Coming into Wednesday’s ASUO Senate meeting, none of the finance committee benchmarks had been set for the coming year. The Senate faced the challenge of approving them all in one night, and making them all fit together to get under the new seven percent overall growth cap
In just under four hours, they were done.
Benchmarks, the Senate-approved guidelines that finance committees use when working out their budgets for the next academic year, have been previously limited to seven percent growth per finance committee for each year. These rules were reinterpreted for this year to allow each committee as much growth as they liked, so long as the total incidental fee budget does not grow more than the maximum seven percent allowable.
The first of the benchmarks to be approved was for the EMU Board, which was also the least controversial. Both the board and the Executive recommended a 5.38 percent benchmark, with all but one of those percentage points going to maintain current service levels for EMU programs.
The remaining funds will be allocated through a separate process after each program has had a budget approved that will maintain its current service level, according to EMU Board Chair Sen. Kaitlyn Lange.
“I think that one percent growth is perfectly acceptable for a budget this large,” Sen. Laura Hinman said after the board’s presentation. The EMU Board’s budget is the largest of the four finance committees.
The rest of the Senate seemed to agree with Hinman’s assessment, and the recommended benchmark was approved.
The Department Finance Committee had a tougher time with its benchmark. It requested 7.25 percent, which would allow it to fund the “Inside Out” program, where students and prison inmates learn together, as well as provide current service level increases for other departments.
The Executive recommended a zero percent increase in part because there were other spending priorities to be attended to.
“We wanted to prioritize student run programs,” ASUO President Ben Eckstein said. “The overall number can’t go much above zero percent if you want to prioritize contracted services and student run programs.”
DFC member Sen. Lamar Wise saw it differently.
“You can’t tell me the departments we have don’t contribute enormously to students,” he said. “I’m not going to sit here and take that. I’ll tell you straight up, we need this increase.”
The rest of the Senate was divided on the matter, and eventually approved, reconsidered and then re-approved a zero percent benchmark, all by fairly close votes.
The Athletics and Contracts Finance Committee said that almost every group it funds asked for more money this year.
A number of these requests received the committee’s blessing, such as those from the Office of Student Advocacy and Legal Services, each of which asked for a more than 20 percent increase to hire another lawyer to help with increased caseload. The committee also expressed support for an additional 30 percent for Sexual Assault Support Services to bring a SASS staff member to campus.
Others requests for significant increases, such as those from the athletic department and the United States Student Association, were not looked as favorably upon.
USSA had requested a 250 percent increase from its current budget. ACFC Chair Sen. Ben Bowman explained that because the group had submitted its budget late and had not explained why it wanted the increase, that the committee was disinclined to grant it.
As for athletics, the committee and the Executive took the opportunity to once again clearly state that they were displeased with the current student ticket arrangement.
“We’re not happy with the service we’re getting,” Bowman said.
“We really can’t be more serious,” Eckstein added. “We believe students need to get more tickets for a lower cost.”
Senators tread softly around the usually hot-button issue of the Oregon Student Public Interest Research Group (OSPIRG), which requested a 97 percent increase in its budget. Instead, long time OSPIRG foes expressed tentative support for increasing OSPIRG’s budget, if by a smaller amount.
Lange suggested giving OSPIRG an additional 25 percent, saying, “I am advocating for OSPIRG to have an increase, but it’s an increase that is comparable to all other contracts.”
The exact amount to set the benchmark at, determined by how much room to factor in for potential growth for the athletic department, was not easily agreed to. After an attempt to pass a 5.14 percent benchmark, the Senate split nine to nine on a 7.02 percent figure, with ASUO Vice President Taylor casting the deciding vote in favor.
The Programs Finance Committee brought forward the largest percentage increase of the night, asking for 10.6 percent, much of which would go to paying for the stipend increases approved earlier this term and maintaining current service levels. The Executive recommended 11 percent, but a desire to allow for growth for programs led to a 12.7 percent benchmark being approved with no nay votes.
“I want to send the message to PFC that we are going to prioritize spending for programs,” Lange said. It was estimated that the 12.7 percent benchmark would leave the PFC with around $58,000 to give to programs for budget growth.
If all finance committee budgets were approved at exactly the levels set by their benchmarks, the total of all four budgets would grow by $789,307, or 6.61 percent.
Budget hearings for all four committees will begin winter term.
Benchmarks squeak in under new overall cap
Daily Emerald
November 16, 2011
0
More to Discover