages caseload.
Case Management can have a referral unit that serves as the primary point of contact for students in need of services. This unit will provide resources that will enable students with less severe needs to navigate and access services within or outside the University on their own, without necessarily being admitted into the program for the full case monitoring process. This process reduces staffing caseload while helping the department to focus on its core values for managing cases.
Omowunmi O.Student Support and Case Management: Case Management can develop a clear framework that shows how their service prioritizes the needs of students with unique, complex, and severe problems, creating a model that effectively manages caseload.Case Management can have a referral unit that serves as ...
Please, let me know y'all thoughts. Thank you
Robert Eppler Wednesday February 11, 3:17 PM
IMAGE OMITTED: Picture of letter mailed to the UDK Fee Manager sent to the Senate Office by mistake
Yo who tried to mail a letter to Nick from our office
Kate Eckert
Casey probably, for holidays and higher ed?
Tanya Singh
Robert that letter is gonna have anthrax on the envelope and was probably part of someone's plan to get back at you
😆 4
Fredrick Wamai Karanja
That would be crazy, KU Students now launching bio-weapons 😄
😆
Omowunmi O.Student Support and Case Management: Case Management can develop a clear framework that shows how their service prioritizes the needs of students with unique, complex, and severe problems, creating a model that effectively manages caseload.Case Management can have a referral unit that serves as ...
I don't have much knowledge in drafting resolutions but this has grounds that you brought up during deliberations.
Omowunmi Abiola Olaleye Wednesday February 11, 4:57 PM
Fredrick K.I don't have much knowledge in drafting resolutions but this has grounds that you brought up during deliberations.
Yeah
Robert Eppler
Omowunmi O.Student Support and Case Management: Case Management can develop a clear framework that shows how their service prioritizes the needs of students with unique, complex, and severe problems, creating a model that effectively manages caseload.Case Management can have a referral unit that serves as ...
I like where your head is at but I think we should limit our resolutions to be more concentrated. I feel like these are things to tell them for next time but dont necesarrly need to be language in the bill
Omowunmi Abiola Olaleye Wednesday February 11, 7:08 PM
Robert E.I like where your head is at but I think we should limit our resolutions to be more concentrated. I feel like these are things to tell them for next time but dont necesarrly need to be language in the bill
Thank you for your thought.
I would like to know. What's the implication between telling them and stating it in the bill?
Just want to understand that aspect. Thank you!
Kate Eckert
stating it in the bill?
Just want to understand that aspect. Thank you!
Fredrick Wamai Karanja Thursday February 12, 7:27 AM
I will likely be giving the first affirmative speech for the Fee
Please add comments where you see fit, a lot of this is my agenda and rationale
❤️
Robert Eppler Thursday Feburary 12, 10:56:00 AM
Underrated that we are all autonomous and didn't vote 100% same
🔥
IMAGE OMITTED: Confirmation email indicating the UDK had submitted a Block Funding Application
Angel Rivera
FINALLY
❗
Robert Eppler Sunday Feburary 15, 12:54 PM
Guess the union doesn't care about state policy either . Although surprised it's considered a state building bc they get no state funding
Tanya Singh Sunday Feburary 15, 1:47 PM
Eppler, Robert
How many entities have applied for Block?
Robert Eppler
16
Tanya Singh
oh we're chilling
Robert Eppler Wednesday Feburary 18, 5:35 PM
The udk block ask is 3.5 😭 they are including 57k for the website and paying Nick's salary again
Tanya Singh
there are a dozen entities on Block, right?
Angel Rivera
Hey guys, let's zero out the newspaper and start a rival one
😆
Tanya Singh
lol
Robert Eppler
18 blocks
Bruh cici Mia and Kenna are jsut using thier officer reports to bash us and want to do discipline they want to impeach it sounds like
Kate Eckert
simrah speaking in negation in finance
Tanya Singh
I think I should go first Kate
Kate Eckert
i just want to answer questions, then you can make the args
its an alley oop
Tanya Singh
Eckert, Kate A i will need u to extend my questioning time
Fee Dream Team
The “Fee Dream Team” chat is a Teams chat that includes at least Eckert, Eppler, Finance Secretary Tanya Singh, and Committee Members Frederick Karanja, Omowunmi Olaleye, Angel Rivera. We received the transcripts of this chat in two parts. The Rose obtained an initial set of these messages through an anonymous source we have independently verified. When asked for comment on the matter, Murga shared the same video we had already obtained, confirming it was the material on which he based his allegations. The Rose obtained the second set of messages from Eckert and were able to confirm that they overlapped with the first production.
The transcript contains every message from the formation of the group chat on February 5th all the way through the end of the Finance Council's deliberations on February 18th. A significant portion of the conversations in this chat happened contemporaneously alongside the Fee Review and Finance Council meetings. We have reviewed the livestream of the Fee deliberations to situate several of the messages with the external context in which they were sent, but without individual message timestamps, some context has been lost.
Of Consideration
The content of this group chat gives additional context to many of the accusations floating about, and confirms some of what we have already reported.
First, there was indeed a coalition, just as Murga alleged. This “team” was described by Eppler as an “RSF Coalition" in what appears to be the first message of the chat. While the Coalition was not among those in the Leg Leaders chat, as the Kansan’s reporting implied, there was a coalition involving multiple legislative officers. Members of the chat were indeed coordinating on topics including cutting the fees for the Student Unions and KU Recycling, which appears to be what Henson referenced in her statement to the Kansan. Rivera even joked about the UDK writing an article about this “shadow committee,” which of course, they later did.
Still, as we previously reported , this type of behavior is not prohibited in the Student Senate Constitution. If anything, § 06-04-01 explicitly permits this sort of informal coalition-building, stating that “members of the Student Senate… may form Student Coalitions for their mutual benefit.” This coalition contained was explicitly formed as the “Fee Dream Team” despite the fact that there is no rule that coalitions must be named, disclosed, or otherwise made transparent. Even if one wants to argue that this coalition broke an unwritten rule, that is not grounds for “internal judicial proceedings,” as Murga suggested. If anything, the rules specifically protect this kind of behavior!
For reference, previous iterations of the Student Senate constitution, from as recently as last March, required that, “if a Senator would like to update their affiliation, at any point, they shall inform the Internal Affairs Director via e-mail.” In contrast, the current constitution allows senators to affiliate and de-affiliate at will – a deliberate change to make forming a coalition easier and less formal.
Second, there was coordination of votes and strategy, corroborating accounts from others on the Committee. Among the first messages in the chat are Eppler sharing a spreadsheet with the target funding for each fee entity. He also shared the priorities for the Coalition, which include zeroing out Student Support and Case Management (SSCM), cutting funding from the Student Union fees, and funding SafeRide.
There are several instances of Coalition members, particularly Eckert and Eppler, explicitly telling members to “vote yes” or “vote no.” Members also shared tactics for approaching matters like the Student Union fee, to which they proposed a cut, a supplemental resolution, and the SSCM fee. They concluded the administrative advisors had attempted to circumvent formal democratic processes by inserting a new entity into the deliberation last-minute, even later suggesting the advisor should not be trusted, and that the fee should be zeroed accordingly. On that last point, in an email Eckert forwarded to The Rose, Eckert recommended to Rachel Auten, Director of SSCM, to apply for Block funding as well as for Fee, giving them the opportunity to seek money from elsewhere. At one point, Karanja referred to the Coalition's strategy as “the plan.”
Again, though, none of this appears to be in violation of the Senate Constitution, its Ethics Code, or could otherwise be classified as misconduct. The coordination was also not absolute, with Eppler noting that the voting records of each member of the coalition did not align perfectly. The deliberations still happened and involved genuine compromise and engagement.
Third, there was some limited pre-planning, supporting but not necessarily proving Murga’s allegations. Eppler shared his messages about the Coalition’s priorities the night before the deliberations began, which would be classified as negotiating ahead of time. Moreover, Eppler’s messages seemingly imply this chat is the product of prior efforts, such as when he references how he "said Kate [Eckert] would definitely join the coalition" and how he, Rivera, and Eckert “came to an agreement” about the Coalition’s platform. However, messages in the chat discussing how to vote, coordinating responses, and forming strategies for their priorities were all sent the day of the deliberations.
The coalition clearly did not rig the deliberations, if for nothing else than because they lacked the means to; throughout the deliberations, they still had to make, as Olaleye described, “hard compromise[s]”. As such, without further context for how the coalition formed and when its priorities were hashed out, it would be dubious to suggest discussions were over before they started.
Fourth, there was hardly any “scripting,” contradicting Murga’s allegations. Members of the Fee Dream Team chat did discuss the content of the ongoing deliberations, but there was very little coordination of speeches or comments. Eppler discussed why “it’s ok that only kate [Eckert] gives a positive speech,” Eckert and others critiqued a speech from Community Affairs Vice Chair and Committee Member Mia Keene, and several Coalition members, particularly Eppler, brought up statistics and information relating to specific fees, which could be argued as sharing talking points, but nothing in the chat could be fairly described as “scripting.”
Of Concern
Beyond the scope of previous allegations, there are three other things worth discussing.
First, some comments made by members of the Coalition were perhaps insensitive, including several later in the afternoon by Singh. While these comments may not have the “tact and poise”, they were not so severe as to warrant the scathing reviews they have thus far received.
Second, there were several pushes to speed up proceedings, including Eppler saying “fuck being here alll [sic] day and night” for no reason, Eckert telling Singh that they cannot discuss the Hilltop fee next because “we’re hungry” and that “that’ll take forever”, Eppler suggesting that “God willing fee is 3 hours now,” and Singh suggesting bullying Binshtok “into speeding up lowkirkinunely.” These comments were arguably responsive to stalling and unproductive discourse over the eight-hour-long deliberation. It is indeed possible that members of the coalition sought to shorten deliberations, but they did not appear to do so by stifling discussion or forcing through their priorities.
Third, as has been clear throughout this process, there was a lack of transparency from those in the Coalition about their conduct. The purpose of livestreaming the Fee deliberation and its preceding meetings is to provide students with an opportunity to see what their representatives are saying about how to spend their money. As such, even though neither the content nor the opaqueness of the chat is damning, if nothing else, when discussions are kept private, constituents are denied the chance to see the whole picture. It can at once be true that this is just how politics work and that, for this specific process, more openness about all this would have been better. At least it’s out there now.
Impeachment
After The Rose received the transcripts from both group chats, Eckert notified The Rose that articles of impeachment against her and Eppler were being drafted by Mia Keene and sponsored by Associate Senator for Community Affairs Cici Hunter. Keene and Hunter both spoke out about the collusion allegations during their officer reports last Wednesday. At the time of publication The Rose the bills have not yet been officially filed, and as such, they are subject to change before they are officially added to the docket. In the articles, after clarifying the process of impeachment, they bring several distinct arguments against Eckert and Eppler.
Keene suggests that, under § 05-02-03, which reads, “The Chair of the Finance Council shall be responsible for… handling all communication on behalf of and within the Fee Review Committee,” the email Eckert sent to Nick Jungman, Kansan Director of Strategy and faculty advisor, was improper. Keene alleges that this was done “in an attempt to preemptively justify and limit debate on her plan to reduce their allocation to zero.” The Kansan reported on Eckert’s attempts to “spell out why the Senate would prefer having the UDK on Block rather than RSF” in their previous reporting without additional context.
Eckert forwarded the email in question to The Rose. In the email, Eckert makes three main points. First, Eckert notes multiple previous instances where the Kansan was told to seek alternative sources of funding. Eckert specifically includes a document from last year’s Fee committee, where the Kansan was told to find funding elsewhere, as well as one from the lawsuit from 2016, where the Kansan said they would find other sources of funding within 3 years. Eckert clarifies that she is “not saying this was right,” but that “it is certainly a pattern worth noting.” Second, Eckert notes the Fee Committee is not a “‘Student Senate’ entity,” while the Block funding committee is. As such, she suggests the Kansan may have an easier time addressing their concerns directly than they would with Fee. Third, Eckert speaks to the comparative security of funding from Bloc, even from those seeking cuts. She pre-empts Jungman’s concerns by suggesting that the Kansan would fit in best with Block and would not necessarily be considered a student club. Eckert concludes that she wants “to be able to say that whatever decision [the Kansan] make[s] was an informed one” and that the Committee is “not targeting the UDK,” rather that “not every department/organization should be on fee.”
The Kansan’s article on this topic did not provide any context for Eckert’s recommendations. They did, however, problematize Eckert being the one to send this email. At most, one could argue that Bishtok still should have been the one to send the email. However, Eckert’s email specifically notes that she is speaking on why current and previous members of “the Senate” have felt the way she does, not on behalf of the Committee. Eckert stated to The Rose that she was “willing to defend the emails were, again, sent in good faith and in a personal capacity, not on behalf of RSF committee.” In addition, while a reasonable interpretation of § 05-02-03 would be that Binstok is responsible for presenting and managing the Fee Review process, to suggest that he must be the one facilitating all communication during the Review process, including every email relating to it, would not logistically make sense.
In the same section, Keene references how Eckert and Eppler allegedly “privately sought advice from Legal Services for Students, another Fee entity, on the possible addition of [SSCM] to the Required Student Fee.” Eckert responded to this point by clarifying, off the record, the nature of her meeting with LSS, which did not include Eppler. It is unclear what Keene is attempting to imply about the nature of this meeting, where she received this information, or how it is relevant to the articles of impeachment. The articles appear to imply that Eckert and Eppler colluded to add SSCM to the Fee, contradicted by their staunch opposition to it, as seen in the Fee Dream Team chat.
Keene also alleges that Eppler “formed a selective and secretive voting coalition for the purposes of passing a pre-determined package of allocations through the [Committee] and to ensure that the decisions which he favored would not be subject to the full discernment or deliberation of that same committee and its onlookers.” Keene confirms Eppler’s responsibility for the chats with a message clarifying that “this whole operation was [his] idea entirely” and that “[he made] all the group chats.”
There is clear and convincing evidence that Eppler did form a coalition, and arguably that it was secretive in nature, but there is no evidence in either chat or that Keene otherwise provides that suggests Eppler attempted to push through a “pre-determined package of allocations.” The Fee Dream Team chat includes discussion among coalition members and a coordination of efforts, but nothing in the Fee Dream Team chat suggests Eppler was, as Keene implies, looking to ‘rig’ the deliberations. Again, there is evidence of planning ahead of time, but not of the scripting, strong-arming, or overt manipulation which would warrant removal from office.
Keene suggests that some of Eppler’s messages “demonstrate a pattern of impatience with the processes of ‘fair and rigorous discussion’ that are outlined within the Code of Ethics.” The Senate’s ethics code is described in § 01-01-07 of the Senate Constitution. While Eppler and others appeared to want to keep the process moving quickly, this alone does not mean they undermined the “fair and rigorous discussion,” as Keene suggests. The deliberations still included eight hours worth of discussion, complete with the negotiations and compromises one would expect from the process. In her statement to The Rose, Eckert observes that the “final fee package is not what the coalition initially agreed to, as there was compromise and reconsiderations as the hearings went on.” Absent evidence of ‘scripting’, then, it is hard to say that Eppler could be held personally liable for any deficits in the discussion.
Keene alleges that Eppler centered his decision making on optics for his fellow Committee members “rather than centering decisions on how to best represent the desires and needs of the Student Body.” The evidence for this is thin, with Keene’s attached messages including 3 messages, which appear to be joking, alongside actual, substantive analysis of fee entities. Lighthearted commentary on Fee as it is happening and as actual discussion is being had is not grounds for removal.
After implicating Eckert in these matters and discussing their involvement in making political moves, Keene suggests that Eckert and Eppler “created false narratives in order to prevent entities they personally saw as unworthy from receiving Required Student Fee Allocations.” It is unclear what Keene sees as “false narratives,” as the rest of the section discusses how Eckert and Eppler suggested SSCM and the Kansan should seek Block funding. Keene suggests that “this is intentionally contradictory logic, as Block funding is generated through the [Fee],” but even if Eckert or Eppler suggested cutting the Student Senate Activity Fee, which eventually becomes Block funding, calling their recommendations “false narratives” is misleading at best.
Keene references the Student Senate Sustainability Advisory Board (SSSAB) and their memo recommending “sustaining or increasing funding for recycling and buses,” arguing that Eppler and Eckert were dismissive of this recommendation. I, Jack, can speak to the nature of that memo, given that I wrote it. The point of the memo was to be a recommendation for the Committee, but there was nothing binding about it. While I disagree with Eckert and Eppler’s decision, I recognize that they raised fair points and that they had to cut something. References to it and the supposed dismissal of it do not belong in impeachment proceedings.
Keene raises concerns around how Eckert and Eppler “repeatedly engaged in rhetoric that was highly disrespectful” and “did not practice mutual respect for their fellow members.” Keene cites Eckert’s message saying “fuck union,” Eppler’s message saying “get wrecked mia” in reference to Keene personally, and Eckert’s message suggesting that those opposed to the coalition “hate us cause they anus.” On that last point, in her statement to The Rose, Eckert specifically noted that she meant to say “anus,” not “ain’t us.”
Finally, Keene alleges that Eppler attempted to “bribe” the author(s) of the articles of impeachment bill. As Keene describes it, “in exchange for limiting disciplinary action to only himself, [Eppler] offered to orchestrate a special election for the [Committee] which could in turn benefit the authors of this bill, if they had been so inclined.” In a text presumably to Keene or someone else writing the bill, he suggested that Keene would take the deal “if [she was] truly concerned about the credibility of the assembly.” Keene laments that “neither of the accused parties demonstrated remorse for their actions nor a desire to reinstate student trust in the institution of Student Senate through transparency.”
The proposition Eppler offered amounted to ‘I will resign if you don't prosecute others’, which is not, as Keene alleged, bribery. Eppler attempted to make a deal in which he would accept a soft punishment for his actions, and in exchange, others less involved would be spared formal retribution. There is no evidence that Eppler attempted to pay off, manipulate, or otherwise bribe Keene or others. The deal he offered was voluntary on both ends. Moreover, out of all parties involved in the deal, Eppler would arguably benefit the least, losing his position as Speaker.
Articles of impeachment should never be taken lightly, yet out of the eight main arguments made, few, if any, hold water, let alone enough to justify attempting to remove two of the most important people in Senate leadership. If they have a problem with this behavior protected by the rules, then change the rules and don’t punish the behavior. Only time will tell if Keene, Hunter, and Murga will follow through with this serious matter.
Nothing Burger?
Now that we have a better sense of what is happening here, what is the takeaway from these revelations?
To say that this drama is a ‘nothing burger’ would be wrong, but to say that this is something worth impeaching people over would be even more wrong. The analysis from my previous piece remains largely true.
At the end of the Fee Dream Team chat transcript The Rose acquired, Rivera notes that “Casey is complaining to Nathaniel [Binshtok] about the group stuff,” possibly in reference to Student Senate Coordinator of Staff Casey Soper. In response, Eppler suggests that “this is not contentious,” argues that the Coalition is “just better at politics” and “agreeing to compromise between ourselves,” and asks, “how do you think budgets are made irl.” Indeed, as I rhetorically asked in my last piece, “is this not how political decisions tend to work?”
Through this coalition, which still does not appear to have violated any rules, members of the Committee successfully negotiated the overall fee down and funded the most essential services on campus while also not bowing to administrative pressure on the SSCM fee, balancing priorities between members of the Coalition, and negotiating with those not in the Coalition. It was disappointing to see Finance vote down the proposal with recommendations to reverse these positive changes, in part because of this whole affair. To respond to all of this with impeachment is not a proportional response to the conduct exhibited.
As a final note, while there are parts of this process worth critiquing without formal discipline, such as the opaque coordination of votes, the medium of these group chats merits mention. These are college kids in a group chat with their friends talking about things they are all knowledgeable about. If you take several hundred messages and put them under a microscope – or, like the Kansan, take them out of context – chances are you can find something to problematize. Keep in mind that these are your peers, who, like you, have group chats they probably wouldn’t have otherwise wanted exposed – not because of their heinous contents, but because of the privacy they assume and the potentially unsavory way they communicate in private.
From here, members of the Coalition ought to make up with those who feel betrayed by this process, Murga and Keene ought to avoid escalating this matter further, senators present and future ought to take note of the need for both transparency and efficiency in their deliberations, and those running the Kansan ought to do some deep introspection.
Wednesday Night, the Kansan reported that KU Student Body President Andrew Murga was alleging collusion by some members of the Student Senate Fee Review Committee. Did they? Does it matter?
In American politics, discourse is saturated with appeals to freedom. While this concept is often ill-defined, these appeals are nevertheless very effective, as ‘freedom’ is a sacrosanct American value.
Over the last decade, growing unrest in the U.S. has been repeatedly channeled into Democratic Party campaigns that promise change while preserving capitalist rule. In Kansas DSA, the Socialist Majority Caucus has advanced an electoral strategy that absorbs mass anger into safe institutional channels, leaving little behind in the way of durable working-class power.
As students already struggle to pay for tuition, those attending KU are forced to pay an additional tax of over $500 a semester to fund basic infrastructure like mental health counseling and transportation services.
When the legislature budgeted for raises for state employees, faculty and staff at KU may have expected raises. Instead, they went to a few at the top, including one administrator who may have played a unique role in appropriating the funds.
Comments
Post a Comment