Cho to stay on fee committee

Student Fee Committee Chair Amanda Newberg said Wednesday that she decided to drop the case to remove member Hyung Cho from the committee, a decision that almost entirely quashes the possibility of forcing Cho’s departure.

The eight-member SFC made a majority ruling on Monday that they have “no confidence” in Cho’s ability to work as a member of the committee, the first step in removing a committee member. After Monday’s vote, Newberg spent the next two days deciding whether she would send the matter to the Judicial Board. The J-Board is the highest decision-making body in student government and the only body that could choose to remove Cho from his position on the Student Fee Committee.

But because Newberg chose to not send the vote to the J-Board, Cho will remain on the SFC.

“I think it was necessary to vote on,” Newberg stated before the members of the committee present at Wednesday’s meeting, “but it’s something I have to work on with all of you.”

Newberg said she hopes that the SFC can learn from the experience and “move on.”

Cho expressed similar feelings shortly after the meeting. “I’m hoping we can move past these things and move on to better things.”

Relations between Cho and some members of the SFC may continue to remain rocky for a while, Cho said.

“I’m going to try to do my job to the best of my abilities,” he said. “I think there will be some tensions after this. I’m prepared to deal with it, because I do enjoy working on the SFC.”

The SFC is in charge of allocating over $12 million in funds to various student groups on campus, including the Vanguard. Students elect seven of the eight members to the committee in the spring to serve for the following school year, while the student body president appoints one. Six of the elected members resigned before winter term started.

Two members of the committee, Julian Jenkins and Vice Chair Karin Zimmer, instigated talk of removing Cho. The two co-authored a memo to the rest of the SFC, detailing concerns they had over Cho’s performance and work ethic.

Jenkins, who was not present at Wednesday’s meeting, and Zimmer could not be reached by phone for comment by press time. The Vanguard did not talk to Zimmer immediately after Wednesday’s meeting ended.

Newberg said she is satisfied with the outcome, and said her decision followed an hour-long private meeting with Cho.

“It was important that we went through the process that we went through to show Cho that some members of the committee weren’t happy with his performance,” Newberg said, “but after speaking with him, it was clear that he has a vested interest in staying on.”

Before the committee made the vote of “no confidence” at Monday’s SFC meeting–a 4-3-1 majority vote, with Cho abstaining–members voiced concerns they had with Cho, saying that he would leave meetings early and send text messages mid-meeting.

Cho maintains that the accusations against him and the subsequent vote were not brought about over his performance, but rather because of personal issues among SFC members.

“I feel this came about because of a personal disagreement between us, and not a professional disagreement,” he said. “I was kind of taken aback by the whole situation to begin with. It just kind of ended really quickly after blowing up really fast.”

Last month, Cho told the Vanguard he had concerns about neutrality and the inner workings of the SFC. He told the SFC last week that the memo was retaliation to his comments. Jenkins and other SFC members say they had concerns about Cho before he spoke with the Vanguard.