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

Over-Realized Committee to rename Over-Realized Fund

Let’s start with a quick history lesson. Every term you pay the Incidental Fee. This fee goes to pay for all the insane programs, contracts, and other things your student government does. The amount of fee you pay is the amount of money the ASUO spends on its various ideas and projects divided by the number of students expected to attend UO. Since enrollment  seems to have a way of increasing fairly regularly, by the time enough I-fee has been collected Spring term to cover all of the budget, there’s some leftover. This is known as the Over-Realized Fund.

It is the responsibility of the Senate to allocate the Over-Realized Fund however they wish. This year, a committee has been formed to recommend different ways to allocate the funds back to the full Senate. This committee was appointed last week, based on a careful selection process consisting of asking for volunteers. The committee’s first meeting is today and one of the pressing items on its agenda is, in the words of Sen. Evan Thomas, “Discuss Over-Realized Project name/slogan.” Thomas elaborates:

“We looking for a slogan or means of advertising this extra student money to the student body without calling it ‘Over-Realized Funds.’ We’re looking for an exciting and intriguing project name, so input about this is fantastic.”

Will someone explain to me why we need to call it something else? Why do we need to advertise this to the student body at large, when the constellation of money pits that we kindly refer to as programs will come up with a myriad of ways to dispense with this cash? I understand the need for public relations in general, but sanitizing everything to sound pretty or hip is particularly annoying, especially when we’re dealing with a group of people (college students) who are supposed to be smarter than the general public? I know I’m probably wrong, but I’d like to hope that the populace could figure it out. Even if they can’t, they probably won’t be able to get whatever silly name the committee comes up with.

I will be unable to attend this stupid meeting, but I would implore someone, anyone to attend and say loudly and proudly, “Why don’t we call it the Over-Realized Fund?” Please, do it for me.

  1. monalisasmiles says:

    Senator Thomas, you aren’t giving students enough credit. You wrote, in reference to the over-realized fund, “Nobody knows what that is…”

    Politically and socially aware students, which I have found to make up almost all of the student body at the UO, will know what that is.

    If “nobody” knows, as you suggest, could that because the ASUO doesn’t communicate often enough and effectively enough to students? Simply changing the name of the “over-realized fund” isn’t going to inform more people about it. Maybe the ASUO should follow in Obama’s footsteps and give a “State of the University” speech on YouTube or Facebook or Twitter or something that you think our generation actually pays attention to instead of campus politics.

  2. Evan P. Thomas says:

    I’m pretty sure most of campus will know what “how would you spend 200,000 dollars for campus?” means.

    I’m not really interested in your opinion of what I “might as well be” doing. You wrote an article asserting that the committee was renaming the fund, which is just false, and would be an incredibly stupid use of time. When in reality, the committee discussed multiple PR techniques utilizing multiple slogans and/or mediums to spark interest. You don’t have to believe me, ask Franklin, the media representative that actually showed up and would have had the actual information necessary to write an article if he were so inclined.

    Just… I don’t know… find something worthwhile to oppose. There’s plenty of material out there.

    PS: Sorry Lyzi.

  3. Rockne Andrew Roll says:

    Senator, barely anyone knows what the ASUO is. Plus, your sentence which begins “Nobody gets interested in a flier…” might as well just end there.

    Furthermore, as quoted from your meeting agenda, one of your topics was “Discuss Over-Realized Project name/slogan.” Even if you are not officially renaming the ORF itself, you might as well be, because if no one knows what ORF is, how in the world do you think they will be able to distinguish between it and whatever name is assigned to the “project” that the money is allocated for.

    I assert that even those who know the difference, perhaps especially those who know, won’t care.

  4. Lyzi Diamond says:

    Why is your comment directed at me? I didn’t write this blog post.

  5. Senator Evan P. Thomas says:

    There was never once indication that the over-realized fund would be renamed. There was, however, much indication that we were actively looking for means to advertise (hence the use of the word “advertise”) the use of this over-realized funds to campus. It’s PR, Lyzi. Nobody gets interested in a flier that says “how would you spend over-realized funds?” because nobody knows what that is…

  6. JMB says:

    The Social Justice Equalization Fund

    Actually I take that suggestion back, they might really use it.

  7. Rockne Andrew Roll says:

    I’ll be sure to make that distinction in the future.

  8. Lyzi Diamond says:

    I agree with Alex.

  9. Rockne Andrew Roll says:

    The actual accumulation of the ORF is an inevitability of the way the I-Fee is calculated and collected, which is kind of sad in and of itself. The way it is used, basically as free candy for programs, is what is screwed up.

    Proposed Name: The Free Candy Fund

  10. atthecoast says:

    How about the – We took too much because we can and now we have to figure out how to get creative so it doesn’t look like we are stealing money from students and it rightfully should not be ours fund? Sorry I guess that is just too obvious? I will be interested to know what was decided. At least Over- Realized Fund is more truthful than an “exciting or intriguing” name that seeks to make people think that the accumulation of the fund is a good thing. Because it isn’t. Right?

  11. CJ says:

    Why, if I didn’t know better, I’d say they were trying to get rid of the baggage surrounding the over-realized fund so they can get the gravy train chugging along again.

    – The above-conceptualized fund

    – The beyond-expected fund

    – The fund formerly known as the over-realized fund

    – The swear jar

    – The fund which shall not be named

  12. That’s not a history lesson. It’s a civics lesson.

  13. FTB says:

    Not sure if I can, as the objective journalist in the room, voice the opinion, but I sure will knock for rationalism when I hear it.

    We should remember that if we rename it, an SDK memorial “kick-back” will be improbable.

    If they’re going to name it anything like what it sounds like they want to do with it, I have some suggestions:

    1. “Surplus 2: Electric Boogaloo”
    2. “Super-secret Surplus”
    3. “Extra monies”

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.