[103] in UA Senate
Re: UA budgeting principles
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Alexandra Jordan)
Thu Oct 15 00:33:10 2009
Cc: Jason Scott <jascott88@gmail.com>, Adam Bockelie <bockelie@mit.edu>,
Janet Li <jli12@mit.edu>, Paul Youchak <youchakp@mit.edu>,
Catherine Olsson <catherio@mit.edu>, Andrew Lukmann <lukymann@mit.edu>,
Alex Schwendner <alexrs@mit.edu>,
"Alex Dehnert (UA Treasurer)" <ua-treasurer@mit.edu>,
ua-senate@mit.edu, ua-discuss@mit.edu
From: Alexandra Jordan <amjordan@MIT.EDU>
To: hwkns@mit.edu
In-Reply-To: <9d4f87ed0910142117h61573e69v2bc9c24e0c981d40@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2009 00:33:03 -0400
--Apple-Mail-10-248593414
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset=US-ASCII;
format=flowed;
delsp=yes
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
I agree with Hawkins. The UA is a large organization, that
cumulatively puts in hundreds of hours for the undergrads per week,
with some individuals putting in well over even a normal 40 hour work
week during the more stressful periods (example: Exec officers and the
Budget Task Force position pieces, example: DPC report compilation).
Providing basics (like food, a productive meeting space, etc.) for
people to perform work on behalf of 4,000 students is completely
within reason. If you're looking to cut fat out of the budget, it
shouldn't be at the expense of the quality of working conditions for
the people who are representing undergraduates to the administration
to make life better at MIT. I also would agree with Ashley's
assessment that student groups probably should fund certain events or
capital expenditures from other means, not only to ensure
sustainability and longevity of the group, but also because many small
student group expenses benefit even fewer people than the UA food
expenditures we're discussing.
I also think it's relevant to recognize that the work of the UA is on
behalf of all undergrads, whereas many of the groups we fund benefit
and represent extremely small segments of the population.
Alex Jordan
On Oct 15, 2009, at 12:17 AM, Daniel Hawkins wrote:
> This argument neglects the differences in size between the UA and
> the senior class council, the difference in budget size, and the
> difference in man-hours of work. How often does the senior class
> council meet? How long are the meetings? Surely none of them are
> like the 9.5-hour senate meeting we had at the end of last
> semester... I think you're comparing very different things here.
>
> -hwkns
>
> On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 12:07 AM, Jason Scott <jascott88@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> I don't generally respond to these threads, but I just feel somewhat
> strongly against food at meetings.
>
> Not once in our four years has our council sponsored food at our
> meetings. If having food at meetings is so important for efficiency,
> can people not simply bring their own food to the meeting?
>
> I'm a strong believer in having committee members being rewarded for
> hardwork/planning. But I think that 14% of a budget spent on the
> committee members themselves, is somewhat excessive.
>
> How would people react if last year's senior class council spent
> over $30K on food for only 8 people?
>
> -Jason
>
> On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 11:58 PM, Adam Bockelie <bockelie@mit.edu>
> wrote:
> I would disagree. Being part of a committee/senate/anything else in
> the UA is a lot of work, and most people are already busy with other
> activities. Having money to spend on food for a meeting means that
> people can focus on getting work done, not on searching for food
> between meetings. People on committees are dedicated, and I don't
> think that food is generally an incentive. But, I do think that
> food helps make meetings more productive.
>
> Janet Li wrote:
> I really like Catherine's idea of the collection jar for food for
> Senate meetings. I also agree with Paul that it doesn't seem all
> that necessary to have so much of our budget go towards providing
> food at committee meetings. People on committees should be dedicated
> enough to not need food as an incentive to come to meetings, anyway.
> ---
> Janet Li
> Baker Senator
> MIT Class of 2012
> Dept. of Biological Engineering
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 11:07 PM, Paul Youchak <youchakp@mit.edu <mailto:youchakp@mit.edu
> >> wrote:
>
> A few comments:
>
> A quick calculation for this years budget makes the cost spent on
> food for meetings for various committees (and poland spring water)
> to be 5675 dollars which is 14% of our budget. This seems to be a
> pretty large sum and percentage. Saving this money and giving it
> to
> Finboard would be quite significant.
>
> I understand the logic in moving the Senate elections to the fall
> so
> that Freshmen could participate. This being said, I think it would
> be worth considering revising this and moving the elections back to
> the Spring. We could withhold a few open Freshman seats to be run
> with the class council (independent of living group) allowing for
> their inclusion in the fall as well. This process should allow
> Senators for the coming year to be involved in the budgeting
> process
> and any other events which might be taking place. For instance
> this
> would have allowed for the Senators to help the Exec on the task
> force report this year and get involved in other projects as soon
> as
> the school year begin. Returning senators would also feel a
> greater
> obligation to be involved instead of waiting for the fall session
> to
> start.
>
> I, being a new Senator this year, do feel that I have relatively no
> idea what is going on for these discussion and because of it do not
> feel it is my place to question the judgment of those who know much
> more about the topic than I.
>
> back to work,
>
> Paul
>
>
>
>
> Catherine Olsson wrote:
>
> I strongly agree with Alex S's sentiments that we should favor
> putting money towards student groups instead of our own
> initiatives. I think at the very least, as Andrew brought up,
> we
> should hold ourselves to the same standard as Finboard holds
> student groups (which will be easier if Finboard's standards
> become more clearly stated and publicized as recommended by the
> FPRC). If we don't hold ourselves to the same standards as the
> groups we're withholding money from, then it seems clear to me
> that the money is not going to its best use.*
>
> Thanks, Andrew, for the relevant history. Would it make sense
> for us to extend the period of the summer budget through the
> second meeting of the subsequent fall's Senate session? It
> seems
> like this would prevent money from being spent before the fall
> budget is approved, as happened with Athletics Weekend and
> other
> expenditures this cycle.
>
> I would also be in favor of putting a collection jar out at
> Senate, Exec, and committee meetings so that we can pay for
> some
> of our own food. I greatly appreciate having food at Senate
> meetings, as it means I don't need to worry about finding
> dinner
> on an evening which is already very busy. However, paying a few
> bucks for the food I eat so that we aren't entirely taxing the
> student body for meals most of them don't eat (even though
> they're welcome to) seems very reasonable. Other students who
> come to meetings would still be able to eat the food and would
> be encouraged to chip in, too. Does anyone else agree?
>
> I'm very glad we're discussing this issue. Given that next
> term's budgeting is starting soon, I think now is exactly the
> right time to pull our thoughts together.
>
> - Catherine Olsson, Random Hall Senator and Senate
> Representative to Finboard
>
>
> *It should be noted that much of the funding denied to student
> groups by Finboard is because the groups' proposals seem not
> well-planned-out or not worth the money (such as t-shirts), not
> _because_ Finboard doesn't have enough money. But if Finboard
> had more money, we could relax some of our guidelines, enabling
> us to fund more conferences, fund capital such as costumes and
> musical instruments more than our current caps, fund more
> travel, enable groups that maintain a library (such as MITSFS
> and Anime Club) to acquire more new material, and allow groups
> who wish to hold a vast number of events to hold all their
> events and not just some.
>
>
> Andrew Lukmann wrote:
>
> If Alex's sentiments are shared by a number of other new
> senators... it might be time to re-investigate the timing
> of
> future budget approvals as well.
>
> History:
> In the somewhat distant past (6-7+ years ago) Senate was
> elected in the Spring with the incoming UA P/VP. As a
> result, the incoming Senate and the incoming administration
> worked together to compile and approve a budget before the
> Summer. However, with a number of changes to the living
> group constituencies, most importantly Freshmen on Campus,
> the decision was made to move Senate elections to the Fall
> to allow freshmen to vote (and run in) the Senate contest.
> From what I recall, the first year of this change, the
> Fall
> budget was actually voted upon by the outgoing Senate,
> allowing the administration to have a complete and approved
> budget to operate on over the summer, during orientation
> and
> during the Fall term. This, however, served to largely
> hamstring the newly-elected Senate regarding financial
> policy until at least the Spring budget was discussed in
> December. As a result, this was altered (about 5 years ago)
> to the current arrangement where the outgoing Senate (in
> the
> spring) grants an advance for the administration to utilize
> over the Summer/Orientation which is disbursed by the
> ExecComm in lieu of Senate. Then the Fall budget is taken
> up
> and approved by the new Senate when it is finally assembled
> and called to order by early-mid October.
>
> Problems:
> It seems that in an effort to address problems of the past,
> we in past UA administrations (and past sessions of Senate)
> have helped to create new problems. It seems that even
> though the intent of moving Fall budget approval to the
> Fall
> was to empower new Senators, this has been less than
> effective. New senators are just beginning to find their
> way
> and are reticent to question the wisdom of a budget handed
> to them by more experienced officers like the President,
> Treasurer and (often) Speaker. Situations are also
> encountered where the executive assumes that certain
> budgetary line items will be approved and preemptively
> spends the money (such as Athletics Weekend), effectively
> circumventing Senate's oversight responsibility. Not having
> an approved budget until mid October also hampers the
> ability of the Executive and it's Committees to engage in
> activities and programming early in the term.
>
> If other people in the UA agree that this is an important
> enough issue, I encourage you to re-investigate the
> possibility of making changes in the budget calendar and
> taking a closer look at the pros and cons of different
> options. In the end, the balance will almost always be
> between empowering the current (or most recently) elected
> representatives and having an experienced enough group of
> Senators calling the shots that they can serve as a
> meaningful check against executive overreaching or "mission
> creep."
>
> Yours in the UA,
> Andrew L.
>
>
> Alex Schwendner wrote:
>
> I would like to advocate that our budgeting goal should
> be to allocate
> more money to student groups. Here's why:
>
> Our goal, as the Undergraduate Association, is to make
> things better
> for undergraduates. When it comes to money, this means
> that we should
> see that money gets spent on the things which most
> benefit MIT
> undergraduates. This might mean that we spend the money
> ourselves or
> this might mean that we give it to student groups who
> can use it.
> There are plenty of student groups who do wonderful and
> amazing
> things. All of us can think of student groups which get
> much of their
> funding from the UA which have made our time at MIT
> more
> worthwhile.
> Our goal, as the UA, should not be to do awesome
> things,
> but rather to
> see that awesome things get done.
>
> Sometimes, of course, this will mean that we should
> spend money on
> projects conceived by the UA and sometimes this will
> mean that we
> should give money to student groups. However, there
> is a
> natural,
> institutional bias toward spending the money ourselves.
> We need to
> fight that bias. Since we, the UA, get first crack at
> the money, it's
> easy to think of cool things which we can do with the
> money while
> forgetting about the very real and very cool things
> which student
> groups will *not* be able to do without that money. We
> can see this
> "mission creep" in UA funding in the way that the money
> allocated to
> UA committees has increased in past years. Yes, the UA
> does more with
> the increased money, but it is not always clear that
> it's spent better
> than it could be spent by student groups. The standards
> which hold for
> receiving funding from the UA general budget should be
> analogous to
> the standards which hold for receiving funding from UA
> Finboard. I
> will note that while UA committees received basically
> everything that
> they asked for in the Fall UA budget, student groups
> which applied to
> UA Finboard received less than 30% of their requests in
> the most
> recent funding cycle.
>
> Therefore, during the Spring 2010 budgeting process, I
> intend to push
> for allocating more money for student groups. Projects
> which we choose
> not to fund from the UA general budget can seek funding
> through UA
> Finboard, from LEF or ARCADE, from the MIT
> Administration, or from
> other funding sources.
>
> Please discuss.
>
> Alex Schwendner
>
> On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 12:52 AM, Alex Dehnert (UA
> Treasurer)
> <ua-treasurer@mit.edu <mailto:ua-treasurer@mit.edu>>
> wrote:
>
> As several people have pointed out, the UA
> spends quite a bit of money on
> events (about a third of last semester's
> budget)
> and focused projects (like
> PLUS --- about a tenth of last semester's UA
> budget). As Andrew Lukmann
> pointed out last week, committees are spending
> almost twice as much in Fall
> 2009's budget as in Spring 2007's budget.
>
> Unfortunately, it is now a little bit late to
> make major changes to the
> Fall 2009 budget. Last week's meeting was
> intended to allow that, and we
> spent a great deal of time on it then. I also
> solicited feedback late Friday
> night (or really Saturday morning), and didn't
> receive any. Of course, you
> are well within your rights to amend the budget
> at this point. (Though
> Athletics Weekend has already happened, so I'd
> rather you didn't amend
> that...)
>
> However, the Spring 2010 budget has not begun
> being compiled. In preparing
> the the Fall 2009 budget, I (and I believe
> committee chairs and the Special
> Budgetary Committee) generally followed
> precedent as to events and amounts.
>
> In some sense, there are (at least) two options
> for guiding principles to
> take in producing the budget:
> (1) Many of the UA-run events are more useful
> than the events and
> programming (Finboard-funded) student groups
> would spend the money on
> (2) Alternatively, that events and programs
> such
> as Athletics Weekend or
> PLUS aren't worth taking the money away from
> those student groups
>
> We've recently been defaulting to the former
> guiding principle. However, I
> would encourage the Senate to seriously
> consider
> which is preferable and
> pass appropriate legislation indicating a
> preference.
>
> I would be *thrilled* to have such guidance,
> and
> would happily incorporate
> it into next semester's budget. (I warn you,
> however, that committee chairs
> will probably be asked to begin budgeting in
> about two weeks.)
>
> Thanks,
> Alex Dehnert
> UA Treasurer
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Adam Bockelie
> 801.209.7233
> <bockelie@mit.edu>
>
> Massachusetts Institute of Technology
> Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering
> Class of 2011
>
>
>
> --
> Jason Alexander Scott
> Class Council President
> MIT Class of 2010
>
>
__________________________________
Alexandra Jordan
MIT 2011
Earth, Atmospheric, and Planetary Science
Political Science
amjordan@mit.edu
916.813.7740
--Apple-Mail-10-248593414
Content-Type: text/html;
charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<html><body style=3D"word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; =
-webkit-line-break: after-white-space; ">I agree with Hawkins. The UA is =
a large organization, that cumulatively puts in hundreds of hours for =
the undergrads per week, with some individuals putting in well over even =
a normal 40 hour work week during the more stressful periods (example: =
Exec officers and the Budget Task Force position pieces, example: DPC =
report compilation). Providing basics (like food, a productive meeting =
space, etc.) for people to perform work on behalf of 4,000 students is =
completely within reason. If you're looking to cut fat out of the =
budget, it shouldn't be at the expense of the quality of working =
conditions for the people who are representing undergraduates to the =
administration to make life better at MIT. I also would agree with =
Ashley's assessment that student groups probably should fund certain =
events or capital expenditures from other means, not only to ensure =
sustainability and longevity of the group, but also because many small =
student group expenses benefit even fewer people than the UA food =
expenditures we're discussing.<div><br></div><div>I also think it's =
relevant to recognize that the work of the UA is on behalf of all =
undergrads, whereas many of the groups we fund benefit and represent =
extremely small segments of the population.<br><div><br></div><div>Alex =
Jordan</div><div><br><div><div>On Oct 15, 2009, at 12:17 AM, Daniel =
Hawkins wrote:</div><br class=3D"Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote =
type=3D"cite">This argument neglects the differences in size between the =
UA and the senior class council, the difference in budget size, and the =
difference in man-hours of work. How often does the senior class =
council meet? How long are the meetings? Surely none of them =
are like the 9.5-hour senate meeting we had at the end of last =
semester... I think you're comparing very different things =
here.<br> <br>-hwkns<br><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Thu, Oct 15, =
2009 at 12:07 AM, Jason Scott <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a =
href=3D"mailto:jascott88@gmail.com">jascott88@gmail.com</a>></span> =
wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"border-left: 1px =
solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: =
1ex;"> I don't generally respond to these threads, but I just feel =
somewhat strongly against food at meetings.<br><br>Not once in our four =
years has our council sponsored food at our meetings. If having food at =
meetings is so important for efficiency, can people not simply bring =
their own food to the meeting?<br> <br>I'm a strong believer in having =
committee members being rewarded for hardwork/planning. But I think that =
14% of a budget spent on the committee members themselves, is somewhat =
excessive.<br><br>How would people react if last year's senior class =
council spent over $30K on food for only 8 people?<br> =
<br>-Jason<br><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div class=3D"im">On Wed, =
Oct 14, 2009 at 11:58 PM, Adam Bockelie <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a =
href=3D"mailto:bockelie@mit.edu" =
target=3D"_blank">bockelie@mit.edu</a>></span> wrote:<br></div> =
<div><div></div><div class=3D"h5"><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" =
style=3D"border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt =
0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> I would disagree. Being part of a =
committee/senate/anything else in the UA is a lot of work, and most =
people are already busy with other activities. Having money to =
spend on food for a meeting means that people can focus on getting work =
done, not on searching for food between meetings. People on =
committees are dedicated, and I don't think that food is generally an =
incentive. But, I do think that food helps make meetings more =
productive.<br> <br> Janet Li wrote:<br> <blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote"=
style=3D"border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt =
0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><div> I really like Catherine's idea of the =
collection jar for food for Senate meetings. I also agree with Paul that =
it doesn't seem all that necessary to have so much of our budget go =
towards providing food at committee meetings. People on committees =
should be dedicated enough to not need food as an incentive to come to =
meetings, anyway.<br> ---<br> Janet Li<br> Baker Senator<br> MIT Class =
of 2012<br> Dept. of Biological Engineering<br> <br> =
<br></div><div><div></div><div> On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 11:07 PM, Paul =
Youchak <<a href=3D"mailto:youchakp@mit.edu" =
target=3D"_blank">youchakp@mit.edu</a> <mailto:<a =
href=3D"mailto:youchakp@mit.edu" target=3D"_blank">youchakp@mit.edu</a>>> =
wrote:<br> <br> A few comments:<br> <br> A =
quick calculation for this years budget makes the cost spent on<br> =
food for meetings for various committees (and poland spring =
water)<br> to be 5675 dollars which is 14% of our budget. =
This seems to be a<br> pretty large sum and =
percentage. Saving this money and giving it to<br> =
Finboard would be quite significant.<br> <br> I =
understand the logic in moving the Senate elections to the fall so<br> =
that Freshmen could participate. This being said, I =
think it would<br> be worth considering revising this and =
moving the elections back to<br> the Spring. We could =
withhold a few open Freshman seats to be run<br> with the =
class council (independent of living group) allowing for<br> =
their inclusion in the fall as well. This process should =
allow<br> Senators for the coming year to be involved in =
the budgeting process<br> and any other events which might =
be taking place. For instance this<br> would have =
allowed for the Senators to help the Exec on the task<br> =
force report this year and get involved in other projects as soon =
as<br> the school year begin. Returning senators =
would also feel a greater<br> obligation to be involved =
instead of waiting for the fall session to<br> start.<br> =
<br> I, being a new Senator this year, do feel that I have =
relatively no<br> idea what is going on for these =
discussion and because of it do not<br> feel it is my place =
to question the judgment of those who know much<br> more =
about the topic than I.<br> <br> back to work,<br> <br> =
Paul<br> <br> <br> <br> <br> Catherine Olsson =
wrote:<br> <br> I strongly agree with Alex =
S's sentiments that we should favor<br> =
putting money towards student groups instead of our own<br> =
initiatives. I think at the very least, as Andrew =
brought up, we<br> should hold ourselves to =
the same standard as Finboard holds<br> =
student groups (which will be easier if Finboard's standards<br> =
become more clearly stated and publicized as =
recommended by the<br> FPRC). If we don't =
hold ourselves to the same standards as the<br> =
groups we're withholding money from, then it seems clear to me<br> =
that the money is not going to its best =
use.*<br> <br> Thanks, Andrew, for the =
relevant history. Would it make sense<br> for =
us to extend the period of the summer budget through the<br> =
second meeting of the subsequent fall's Senate =
session? It seems<br> like this would prevent =
money from being spent before the fall<br> =
budget is approved, as happened with Athletics Weekend and =
other<br> expenditures this cycle.<br> <br> =
I would also be in favor of putting a =
collection jar out at<br> Senate, Exec, and =
committee meetings so that we can pay for some<br> =
of our own food. I greatly appreciate having food at Senate<br> =
meetings, as it means I don't need to worry =
about finding dinner<br> on an evening which =
is already very busy. However, paying a few<br> =
bucks for the food I eat so that we aren't entirely taxing the<br> =
student body for meals most of them don't eat =
(even though<br> they're welcome to) seems =
very reasonable. Other students who<br> come =
to meetings would still be able to eat the food and would<br> =
be encouraged to chip in, too. Does anyone else =
agree?<br> <br> I'm very glad we're =
discussing this issue. Given that next<br> =
term's budgeting is starting soon, I think now is exactly the<br> =
right time to pull our thoughts together.<br> =
<br> - Catherine Olsson, Random Hall Senator =
and Senate<br> Representative to Finboard<br> =
<br> <br> *It should be noted that much of =
the funding denied to student<br> groups by =
Finboard is because the groups' proposals seem not<br> =
well-planned-out or not worth the money (such as t-shirts), =
not<br> _because_ Finboard doesn't have =
enough money. But if Finboard<br> had more =
money, we could relax some of our guidelines, enabling<br> =
us to fund more conferences, fund capital such as costumes =
and<br> musical instruments more than our =
current caps, fund more<br> travel, enable =
groups that maintain a library (such as MITSFS<br> =
and Anime Club) to acquire more new material, and allow groups<br> =
who wish to hold a vast number of events to =
hold all their<br> events and not just =
some.<br> <br> <br> Andrew Lukmann wrote:<br> =
<br> If Alex's sentiments are =
shared by a number of other new<br> =
senators... it might be time to re-investigate the timing of<br> =
future budget approvals as =
well.<br> <br> History:<br> =
In the somewhat distant past =
(6-7+ years ago) Senate was<br> =
elected in the Spring with the incoming UA P/VP. As a<br> =
result, the incoming Senate and the =
incoming administration<br> =
worked together to compile and approve a budget before the<br> =
Summer. However, with a number =
of changes to the living<br> =
group constituencies, most importantly Freshmen on Campus,<br> =
the decision was made to move =
Senate elections to the Fall<br> =
to allow freshmen to vote (and run in) the Senate contest.<br> =
=46rom what I recall, the =
first year of this change, the Fall<br> =
budget was actually voted upon by the outgoing Senate,<br> =
allowing the administration to =
have a complete and approved<br> =
budget to operate on over the summer, during orientation and<br> =
during the Fall term. This, =
however, served to largely<br> =
hamstring the newly-elected Senate regarding financial<br> =
policy until at least the Spring =
budget was discussed in<br> =
December. As a result, this was altered (about 5 years ago)<br> =
to the current arrangement =
where the outgoing Senate (in the<br> =
spring) grants an advance for the administration to utilize<br> =
over the Summer/Orientation =
which is disbursed by the<br> =
ExecComm in lieu of Senate. Then the Fall budget is taken up<br> =
and approved by the new Senate =
when it is finally assembled<br> =
and called to order by early-mid October.<br> <br> =
Problems:<br> =
It seems that in an effort to address problems of the =
past,<br> we in past UA =
administrations (and past sessions of Senate)<br> =
have helped to create new problems. It seems that =
even<br> though the intent of =
moving Fall budget approval to the Fall<br> =
was to empower new Senators, this has been less than<br> =
effective. New senators are =
just beginning to find their way<br> =
and are reticent to question the wisdom of a budget handed<br> =
to them by more experienced =
officers like the President,<br> =
Treasurer and (often) Speaker. Situations are also<br> =
encountered where the executive =
assumes that certain<br> =
budgetary line items will be approved and preemptively<br> =
spends the money (such as Athletics =
Weekend), effectively<br> =
circumventing Senate's oversight responsibility. Not having<br> =
an approved budget until mid =
October also hampers the<br> =
ability of the Executive and it's Committees to engage in<br> =
activities and programming =
early in the term.<br> <br> If =
other people in the UA agree that this is an important<br> =
enough issue, I encourage you to =
re-investigate the<br> =
possibility of making changes in the budget calendar and<br> =
taking a closer look at the =
pros and cons of different<br> =
options. In the end, the balance will almost always be<br> =
between empowering the current (or =
most recently) elected<br> =
representatives and having an experienced enough group of<br> =
Senators calling the shots that =
they can serve as a<br> =
meaningful check against executive overreaching or "mission<br> =
creep."<br> <br> =
Yours in the UA,<br> =
Andrew L.<br> <br> <br> =
Alex Schwendner wrote:<br> <br> =
I would like to advocate that our budgeting =
goal should<br> =
be to allocate<br> =
more money to student groups. Here's why:<br> <br> =
Our goal, as the =
Undergraduate Association, is to make<br> =
things better<br> =
for undergraduates. When it comes to money, =
this means<br> =
that we should<br> =
see that money gets spent on the things which most<br> =
benefit MIT<br> =
undergraduates. =
This might mean that we spend the money<br> =
ourselves or<br> =
this might mean that we give it to student =
groups who<br> =
can use it.<br> =
There are plenty of student groups who do wonderful and<br> =
amazing<br> =
things. All of us can =
think of student groups which get<br> =
much of their<br> =
funding from the UA which have made our time at MIT =
more<br> =
worthwhile.<br> =
Our goal, as the UA, should not be to do awesome things,<br> =
but rather to<br> =
see that awesome =
things get done.<br> <br> =
Sometimes, of course, this will mean that we should<br> =
spend money =
on<br> projects =
conceived by the UA and sometimes this will<br> =
mean that we<br> =
should give money to student groups. =
However, there is a<br> =
natural,<br> =
institutional bias toward spending the money ourselves.<br> =
We need to<br> =
fight that bias. Since =
we, the UA, get first crack at<br> =
the money, it's<br> =
easy to think of cool things which we can do =
with the<br> =
money while<br> =
forgetting about the very real and very cool things<br> =
which student<br> =
groups will *not* be =
able to do without that money. We<br> =
can see this<br> =
"mission creep" in UA funding in the way that the =
money<br> =
allocated to<br> =
UA committees has increased in past years. Yes, the UA<br> =
does more with<br> =
the increased =
money, but it is not always clear that<br> =
it's spent better<br> =
than it could be spent by student =
groups. The standards<br> =
which hold for<br> =
receiving funding from the UA general budget should =
be<br> analogous =
to<br> the =
standards which hold for receiving funding from UA<br> =
Finboard. I<br> =
will note that while UA =
committees received basically<br> =
everything that<br> =
they asked for in the Fall UA budget, student =
groups<br> which =
applied to<br> UA =
Finboard received less than 30% of their requests in<br> =
the most<br> =
recent funding cycle.<br> <br> =
Therefore, during =
the Spring 2010 budgeting process, I<br> =
intend to push<br> =
for allocating more money for student =
groups. Projects<br> =
which we choose<br> =
not to fund from the UA general budget can seek funding<br> =
through UA<br> =
Finboard, from =
LEF or ARCADE, from the MIT<br> =
Administration, or from<br> =
other funding sources.<br> <br> =
Please discuss.<br> <br> =
Alex =
Schwendner<br> <br> =
On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 12:52 AM, Alex Dehnert (UA<br> =
=
Treasurer)<br></div></div><div><div></div><div> =
<<a =
href=3D"mailto:ua-treasurer@mit.edu" =
target=3D"_blank">ua-treasurer@mit.edu</a> <mailto:<a =
href=3D"mailto:ua-treasurer@mit.edu" =
target=3D"_blank">ua-treasurer@mit.edu</a>>> wrote:<br> =
<br> =
As several =
people have pointed out, the UA<br> =
spends quite a bit of =
money on<br> =
events (about a third of last semester's =
budget)<br> =
and focused projects (like<br> =
=
PLUS --- about a tenth of last semester's UA<br> =
=
budget). As Andrew Lukmann<br> =
pointed out last week, =
committees are spending<br> =
almost twice as much in =
Fall<br> =
2009's budget as in Spring 2007's budget.<br> <br> =
=
Unfortunately, it is now a little bit late to<br> =
=
make major changes to the<br> =
Fall 2009 budget. Last =
week's meeting was<br> =
intended to allow that, and we<br> =
=
spent a great deal of time on it then. I also<br> =
=
solicited feedback late Friday<br> =
night (or really =
Saturday morning), and didn't<br> =
receive any. Of course, =
you<br> =
are well within your rights to amend the budget<br> =
=
at this point. (Though<br> =
Athletics Weekend =
has already happened, so I'd<br> =
rather you didn't =
amend<br> =
that...)<br> <br> =
However, the Spring 2010 =
budget has not begun<br> =
being compiled. In =
preparing<br> =
the the Fall 2009 budget, I (and I =
believe<br> =
committee chairs and the Special<br> =
=
Budgetary Committee) generally followed<br> =
precedent =
as to events and amounts.<br> <br> =
In some sense, there are =
(at least) two options<br> =
for guiding principles to<br> =
=
take in producing the budget:<br> =
(1) Many =
of the UA-run events are more useful<br> =
than the events =
and<br> =
programming (Finboard-funded) student groups<br> =
=
would spend the money on<br> =
(2) =
Alternatively, that events and programs such<br> =
as =
Athletics Weekend or<br> =
PLUS aren't worth taking the =
money away from<br> =
those student groups<br> <br> =
=
We've recently been defaulting to the former<br> =
=
guiding principle. However, I<br> =
would encourage =
the Senate to seriously consider<br> =
which is preferable =
and<br> =
pass appropriate legislation indicating a<br> =
=
preference.<br> <br> =
I would be *thrilled* to have =
such guidance, and<br> =
would happily incorporate<br> =
=
it into next semester's budget. (I warn you,<br> =
=
however, that committee chairs<br> =
will probably be =
asked to begin budgeting in<br> =
about two weeks.)<br> =
<br> =
Thanks,<br> =
Alex Dehnert<br> =
=
UA Treasurer<br> =
<br> <br> <br> <br> =
</div></div></blockquote><font color=3D"#888888"> <br> -- <br> Adam =
Bockelie<br> 801.209.7233<br> <<a href=3D"mailto:bockelie@mit.edu" =
target=3D"_blank">bockelie@mit.edu</a>><br> <br> Massachusetts Institute =
of Technology<br> Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering<br> =
Class of 2011<br> </font></blockquote></div></div></div><font =
color=3D"#888888"><br><br clear=3D"all"><br>-- <br>Jason Alexander =
Scott<br>Class Council President<br>MIT Class of 2010<br><br> =
</font></blockquote></div><br></blockquote></div><br><div =
apple-content-edited=3D"true"> <span class=3D"Apple-style-span" =
style=3D"border-collapse: separate; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: =
Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; =
font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; =
orphans: 2; text-align: auto; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; =
white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; =
-webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: =
0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: =
auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0; "><div style=3D"word-wrap: =
break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: =
after-white-space; "><span class=3D"Apple-style-span" =
style=3D"border-collapse: separate; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: =
Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; =
font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; =
orphans: 2; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; =
widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; =
-webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; =
-webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: =
auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; "><div style=3D"word-wrap: =
break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: =
after-white-space; =
"><div>__________________________________</div><div>Alexandra =
Jordan</div><div><br></div><div>MIT 2011</div><div>Earth, Atmospheric, =
and Planetary Science</div><div>Political =
Science</div><div><br></div><div><a =
href=3D"mailto:amjordan@mit.edu">amjordan@mit.edu</a></div><div>916.813.77=
40</div><div><br></div></div></span><br =
class=3D"Apple-interchange-newline"></div></span><br =
class=3D"Apple-interchange-newline"> =
</div><br></div></div></body></html>=
--Apple-Mail-10-248593414--
