Most students don’t participate in programs funded by the student government. Maybe 10 percent of the student population is involved in programming funded by the incidental fee. All students have the opportunity to benefit from the fee but, at the risk of overstatement, for most students, membership in the Associated Students of the University of Oregon comes down to two tangible services: bus passes and athletic tickets.
So unless the goal is to eliminate the ASUO’s relevance and the legitimacy of the incidental fee, the Senate better be careful to maintain both. Senators say they want a stronger hand in negotiations by telling the committee which approves the contracts to keep its budget the same next year. But they should not let economic concerns push either out of student control.
“That’s where we have to be really careful,” said Sen. Alex McCafferty, chairman of the Athletics and Contracts Finance Committee. “Tickets and LTD are a huge part of student perception of the (incidental) fee. If one of the services goes away, the ASUO has a real perception problem.”
McCafferty joined other committee members in presenting their request for a seven percent increase for next year’s budget, the maximum allowed under Oregon University System rules. The ASUO executive recommended the same. In order to maintain the current bus service alone, Lane Transit District’s contract would cause the committee’s budget to grow 6.65 percent over the current year. That’s without any growth in any contract, a new contract for the Oregon Student Public Interest Research Group, a contract to purchase a campus subscription to The New York Times or any new bus routes for students to get home at night.
Still, McCafferty called the Senate’s recommendation for his committee to spend no more money next year “exciting and aggressive, and I like that.”
The chairman did not speak against his committee’s budget remaining the same, he said, because it’s “one of the cruxes of parliamentary procedure” that he was acting as a presenter and not a senator. He could only speak if asked a question, he said. And he didn’t know of any dissenting views pushing for no increase before the meeting, a claim that seems a little unlikely.
There is no denying the stagecraft was fun to watch. It’s rare for the ASUO Senate
— most legislative bodies, for that matter — to do something daring and unexpected to at least half the participants in the room. And given the unflinching stance LTD and the athletic department take when drafting their contracts, it was likely cathartic for senators to flick their chins at the contractors.
But let’s take a moment to reflect on how dire the ACFC’s situation is. It is the day before Thanksgiving and the ASUO has not yet finalized a 2009-10 LTD contract that should have been completed at the beginning of summer.
Andy Vobora, LTD’s director of marketing and communications, said LTD wants to collect money from all students eligible to ride the bus, not just the number of students the University conservatively estimates will attend. The problem for the ASUO is that contracts are (supposed to be) set in June; actual enrollment numbers are not available until the third week of each term, months after the price of the contract has been set.
“If we can’t fix what’s going on this year, LTD is looking at forgoing $150,000 revenue … or saying the program ends fall term,” Vobora said. “We have to figure that out pretty quickly here, because if the program were to end, we need to spend a lot of time to educate students the program will end so they can figure out their transportation options next term.”
That’s the situation ASUO President Emma Kallaway is dealing with when negotiating with LTD, and helps to explain why she was so upset with the zero-percent benchmark. She said her aim is to do what’s best for students, even if that means going over the benchmark.
“It’s important to remember that the executive has a veto over the process,” she warned.
Sen. Sandy Weintraub, the most outspoken and reliable progressive in the ASUO, said senators were trying to strengthen their hand, not deny either service. He does not doubt Senate would eventually fund a 7-percent increase for the ACFC, he said.
“Frankly, if all students expect out of the i-fee is a discounted football ticket, i think they’re missing the point of the i-fee,” Weintraub said. That is absolutely true. However, it will affect far more students than the vocal minority who must attend football games if the ASUO no longer provided the tickets. Let’s hope the proper budget process plays itself out and senators calm down a little by the time they are giving the ACFC a sizeable increase next year.
[email protected]