GUEST COLUMNIST: SAC needs clearer funding rules

At the October 29 Student Activities Council meeting, I made a motion to reduce The Red and Blue's budget by $9,660. After a short period of debate, the motion was defeated. I sat down feeling not defeated, but disappointed. I was disappointed that the debate and the final vote -- which was very nearly unanimous -- reaffirmed R&B; Editor-in-Chief Marc Leader's characterization of SAC as "a shepherdless flock of sheep" in his magazine's September 1996 issue. The last person to speak before debate closed urged SAC members not to create a "dangerous precedent" of "going after SAC groups." His message amounted to a warning: "If you vote for this motion, your group's funding may be next." I had wanted to demonstrate that individual SAC representatives must make sure that the body's Executive Committee distributes funds consistently. Debates over funding should focus on this question. I would have been content if legitimate points about the consistency of SAC funding were raised during the debate over my motion, even if the motion had still been defeated. Instead, the representatives present were clearly concerned only with protecting their own turf. As the debate continued, one representative said it was not fair for SAC to reverse a decision it had already made about a group's funding. But what happened at the first SAC meeting of this semester was not the body making a decision at all. All representatives were given at that meeting was a list of dollar values for 104 groups that SAC's Executive Committee recommended for approval. The body voted on all of these recommendations at once, with almost no discussion. This is not a decision; it's a rubber stamp. When the SAC constitutional reforms were passed last year, then-SAC Chairperson Graham Robinson assured representatives that because SAC as a whole would have to approve the Executive Committee's decisions, fairness would be preserved. But the blind methods by which funding has been approved this year have not upheld this promise. SAC representatives have become less careful about funding decisions, and have rarely questioned the Executive Committee's decisions, for fear of putting their own group in the spotlight. What is needed -- and what I hope will occur this year -- is a clearer definition of SAC standards for group funding. I motioned to reduce The Red and Blue's budget by the cost of five issues, leaving three issues funded through SAC. The $13,969 that SAC had allocated for eight issues of the magazine was very large when compared to other campus publications, which receive about $3,000 to $5,000 for no more than three issues. This inconsistency comes from the Executive Committee's policy on funding student publications. As was stated at the last SAC meeting, The Red and Blue set a standard for SAC-funded publication per-issue printing cost, since it was the lowest, at $1,837. However, there is no standard number of issues a group can publish. Therefore, if The Red and Blue is funded for eight issues, there is nothing stopping other student publications from requesting that number of issues -- and the Executive Committee will have absolutely no legitimate grounds to deny such a request, provided the physical quality of that group's magazine matches other publications'. SAC representatives can and should do many things to ensure that their role in student government amounts to more than petty bickering over turf rights. Get a copy of the SAC Constitution from the Office of Student Life and see what your group is entitled to. If you don't like the SAC Chairperson's decision during a meeting, appeal it. If there is a vote where people may not feel comfortable showing how they are voting, request a secret ballot. If you are concerned about the standards the Executive Commitee has set, meet with them. But don't sit back and give Exec free reign over funding decisions without questioning -- or even looking at -- the basis for those decisions. We are not SAC representatives for the sole purpose of protecting our own groups' interests. When you next sit in a SAC meeting -- which anyone can do, whether SAC representative or not -- think about where students' money is going. Are these dollars encouraging new activities and bettering student life? Don't unquestioningly accept the SAC Executive Committee's decision and be one of Leader's "sheep." There is still time to depart from the flock.