Although election-time grievances have put a crimp in the budget process, University President Dave Frohnmayer will still have next year’s ASUO Programs Finance Committee numbers on his desk by the end of the day.
Five senators filed a grievance against the Multicultural Center’s ballot measure late last term, halting the general election and stopping the vote on two measures requesting funds from the student incidental fee. Until the election is over, the budget will not be complete.
But the PFC, which allocates funds to more than 100 ASUO programs, got its own share of the load done in time. And, according to some groups and committee members, it was done with only a few kinks along the way.
“I think there were a lot of programs we were able to help,” said PFC chairwoman Mary Elizabeth Madden, but “obviously we couldn’t give everybody everything they wanted.”
Those on both sides — the groups presenting their budgets and the PFC members deciding on them — said the fee allocation process was efficient and fair, and that the committee members put a lot of time and energy into the hearings.
But there were issues, many said, that could have been prevented by more preparation.
PFC member Lawrence Gillespie said the PFC should have been given more training. That way, when complicated situations arose — as they often did — the members would have known what their jurisdiction was.
“We were kind of just thrown into it,” Gillespie said. “I know that learning curve could’ve been leveled out more if we had been trained better, [and] some of that was due to late appointments.”
ASUO President Jay Breslow did not finish filling the empty positions on the board until late fall term, which cut short the PFC’s timeline. All but one PFC member was new this year.
Sen. Jackie Ray said that because of unfamiliarity with the process, the PFC let a lot of things slide early on that it later had to re-examine.
About halfway through the budget hearings, the PFC was criticized for passing a lot of budget increases, and members didn’t know how to deal with the issue. But, Ray said, it was only a matter of time before the PFC hit its groove and became comfortable with the process.
“By the end, we were more in tune with each other,” she said. “And we were criticizing everything down to a couple dollars.”
The PFC members were not the only ones feeling unprepared.
“The way I see it, the whole process was too formal,” said Andreas Georgiades, co-director for the International Student Association. “Let’s not forget: We’re not lawyers … we’re student leaders.”
Georgiades expressed frustration with the complex process — filled with parliamentary procedure — and with the lack of preparation.
“It’s way too complicated for student leaders,” he said. “I believe you need to take classes before, like PFC 101.”
MCC Director Erica Fuller echoed that sentiment, saying the process is completely new for many students and can be intimidating.
Fuller said her job is to help student groups with things like this, so she had to learn the process. But, she added, she also has 40 hours a week to do it.
“Students don’t have 40 hours to memorize the PFC process,” she said. “You almost need to be that prepared.”
Part of the problem may be the high turnover rate for both the PFC board and many student groups, said Alan Tauber, president of the Future Lawyers Association. The leadership changes, and that means students who are presenting or deciding on budgets start fresh each year.
“That’s confusing, especially since you’re asked to answer for the decisions of those who made those decisions in the past,” he said.
Even so, Tauber said he thought the PFC handled the budgets fairly by asking good questions and considering the groups’ fundraising efforts.
A few groups said communication between them and the committee could have been better, but members of the PFC said the groups got out of it what they put in.
One recurring issue involved a benchmark meeting held fall term to estimate the necessary increases for next year. If a group did not attend the benchmark meeting, the PFC was less likely to give it all of the increases it sought.
A handful of groups did not show up to the meeting, and explained during their hearings that they didn’t receive any notice.
But the PFC board said it was sure it sent out an e-mail to all groups.
Communication within the PFC itself came to a halt mid-February when PFC member Aaron Weck stopped showing up for hearings. Members were unsure what was going on, but a few weeks later Weck submitted his resignation — post-dated to the day he stopped attending.
While Madden said Weck’s failure to appear was understandable and did not affect the PFC’s abilities too much, Ray said his absences caused aggravation within the committee.
Ray said that if Weck knew there was a problem, he should have told the PFC, and that the hearings were taking a toll on everyone — not just Weck.