The OC Blog Back Issues Our Mission Contact Us Masthead
Sudsy Wants You to Join the Oregon Commentator
 

Student Senate Report 3/7/07

I have attended quite a few Student Senate meetings this year (well, more than Dallas Brown did last year), and it seems like every time I sit down to write about it for this blog my thoughts end up more critical and negative than the week before. I don’t like this, because the Senate has made some progress this year, and I don’t want to sound like a whiner, but yesterdays meeting was so horrendously embarrassing that I almost want to pretend that it never happened. It was bitter, divisive, unproductive, long and above all, embarrasing to everyone involved. The only solace I can find in all this is that next weeks meeting can’t possibly be any worse… or can it? Abandon hope all ye who enter here.

The Senate heard several special requests last night including a few that were of some interest to the concerned student. Some of the less interesting requests were $6,000 for the Debate team to attend the NPTE (congrats guys!), $500 for the LGBTQA’s Drag Show, $550 for Students For Choice to bring Judith Arcana to campus, and $600 to send AIAS members to their national conference. These requests generated little drama, and were all passed in the amounts noted (although some requested more).

Far more interesting were two requests from the Executive. The first was a request for $2,500 to expand the ASUO offices. This money would be used to create plans which could then be submitted to the OUS Building Fund Committee, which may or may not fund the project. The request was justified by the fact that the ASUO has grown since it first moved into Suite 4, and that the office is now very cramped. Furthermore, it would improve energy costs by replacing the old single-pane glass windows. This is not a fantastic use of student money, but if they can get the OUS to pick up the tab for the project it will have been worth it. If not, it’s just another $2,500 down the tubes, no big whoop.

The Executive was in a gambling mood though, and the second special request had elements of risk and reward as well. The second request was for $5,000 which would go towards paying for a “”budget review” of the LTD contract, to determine if it qualifies for a tax break from the state. The budget review costs .75% of the budget, and if approved it would decrease the entire budget by up to 35%. This could translate into savings of up to $250,000 per year, making it well worth the $5,000 gamble, as long as our chances of receiving the tax break are as good as President Axelrod would have us believe.

Senate then moved on to discussion of Senate Bill 28 and Senate Bill 32, which deal with the future of the beleaguered Student Recreation center. At this point, Senate began to show its highly politicized side, in a taste of what was to come later that night. The debate centers on where funding for the Rec Center should come from, and how oversight should be undertaken. One camp seems to think that moving the Rec Center onto a separate fee with a separate finance body, ala the Student Health Center would cause students to “lose control” of the Center, or would allow the Administration to screw students over. Another group thinks that the Health Center would be a good model, because it would allow for a dedicated oversight body, which in the case of the Health Center has kept costs down better than the PFC ever has. Still more think that the entire PFC needs to be reassembled into several new finance committees to provide the necessary oversight, and flexibility. Senate has been “discussing” this issue for eight weeks, and the level of ignorance around it remains staggering. SRC administrators have been coming to every Senate meeting, listening to questions and providing answers, meanwhile the majority of Senators still struggle to discuss the issue intelligently. Unafraid to appear callous to these poor administrators, Senate tabled the issue until a special meeting next week, at which point some consensus may be reached. Meanwhile, we will be hosting a discussion on the issue on this blog… watch this space for more.

During the SRC discussion, Senate became increasingly more divided and political, reflecting the political schisms which are emerging as election season hits full swing. Grandstanding and populist pandering became the norm as Senators opined that “we owe it to students to retain control of our Rec Center,” despite the fact that PFC has been consistently unable to control the SRC budget since day one. Hoping to build consensus before tackling the divisive issue of funding, Senate President Sara Hamilton even suspended Roberts Rules of Order, to more freely discuss the make-up of the new SRC oversight board. Unfortunately, the funding issue determines the size and nature of the board, and so much time was wasted trying to hash out oversight before deciding on a funding source. One can’t blame her for trying to get the conversation going in a positive direction, but Senate is like a leadership black hole… the more you put in, the less you get out. This would be demonstrated again and again, before the meeting finally adjourned at 12:30 am.

It was already late when the PFC came into the boardroom to present their budget, and the sad display of political blackmail, venal self-interest and childish finger-pointing made the time go by even slower. Now, with 12 hours of perspective on the events, I am still so angry and frustrated by what happened that simply recounting it here will probably lead to several more hours of lonely, angry brooding (followed by heavy drinking.) Here’s basically what happened…

The PFC came in and made their presentation, which had the budget coming in at a 2.77% increase, not far off from the Senate benchmark of 2.5%. During their presentation, they mentioned several times that they were frustrated, because contracts and services were receiving large increases due to current service level (CSL) increases, while student programs as a whole got a .25% decrease. In effect, their message was “you set a 2.5% benchmark, in a year where you knew CSL would be high, so don’t blame us if programs are pissed about this.” This message was accurate and appropriate, if somewhat overstated, so did Senate own up to its benchmark decision and take the heat like grownups? Of course not. The madness started when PFC Senator Micah Kosasa decried the program decrease as “a strong statement that the ASUO does not support campus life”, and the first step to transforming the U of O into a “commuter college.” As a transfer student from our own local “commuter college,” I can assure Micah that it will take a lot more than a one-year .25% decrease (that’s point-two-five) for programs to turn our culture-rich campus into the wasteland that he claims. Kosasa was not the only Senator who tried to refight the benchmark battle, demonize those who voted for the benchmark, and generally display their unconditional love for student programs. Even Senate meeting regulars (on and off Senate) who are usually balanced and reasonable in their judgment fell over themselves trying to make it clear that this overall cut to funding was somebody, anybody else’s fault.

This shit went on for hours and hours. At one point, three people in the boardroom were crying. Always the class act, Senator Gulley dropped the F-bomb in a speech, even after several Senators called him out for cursing under his breath during other Senators speeches. The PFC made it abundantly clear that they had made the best budget they could, and asked Senate to suggest the changes they wanted to see. The only proposal came from Kosasa, who wanted to randomly distribute $16,000 to 8 groups who had spent 98% of their budgets and had fundraised 50% of their budgets. Seriously, with no thought to the needs of these groups, or the needs of campus, he thought that this disbursement would prevent the dire consequences he had foretold. The plan was blessedly ignored.

As the atmosphere became more and more toxic, as program representatives threatened Senators who would be running for office again, and as Senators bickered and embarrassed themselves, it began to seem like the meeting would never end. Finally, this blogger suggested they just pass the damn thing, and deal with the political fallout on the campaign trail like adults. The advice was taken, the PFC budget passed at a 2.77% increase, and I went home feeling crushed like a bug in the ground, as Thom Yorke might put it.

  1. Doomscheissah says:

    And take a guess at who is the forerunner in not wanting to relinquish control? NATE GULLEY.

    I’ll be honest, I would like to see the Rec Center as a separate fee that can be listed on our account summary. This would help out in keeping bureaucracy to a minimum, would streamline the process of funding for the rec center, and would keep the center in check, similar to the Health Center as of current.

    PLUS, as an extra added benefit, that’s one less contract or service that needs to be funded by the Incidental Fee and the PFC, taking responsibility off of them.

    Ebner got the right idea, Kinsey got the right idea. GULLEY got the absolute wrong idea.

  2. SRCABCM says:

    This comment has been converted to a full post which can be read here.

  3. Nick says:

    I don’t have time to respond to that small novel-sized post. But even the first part pisses me off.

    It would have been somewhat intelligent…well, that’s not usually a word with which I like to describe the ASUO Executive EVER, but for lack of something better…it would have been somewhat ‘intelligent’ had they thought out this office expansion last year when the flooding of the EMU cost thousands in repairs. Remember the yellow tape outside Suite 4? It was being used while contractors rebuilt that little cubby of a receptionist’s desk, the area that would likely be the easiest to tear down if some lunatic accepted the expansion. It’s fuck’n student politics for Dog’s sake. Move ’em to a matroom in the rec. center.

  4. Niedermeyer says:

    MST 3000, bad SNL skit, whatever.

    Oh, and Health Center cost increases are well below typical PFC levels… that much was made clear at the meeting. I was there last a year ago, and despite construction the service was good.

  5. Ford says:

    Crying? Cursing? Niedermeyer calling the shots? Sounds like it’d make good material for a Mystery Theater 3000 episode.

    In all seriousness, I am nearly always quite disappointed by the lack of preparedness done by the Senators. They don’t know the issues, they haven’t done research…most of their arguments aren’t statements of likely real world results. They just argue possibilities, without any thought as to what is more likely to occur.

    For example, did anyone on the Senate ask the Health Center if they felt service had suffered because of the shift to University management from the ASUO? I feel that would have been a good question to ask – and to ask before Wednesday night.

    Oh well. It’s just $12m.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.