Group vetoes cap on tickets

Clarification: The Feb. 23 article “Group vetoes cap on tickets” states that Student Congress took action on an “amendment” that would have limited the number of basketball tickets for members of the Carolina Athletic Association. The proposal is not technically an amendment; rather, its passage ultimately could have led to an amendment to the Student Code outlining CAA ticket policies.

Indecision and caution marked the comments of Student Congress members Tuesday night as the Rules and Judiciary Committee discussed basketball ticket allotments for members of the Carolina Athletic Association.

The spotlight recently has been placed on the CAA, which has retained more than 130 men’s basketball tickets for its members. Only 40 tickets are reserved for the group through Student Code mandates.

But by a 4-to-2 vote, the committee rendered an unfavorable report on a proposed amendment to spell out a 40-ticket limit to CAA members. An unfavorable report tables a piece of legislation but doesn’t kill it.

The committee might revisit the legislation in two weeks if representatives pass a motion to address the issue.

The debated amendment states that before each basketball game, CAA “shall make and maintain a list as a matter of public record those receiving tickets not approved by Student Congress.”

Committee members expressed varying views, with two main options dominating the playing field: either including the amendment in the Student Code or placing a referendum on the ballot so the student body decides the outcome.

“Both perspectives have merit,”

said Luke Farley, chairman of the Rules and Judiciary Committee. “I have no problem with bringing students into the Code.”

But Farley also said the number of tickets allotted to CAA should be stated in the Code. He added that the Code needs to allow flexibility for changing conditions in the group.

“All the attention CAA has gotten has pressured CAA to reform,” he said. “Reforms have been necessary, but I don’t think it has to be cast in the negative light that it has been.”

CAA President Lindsay Strunk, who did not attend the meeting, said the proposed amendment is completely out of line with CAA’s intentions. She highlighted what she said is the admirable mission of each athletic association member.

“These are people who apply themselves and make a commitment to athletics at UNC,” she said.

Strunk said that while she would consider a reduction in CAA tickets, she is frustrated that Student Congress is continuing to probe into the organization.

“We don’t need or want the student government to serve as a micromanager of CAA,” she said. “I’m shocked to read some of the things that were written.”

CAA President-elect Justin Johnson, who also did not attend the meeting, said he is upset that people have labeled the association as dishonest. “This continued scrutiny is superfluous,” he said. “It really makes it difficult for us to serve the students.”

Student Congress members said increased dialogue between the two organizations is critical.

“I don’t see how it serves as micromanagement,” said Trey Winslett, former chairman of Congress’ athletics committee. “It’s just trying to increase the communication between CAA and Congress. It’s an opportunity to bring more opinions to the table.”

Contact the University Editor at udesk@unc.edu.