The Programs Finance Committee controls a tremendous amount of money – $5.4 million. And the figure keeps going up despite passionate entreaties for the PFC to remain fiscally responsible. Every year, during winter term, groups that receive incidental fee money write their budgets for the next year and then meet with the PFC to discuss their budgets. Before this process even takes place, the ASUO drafts a “benchmark” – the recommended budget percentage increase for all groups. This year, the budget benchmark was set at 2.5 percent.
But after only two days of student group budget hearings, on Jan. 15, the PFC exceeded its previously announced benchmark. PFC members are entrusted with student fees; they are ostensibly elected to be stewards of our finances, yet they don’t seem to care. Members of the ASUO speak of “protecting the fee,” but what about protecting student funds?
ASUO President Jared Axelrod said the benchmark would be impossible to implement. So why was it even created? What was the point? Perhaps, some groups should decrease their service level. Perhaps, groups should not have bloated stipend budgets.
The PFC is composed of seven students who operate with little oversight. Going over the benchmark in such a capricious manner indicates that the checks and balances that should keep a governing body responsible don’t exist. There are too many people within the ASUO who are unconcerned with keeping the fee manageable. There are also too many people who are beholden to the monetary interests of student groups.
Elected members of the ASUO know on which side their bread is buttered. The percentage of students who vote for student leaders remains in the low teens. Many of these leaders are former members of student groups. Their constituents are not the average fee-paying student, but rather the directors and members of the many dozens of student groups that receive student lucre.
This is yet another example of the ASUO initially paying lip service to fiscal responsibility, and then going against its word. The PFC may have felt it necessary to exceed the benchmark, but doing it after only two days of budget hearings is a slap in the face to fee-paying students. It also sends the message that the ASUO does not care about fiscal responsibility; all it cares about is protecting the fee.