Attempts to agree on how to reimburse student groups for paid positions cut during this year’s funding process failed in the ASUO Student Senate during a tense
meeting Wednesday night, causing senators to postpone the matter to consult group representatives.
The Programs Finance Committee, which allocates student money to groups, implemented a new pay model during this year’s process, drawing ire from multicultural groups that lost paid positions or received pay cuts for some leaders. Eleventh-hour lobbying by groups led members of the PFC to include notes in the budget asking the Senate to create a committee to disburse funds to groups that lost stipends.
PFC member and Senator Mike Sherman presented four options to the Senate
on how to fund cut positions, including giving back all of the roughly $94,600 that was cut.
Sherman said the money would come from overrealized funds, which is incidental fee money earmarked for one-time expenses and is generated by overestimates of the University’s fee-paying population at the beginning of the year. He said the fund fluctuates from about $250,000 to $300,000.
But to use the money, the Senate would have to gain approval for its plans from the ASUO Executive and University President Dave Frohnmayer.
The first option would replace all the cut positions at $125 each, costing $60,500. The second proposal would reimburse the cut money to be distributed by groups among existing positions, costing $94,580.
The other possibilities include creating a “mini-PFC budget committee” to dole out relief funds on an individual basis or having groups submit special requests to the full Senate for funding.
Sherman said the second option would raise the PFC’s increase over last year to 8.9 percent, 1.9 percent higher than the cap allowed by the Green Tape Notebook.
Although several senators said they favored refunding all the cut money, others disagreed, saying the ASUO Executive and Frohnmayer might not approve such a large amount.
Several senators referenced a letter from Frohnmayer to student government leaders this summer in which he pointed out that some groups received more money for member pay than for programming, asking them to re-evaluate the old stipend model.
Sherman called the solutions a “Band-Aid solution” no matter what the Senate decides, saying the pay model will have to be revised next year.
“We don’t get a choice,” he said. “That’s the elephant in the room right now.”
Senator Austin Shaw-Phillips said he favored the second option because it would give groups the “most autonomy without being ridiculously complicated.”
Senator Sarah Wells said student Kit Myers is circulating a petition among student groups whose members favor the second option.
But Senator Barett Volkmann said it’s logical that groups want the second option because it gives them the most money.
“I think we need to be careful about continuing to spend money and sign away and not care anymore,” he said.
Senator Nick Hudson motioned to approve the first option, saying “realistically, I think this one would be the best case to have it approved” by the executive and Frohnmayer. The Senate defeated the motion 2-10.
Senator Rona Yang later motioned to use option two with a provision that calls for a relief committee to be established if the spending is not approved. The motion also failed in a 5-8 vote.
The Senate postponed the matter to hear from student group leaders.
Special requests granted
The Senate also approved $2,820 in special requests. Senators started the meeting with about $5,335 in surplus funds after two accounting errors showed Senate ledgers
two weeks ago with only about $335 remaining.
Senate President James George notified groups about the change in an April 25 e-mail, noting that “this does not change the fact that Senate Surplus should be a last resort.”
Senators approved $413 for the Native American Student Union to provide 44 people associated with the group with a “traditional honoring” of blankets. But some senators said the blankets fall under the Senate’s rules against providing money for gifts worth more than $25.
Sherman called cultural gifts a “gray area,” noting that many cultural groups could give gifts.
“I do think this falls under the gift policy,” Sherman said. “It appears not to violate the rule to the letter, but it’s violating the rule in spirit.”
NASU Co-Director Natasha Joseph said the blankets cost about $5,000 total, of which the group raised all but $413. She said NASU has given the blankets out for at least five years but gave out a larger amount this year and came to the Senate “as a last resort” after failing to fundraise the entire amount.
Hudson said the blankets are a gift, but if the $413 is divided among the blankets, each gift costs about $10 and is allowed by the Senate’s rules.
The Senate voted 10-3 to approve the funding.
The Senate also approved $2,407 of surplus funds to the Men’s Lacrosse Club to attend a national competition in Minnesota.
Club Sports Director Sandy Vaughn said the organization
has used all its money for the first time and was unable to contribute to the team.
Rule-making
attempts also fail
Tension escalated during the meeting when senators attempted to approve changes to the Senate’s rules, formulated this year by the Rules Committee, resulting in a vote to postpone approving the rules.
Because approving rule changes requires a three-fourths vote of the 18-member Senate and only
14 members currently sit on the Senate, Sherman said he could vote against the overall changes and cause them to fail. He was the only senator who threatened to do so, saying the voting rules are flawed.
ASUO Vice President Mena Ravassipour questioned why Sherman had that power.
“Is it just because the squeaky wheel gets the grease?” she said. “It is like one person votes ‘no’ and it all goes to shit.”
George asked the Senate to take into consideration the work the Rules Committee did on the changes. He said delaying the vote might prevent the ASUO Constitution Court from reviewing the rules before several of its members resign this month.
Senator Kevin Day eventually threatened to leave the meeting.
“I feel everybody is tired, frustrated and has things to do,” he said. “If this motion doesn’t pass, I’m walking out of here anyway.”
He said the vote could be delayed because no matter when the Senate votes, approving the changes will become the court’s decision.
“It’s still in their court,” he said.
The Senate postponed the issue.

[email protected]