ASUO Breaking News 10/18
Executive Clarifies Position On OMB Funding
In a memo sent to ASUO Senators and campus media outlets, the Executive stated that “while we regret not informing the leadership of the Marching Band, we stand by our belief that the incidental fee is not the appropriate source of OMB funding.” The memo went on to outline the history of OMB funding, pointing out that the band was originally funded by the Athletic Department, before a budget crisis forced the ASUO to bail it out. The argument goes that now students need help, and the AD is one of the most profitable in the nation, so the OMB should once again be funded by Athletic Department dollars. This makes quite a bit of sense, but let us hope that this move is not simply the lip service to fiscal responsibility that allows better connected student groups to get away with unaccountable spending. One hopes that in the future, the Executive will be a little more open and forthcoming about such projects, to avoid situations such as this where affected groups and media are left to speculate about the effects of poorly articulated policy.
Student Retreat Policy Cut
This one is well covered in ‘Ol Dirty. Clearly the “smooth, cocky motherfuckers” scenario of a few years back has slipped gently from the institutional memory of the ASUO. Why the Executive would want to put itself at risk of another scandal, just to eliminate “extra paperwork” is beyond me. Hell, I hate red tape as much as the next guy, but when you are funding college kids’ retreats to places with hot tubs etc, you damn well have to plan on the majority breaking substance abuse policies, and at least a few getting caught. This one will come back to haunt you…
ASUO Senate Meetings are Boring
Or maybe slightly less so in the future… releases of food funds under $300 dollars no longer have to be voted on by the Senate. To paraphrase the two best arguments for this move, Senate meetings will be shorter, and they really weren’t providing any oversight anyway. The senate also approved guidelines for spending the surplus funds (i.e. the money that should really be refunded to students.) As one Senator put it, “We have sooo much money… I mean, last year it was a lot, but this year it’s even more…” Apparently the surplus this year is $240,000, compared to a $70,000 average surplus. The guidelines include requirement for a 2/3rds vote on any spending, and a requirement for fundraising efforts for groups making requests. No attempt was made to actually reduce the incidental fee.
Other highlights of last nights Senate meeting: The use of the phrase “stranger-danger,” Senator Daniels rocking the Sudsy Tee (big ups!), the revelation that the PFC has yet to meet in full committee, the spirited game of “musical committee seats,” the line “we are here to make the important decisions,” and the undisputed election of Senator McKenzie for Senate treasurer due to the fact that his opponent found a (real?) job.
Oh dizzam… you got served Tim.
Well, people don’t vote for any number of reasons, #1 being because they won’t affect the outcome much. I could go off on the standard libertarian rant about the available choices and whatnot, but I think you know where I’m headed.
But, hey, I voted in all of the ASUO elections while I was there, I campaigned tirelessly against OSPIRG and the OSA, hell, I even ran once, for all the good it does.
Interesting aside, IIRC groups without fee allotments can’t get EMU office space.
BONUS: Don’t miss one of the most unintentionally hilarious letters in ODE history:
Hahaha I like that putting it in a pile that would be ufn everyone loves bon fires right? I guess my whole point in this is not to say anything against the OC but rather if you are fundamentally opposed to the idea of such a fee then don’t use it. There are many people out there that don’t think they use the money they pay to the i-fee but then when you think about the services that it offers thats simply not true. I am all for reforming the way the I-Fee is spent I think you came up with some great suggestions. I have to agree with Tim though in saying that elections don’t work. People are so apatheic that they don’t vote… then they turn around and complain go figure…
I think if anything would ever motivate students to participate it would be the promise that voting for something would net you a $50 check with literally no negative consequences.
I don’t think an election would work, for the same reason that ASUO elections never work. I’d suggest that the Senate just put the money in a pile and burn it, at least that’s honest.
Then my suggestion would be to do your part and put your money where your mouth is: stop submitting a budget to the PFC. That would help decrease the I Fee right?
Eliminating the OC’s line item from the budget would not impact the per-student fee and the extra money would simply go into the surplus. In addition, groups like Students for Choice and the Insurgent would not follow our lead. If the ASUO is going to continue to subsidize political speech, we would be irrational to not submit a budget. So would the ODE and every other group receiving incidental fee revenues.
But this isn’t about the Commentator and it isn’t about the righteousness of the incidental fee. It’s about the $1 million in surplus funds that was taken from students and should be returned. Again, ask the students either by a large sample survey (that includes a healthy portion of people unaffiliated with student unions and fraternities) or by a direct election what they’d like done with their money. Or give it back to them and give them the opportunity to put it into a fund that will go to school infrastructure improvements or beautification efforts. Just allow us, the student body, to choose what to do with our money.
Great I am glad that the OC can fund itself independently there are many groups that can
What it comes down to is that there
I am ABSOLUTELY not saying that EVERY group on campus is as “necessary and integral” what I am saying is that simply eliminating the incidental fee would have an incredible effect on the community of this campus. Yes it would be great if the university took responsibility for the programs; however, they don’t. You saw how up in arms the Athletic department was when it was suggested that they resume funding the marching band. So yea lets talk about being harsh on groups and make sure they are actually contributing to this campus but elimination of the I fee is not the answer to making that happen.
For example the child care subsidy program allows students with children to attend school here. Your incedental fee money goes to that. How do you suggest they become self sufficient? A bake sale? Not all groups are able to fundraise as easily. As a publication the benefit is there of being able to sell advertising space great but what about the other groups that are necessary and integral to this campus?
Well, this is an issue I disagree with Tim on. I think that the child care subsidy is a worthy thing to spend money on, along with a few other groups. This would ideally be done through the University administration, but whatever. What it comes down to is that there’s no good reason students should be paying for groups to advocate political views (i.e. the Commentator, Students for Choice, etc..)
Surely you aren’t about to claim that every group on campus is as “necessary and integral” to the university as the childcare subsidy. I don’t recall that program being labled as “part of the problem” by this publication… at the same time, where does the health center get its money? The bias-response team?
Why not make the university responsible? Sure, maybe tuition would go up, but surplus or not, there is no effort being made in the status quo to reduce the cost of education for students. Oh yeah, except for dumping money into the gaping maws of the USSA and OSPIRG, a move not unlike buying lottery tickets as a business strategy.
Great I am glad that the OC can fund itself independently there are many groups that can’t but are still a great contribution to the campus. For example the child care subsidy program allows students with children to attend school here. Your incedental fee money goes to that. How do you suggest they become self sufficient? A bake sale? Not all groups are able to fundraise as easily. As a publication the benefit is there of being able to sell advertising space great but what about the other groups that are necessary and integral to this campus?
So if we get rid of the student fee that means no more OC, ODE or anything like that as these are all things that student fees go to pay for you talk about making a contribution to campus but how do you fund yourself? With other students money.
The ODE can fund itself independently through only advertising fees. The Commentator website is funded independently and we receive enough funding through grants to continue publishing (albeit at a reduced number of issues.) The Commentator would eagerly cheer for its own defunding if it meant that every other publication and special interest group receiving incidental fee revenue had their trough privileges revoked.
Additionally, just to be clear groups can not spend money on food for meetings and things. They can for events and things of that nature nor can they use incidental fees to make money, unless it goes into a specific account to be used on the next years event. Additionally, according to current regulations fundraising CANNOT be used for food for meetings and the like
So if we get rid of the student fee that means no more OC, ODE or anything like that as these are all things that student fees go to pay for you talk about making a contribution to campus but how do you fund yourself? With other students money. Additionally, just to be clear groups can not spend money on food for meetings and things. They can for events and things of that nature nor can they use incidental fees to make money, unless it goes into a specific account to be used on the next years event. Additionally, according to current regulations fundraising CANNOT be used for food for meetings and the like…
Also, the Incidental Fee cannot be legally used for building improvements to campus. This has been gotten around in the past RE the solar panels and the amphitheatre because they do not have “foundations”.
And, again, the best solution is actually the elimination of the incidental fee. That’s over $600 a years in savings, which is more than the tuition freeze these idiots keep lobbying for will save anyone.
Ted: That’s not technically true, there was one year in the late 1980s when the OC got $100 of stipend money. Just for full disclosure.
I know it’s cynical, but every time the phrase “lasting contribution to campus” comes up, I hear “expensive monument to ego.”
Oh, and I am involved… somehow the Commentator has contributed greatly to campus life for nearly a quarter of a century without spending a single cent of student fees on food, stipends, retreats or gala fundraising events. If we can do it, why can none of the studen unions exist without regular meals, etc on the students dime?
If you are so hell bent on spending the money without ever setting up a refund, maybe shouldn’t we be offering free meals to students based on financial need? I can see it now: The Broke-Ass Student Union. Makes a lot more sense than the way things are going now…
I pay my share of student fees and carry my share of student loans (probably more so than most) but I also recognize that should I choose to participate on campus I get that money back in spades.
And this is just a spectacular statement. You “participate on campus” by going to class. There is no conceivable way that the $1 million could be spent by the Senate and, as a consequence, have every student receive more than $50 in benefits.
The solution is simple: leave it up to the students. Ask them through an election or survey. It’s their money, not yours.
Anyway I think that it might be wise for this body to set aside some money and really contribute in a lasting way to the campus.
The incidental fee is not social security.
Lets the the incedental fee also goes to several departments and things that should not really be funded by your dollars. I think it would be wise to, instead of simply refunding the money, put some mechanisims in place that really do things for students. One idea might be helping build/revamp a new EMU. The EMU was a great place for students to gather and this has not been the case in the recent future. That will be something that goes on for many years and will have a far better impact that giving people back a measly $50. I pay my share of student fees and carry my share of student loans (probably more so than most) but I also recognize that should I choose to participate on campus I get that money back in spades. Instead of calling for the elimination of programs that “do little more than host dinners” why not get involved and make sure that they are doing more? I mean if your hand is sore you don’t cut it off right. You try to make it better…Anyway I think that it might be wise for this body to set aside some money and really contribute in a lasting way to the campus.
Which is precisely why the only just thing to do is eliminate the incidental fee and let people shift for themselves.
Woowza-
While I appreciate the metaphor, I think it’s a bit off-base. What was brought up in the meeting was not that this was one surplus among many deficits, but rather an extra-large surplus among many smaller surplusses. Also, as awfull as the state legislature has been at times, I don’t see it “rolling over” a huge percentage of the previous years revenue (ASUO rolled over about 10% of last years total revenue), while simultaneously increasing taxes (incidental fee is up $16 this year).
The argument that the fee pays for many great programs is well taken, here are some of my favorites: American Sign Language, Campus Recycling, Career Center, Child Care Subsidy, DDS, Disablilities Services Project, Forensics, Legal Services, Mentor Program, Office of Student Advocacy… In other words, I have no problem funding programs which contribute in ways that don’t just involve shuffling their whole budget over to Campus Catering.
Fiscal responsibility is about more than just making sure that groups spend all the money they’ve been earmarked, it’s a philosophy that sees student fees themselves as a burden on ALL STUDENTS which should be addressed. As long as huge amounts of funding continues to go to a plethora of groups which do little more than host dinners and fundraise more money which can then be spent unaccountably, I’m sorry but I think money should start making its way back into the hands of students. At the very least, the ASUO should find a way to freeze the fee at it’s current level for say, 5 years. The bottom line is that a record surplus ($240,000), a huge roll-over(over $1 million?) and a $16 increase in the fee all in the same year sends a clear message to students: keep paying up suckers, because there’s no end to the money we’d be willing to take.
The write up on the surplus guidlines were not correct. Only a mojority vote is needed to authorize spending in most circumstances; however, if a group fails to fundraise then they have a hell of a case to put forth. Get it right guys. I think this is a smart move. I think issuing a refund or something will simply put us in the same state as the state government. When they don’t recieve their projected revenue they are in a bind and have to cut services because they issue kickers when they bring in more then the projected revenue. Our student fees go to so many services and we need to make sure that they are continued.
Meh, if they can get the AD to fund it, then more power to them. It’s not the ideal tactic, nor was it well executed, but it is a step in the right direction. Now, about that record surplus…
Man, no good reason to fund the band. I mean, it only confers direct benefit upon the most students of any group, can’t see a good reason for them to keep their funding…let’s make sure OSPIRG and the OSA get full funding, gotta keep lobbying for the environment, maaaan!