Student Association senators R.J. Gravel and Jeff Meyer are expected to file a formal complaint today that may jeopardize the future of the Big Time Entertainment committee.

The SA Judicial Branch will receive the complaint, which targets meetings that allegedly violated the Illinois Open Meetings Act.

The complaint will be filed against the SA, SA President Kevin Miller, Vice President Jaime Garcia, Treasurer Shaun Crisler, Senate Speaker Frank Woodin and President Pro Tempore James Barr. It cites specific instances when the SA violated the Open Meetings Act.

The complaint states that the Nov. 10 meeting, when the BTE committee bill was passed, violated the Open Meetings Act because an agenda was not publicly posted 48 hours in advance of the meeting.

The complaint requests that the BTE bill be nullified, and that its $37,500 allocation be returned to the SA’s general reserve fund. It also lists other dates of SA Senate meetings that allegedly violated the Open Meetings Act.

The Northern Star was conducting its own investigation prior to learning about the complaint.

On Wednesday, the Star filed a Freedom of Information Act letter to SA President Kevin Miller requesting information on the BTE. Specifically, copies of applications submitted for the BTE committee, copies of all correspondence and/or votes regarding the BTE’s support of the Feb. 12 Ja Rule concert and copies of the minutes and agenda of the Nov. 10 meeting.

Miller told the Star on Monday that the BTE committee members were selected without being interviewed, and that he based his decisions on the paper applications.

After Miller chose four members, the committee conducted a meeting via e-mail and voted for a $10,000 allocation to co-sponsor the Ja Rule concert with the Convocation Center. There still is one vacancy on the BTE committee.

The SA contends that it is not subject to the Open Meetings Act.

“To our knowledge, we are not bound legally to the Open Meetings Act,” said Brooke Robinson, SA director of public affairs.

Robinson said that based on what she was told by Dan O’Meara of the Illinois Attorney General’s office, the SA is not subject to the technicalities of the Open Meetings Act.

O’Meara told the Star on Wednesday that he could not recall any conversation with the SA, or with Robinson.

“I would not have said if they can or can’t,” O’Meara said.

O’Meara told the Star he would not comment on whether the Open Meetings Act applies to the SA because he cannot make that decision.

Scott Sievers, an attorney for the Illinois Press Association, said he believes the SA is bound by the Open Meetings Act.

“The definition of a public body under the Open Meetings Act is very broad,” he said. “When we are looking at an entity that meets in a public facility, uses public resources to do its business, has been delegated authority to public business, those are all indicators that this is, in fact, a public body.”

The SA most recently disregarded the Open Meetings Act by holding unannounced finance committee meetings to review the budgets of SA-recognized organizations. CAB’s budget is up for review today.

In a meeting held Friday between CAB and the SA, Bertrand Simpson, associate director of University Programming & Activities, said the BTE committee and CAB may be in competition with each other if the BTE puts money into anything but the Convo Center.

On Wednesday evening, two pieces of paper were posted on the door of the SA office at the Campus Life Building. One stated “Finance Committee at Illinois Holmes Student Center,” not specifying a time or date. The other note, which stated, “VSA finance committee with SA @ 9 p.m. in the Holmes Student Center Illinois Rm,” was posted on the window next to the door of the SA office and did not specify a date, either. An agenda of the meeting was not posted.

On Nov. 25, 2002, Miller was sent an e-mail from then NIU General Counsel George Shur stating that the SA was subject to the Open Meetings Act.

“It is my opinion that they are,” the e-mail stated. “The act is designed to keep the public aware of meetings and decisions of any ‘public body.’ The definition of that term includes any group which disposes of public funds – which, of course, the SA does.”

Ken Davidson, who took over as General Counsel for Shur in January, would not comment to the Star about the matter.

After the Star spoke with Davidson, Gerald Huston, legal counsel for the Star, filed a request Wednesday for a formal statement clarifying Davidson’s position with regard to whether the SA must comply with the Open Meetings Act.