"Please note that this is not at all an attack on anyone here," said RHA representative Grace Bell at the beginning of last Monday's Student Executive Council (SEC) meeting. The SEC is composed of representatives from Media Board, Undergraduate Student Government, Undergraduate Programming Board, Interfraternity Council and Panhellenic Council, Class Officer Collective, and Residence Hall Association (the only nonvoting member on SEC), and governs the allocation of student activity fee revenue to its member organizations.The meeting, one of the most contentious of the year, focused on the development of a referendum on whether or not certain Media Board organizations' salaries should be paid with the student activities fee (SAF).
If ratified, the referendum would prohibit the ability of organizations to pay students from student activities fee money for holding positions. Instead, the organization would have to generate its own revenue, should it want to pay students in executive positions. Bell repeatedly emphasized that no money would be reallocated. Rather, SEC would allow members paying salaries the opportunity to explore new initiatives with the funds before being reviewed next semester by the council. No changes would go into effect until Fall 2010. "We decided last year it would be unfair to pull students salaries mid-year," said Bell.
The Media Board organizations that would be affected by the referendum are the Athenian, Case Reserve Review, Discussions, and Ignite T.V. While the Engineering Science Review, Film Society, Observer, Retrospect and WRUW are part of Media Board, the organizations are able to pay their salaries without the SAF because salary payment is generated through external revenues in the forms of advertising, fundraising, and alumni donations. Media Board is currently led by chairperson Michelle Udem, treasurer Beth Gilcher, and secretary Sean Yeldell.
Despite Bell's assurances that Media Board was not being attacked, not all were assuaged. In one letter to SEC justifying salary, the author wrote that, "I think the motive behind wanting to get rid of payments from the [Student Activities Fee] is that many other students are not paid for the work they do on campus.I'm just concerned that SEC wants to tamper with a policy without considering the consequences. Essentially, stepping into issues Media Board knows best about and potentially damaging Media Board groups in the process-and that they will offer it up on a student referendum on the ground that 'it's not fair' [we] get paid and [they] don't."
Each of the organizations potentially affected by the referendum were allowed to state their case to the body. Many highlighted their overall importance to the CWRU campus and the various benefits of having salaried staff.
Athenian editor-in-chief Paul Hay argued that the humor journal was a valuable contribution to the CWRU campus. "We do small print, it's a dying medium.This is an opportunity for SEC to do something about it by leaving us alone," he said. Hay went on to add that he was not supportive of generating revenue through advertising to pay for staff salaries. "I'm not willing to tame what we put in there to make money," he said.
Kayla Gatalica, editor of the Case Reserve Review, also stated her preference not to use advertisements to generate revenue. She also stated that it would be difficult to advertise simply because the journal is only published twice a semester.
In addition, Gatalica posited that salaries derived from the SAF increased the professionalism of the Review. "I feel most of our staff would still do it, but how well would we do it.the money gets students to treat this like a job." She added that eliminating salary benefits would be a deterrent to many students wanting to participate "Not everyone on this campus can afford to work 20 hours a week for free. I don't think getting paid for work is unethical," she stated.
UPB representative Alicia Sanchez disagreed that a lack of salary would result in a lack of student participation. "If you don't have enough interest you should try branding to promote your organization," she said.
Other supporters of the referendum argued that other members of student organizations were not paid for their contributions. "The students I talk to are really shocked and turned off by the fact people are getting paid," said UPB representative Brian Browne. Browne, who was a primary force behind the creation of the referendum, stated that as president of UPB, he himself could be paid a salary but elected not to receive payment.
President of USG Duwain Pinder, who is also in an unpaid position, stated, "[Being president] is a job I never clock out of." He proceeded to reference various members of USG who commit numerous hours a week to the organization without having the benefit of a salary. "A lot of organizations put in a similar amount of work. This is not based on Media Board, it's based on salaries in general."
However, Media Board members strove to differentiate themselves from other campus organizations.
Udem stated, "Through our publications and media outlets, Media Board offers a unique opportunity to the entire undergraduate Case community that is indispensable and everlasting. Students who receive a salary are paid for the labor involved in the media production process."
Dan Hill, the general manager of WRUW, was frank about the motivations of his executive board. "If those six people did not get paid, nothing would get done," he said. "We have to do things that no people in their right mind would do without getting paid."
Despite evident opposition from Media Board representatives toward the referendum, it was passed by the SEC. The referendum will occur this semester, as will a forum to discuss the issue.
is a member of the 
