The ASUO Executive issued a statement to members of the Student Senate Tuesday chastising the small budget increase for student programs they approved for next year, calling it a “disappointment” that will result in “substantial cuts in services and student employment.”
The Executive is “reluctant to accept” the Senate’s 2.5 percent overall increase cap, passed Nov. 15, according to the letter. It is attached to a memo from the director of Physical Activity and Recreation Services that details how the growth limit might force the Student Recreation Center to cut services.
The situation is compounded by a grievance filed by former Sen. Dallas Brown requesting the ASUO Constitution Court rule whether Programs Finance Committee members should be allowed to vote on the PFC’s budget. If the court rules in favor of Brown, it is possible that all the recommendations passed by the Senate will need to be voted on again.
ASUO President and former PFC Chairman Jared Axelrod said the PFC cannot stick to the Senate’s recommendation, citing inevitable increases in personnel costs.
Although Senate President Sara Hamilton has asked the court to decide if the Executive has the right to veto the Senate’s recommendation, Axelrod said he is not considering that move.
He is not interested in creating a rift between the two branches of government, he said.
Sen. Kyle McKenzie, a supporter of a lower benchmark for the PFC, said that although he thinks the Executive is “doing an excellent job of making sure students get all they deserve,” the Senate chose the smaller-than-normal budget increase to start reforming the PFC process.
“By taking a stance now, we can make our voice heard,” he said. The Senate has come under criticism from fiscal conservatives in recent years who favor reducing the $202 per term incidental fee. The letter states that the Executive feels the Senate has singled out the PFC when determining which budgets to cut and has done so unfairly. The Senate passed increases for the Athletic Department Finance Committee of 7 percent and the EMU of 5.5 percent.
“If Senate decides that reductions in service level are necessary, we know that students would want them applied across the board,” the letter states.
McKenzie countered that the process for determining funding levels for the ADFC and the EMU are “legitimate.” He said the PFC process is flawed because it rewards programs for spending their entire budgets without a system of checks to see where money is being spent.
“This is the first step in what will lead to a better PFC process,” he said.
ASUO Finance Coordinator Madeline Wigen said the model she used to determine the Executive’s recommendation took into account many factors. Groups needed to have spent 95 percent of their budgets for the previous year and have used a percentage of fund-raised money to support programming and events.
“Not too many groups are eligible for increases under this model,” she said.
Wigen said the Executive’s recommendation of a 5 percent increase actually included a small decrease in program funding.
Programs account for $2 million of the PFC’s total more than $5.4 million budget, whereas departments and contracts compose the rest, she said.
Axelrod said the PFC will find that in order to support ASUO contracts and to keep pace with mandated increases, such as the minimum wage increase starting Jan. 1, the committee will need to exceed its Senate-imposed spending limit.
“We have to pay those people,” Axelrod said.
Wigen said additional costs are difficult to avoid without cutting personnel.
“I think that they’re doing their job in scrutinizing, that’s what they are supposed to do,” Wigen said of the Senate.
As for whether the PFC is likely to be able to stay within the Senate’s recommendation, “there’s always a way,” Wigen said.
McKenzie said the PFC should be able to find ways to keep current services without a substantial increase.
“I think that if they actually tried extremely hard and looked at each group, at how they benefit the University, they could easily come in around 2.5. I think it’s very plausible,” he said.
Axelrod said he sees the Senate’s side.
“I see where some senators are coming from, we need to cut back on excessive spending by groups,” he said. “I think if Senate had a choice they would give a 0 percent increase to programs and a 5 percent increase to departments and contracts – but you can’t do that because they are all part of the same budget.”
The attached memo from Dennis Munroe, director of Physical Activity and Recreation Services, includes ways that the Recreation Center might counteract a small increase, such as raising rates for locker rentals and charging for or discontinuing towel services, although Munroe said he is certain that not all listed effects will occur.
The facility’s total budget from student incidental fees last year was $966,858. The department asked for an 18.19 percent increase for next year, which Munroe said was little more than what’s needed to maintain current services.
Munroe stressed the need to keep up with additional custodial care. The Rec Center has not been able to maintain services with the funding it has received from student fees and general fund revenues, and has had to dip into reserves, he said.
“We can’t continue down that road,” Munroe said.
The memo states that students pay $21.50 per term to use the Rec Center, which is used by 3,500 people Monday through Thursday. About 64 percent of undergraduate and 42 percent of graduate students use the facility, he said.
If the PFC sticks to the 2.5 percent increase, “We would have to get serious and talk about which would be least impactual for students,” he said.
Contact the federal and campus politics reporter at [email protected]