LUCC Inaccuracies in Exner’s Article

neubauer@lawrence.edu and dieterj@lawrence.edu

As the Recording Secretary and the Finance Secretary of LUCC we would like to address some inaccuracies in Ms. Exner’s article about our ninth week meeting.
Ms. Exner incorrectly named Ms. Heather Edmunds as the Coffeehouse Committee member who dispelled the rumors about the committee being a part of SOUP. This was actually said Mr. Matt Kretzmann. She also refers to Plantz Hall Representative Mr. Stevens as Pete Stevens. His name is actually Peter.
Aside from these, rather small inaccuracies, Ms. Exner incorrectly quotes LUCC Vice President Mr. Adam Locke. She reports him saying that the five member rule for group recognition and rerecognition does not apply to existing organizations. This is wrong. He stated that the five member rule applies to all organizations, but that this was not why the Coffeehouse Committee was denied funding.
Ms. Exner also uses a quote from Mr. Joe Nelson, expressing anger over not being invited to represent LUPO at the budget meeting on May 31. Mr. Nelson did not even represent the organization at their budget hearing with the LUCC Finance Committee. Ms. Elizabeth Gucker and two others represented LUPO at the hearing and she and Ms. Katherine McKnight are listed on the budget requests as those “who can be held responsible for this year’s LUCC budget allocation.” (quoted from the LUCC finance committee budget request form)
Funding for next year’s Skappleton was not promised to the YUAI community by the LUCC Finance Committee. Their original recommendation was that the YUAI Community wait until next year to hold the event when a more opportune day (not over Memorial Day weekend) could be chosen and more planning time could be invested. The committee felt it would be better to hold the event on a day when more LU students would be on campus, and that the YUAI Community should return with a funding request at that time. The council decided to give the YUAI Community money to fund a smaller version of the event this year, and the finance committee decided it would be best to wait until the success of this year’s event could be evaluated before providing funding for next year.
All group leaders were informed, at the time of their budget hearings, that the budget would be presented, discussed, and voted on by the council at the ninth week meeting. The finance committee also advised the group leaders to attend this meeting, especially if they had questions regarding their budget. In addition, budgets were posted in the residence halls by the LUCC representatives, and any questions or concerns could have been addressed to the representatives or any member of the finance committee.
In conclusion, we would like to suggest that in the future the Lawrentian writers record the meetings in order to ensure the accuracy of the quotations and information they use. Also, representatives and cabinet members would be happy to answer any questions they might have regarding the events of a particular meeting.
Sincerely,
Rebecca Neubauer and Jennifer Dieter

Top