[168] in UA Senate
Re: 41UAS2.3: Bill to Authorize the Treasurer to Reallocate Money
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Paul Youchak)
Mon Oct 19 22:43:05 2009
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 22:42:54 -0400
From: Paul Youchak <youchakp@MIT.EDU>
To: Ted Hilk <thilk@mit.edu>
CC: Maggie Delano <maggied@mit.edu>, Alexandra Jordan <amjordan@mit.edu>,
Alex Dehnert <adehnert@mit.edu>, UA Senate <ua-senate@mit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <6ed15f040910191937y859615dhdc3de04dcaffd709@mail.gmail.com>
No one is forcing the committees to decrease spending.
If we want to talk about precedence we should look at how much money was
allocated for the previous semesters. When looking at how much money to
allocate to committees before semesters we fully understand that they
are probably over budgeted and we expect that, and yet we still budget
because we know it is better to be over budgeted than under.
We theoretically already know how much committees over budget and yet we
still over budget, this bill wont change that. It just moves money faster.
Paul
Ted Hilk wrote:
> Agreed -- when planning budgets in subsequent years, it is important
> to know what the original line item was, in addition to the
> reallocated one. Otherwise, the bill risks deceiving later Senate
> members.
>
> The bill should include specific language stipulating that the
> original line item remain on record in the budget for that year. If
> the bill's purpose is to simply recycle leftover money (which I wholly
> support), rather than forcing committees to progressively decrease
> their spending (which I emphatically do not, at least not on such a
> broad level), then I see no reason why such language should not be
> included. Why is it not?
>
> Ted
>
> P.S. Meant to hit 'reply to all' -- sorry if Maggie got two copies of
> this.
>
> On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 10:28 PM, Maggie Delano <maggied@mit.edu
> <mailto:maggied@mit.edu>> wrote:
>
> To address Alex's second point: I think it would be useful to see
> how much money a committee actually spent /along with/ what they
> were allocated. I don't think this will explicitly set a precedent
> for lower budgets, as we would still like to overallocate slightly
> on line items.
>
> -Maggie
>
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 10:25 PM, Alexandra Jordan
> <amjordan@mit.edu <mailto:amjordan@mit.edu>> wrote:
>
> Response to Paul:
>
> I agree that committees could find that a project can't be
> implemented, or that they no longer want to implement it, but
> since Senate budgeted money for said project, Senate should be
> informed and able to approve the reallocation of these funds.
> I don't want to take the right of Committee Chairs to use
> their discretion on projects, but rather I don't want to
> formally exclude Senate from deciding to change project funding.
>
> I'm not worried about the Treasurer unilaterally changing
> committee budgets mid-semester. I'm worried about putting a
> piece of legislation in place that practically guarantees that
> next year's chairs will have a precedent of lower budgets and
> will thus have to work much harder to ask for increased
> allocations. As I said before, Senate usually relies on
> precedent when approving allocations, so this would almost
> ensure a more difficult budget approval for many committees.
>
> Alex
>
>
>
> On Oct 19, 2009, at 10:17 PM, Paul Youchak wrote:
>
> I am responding to both Alex and Ted here...
>
> Committees may fund for a project and later find out is is
> either not possible or not desirable. Committees may
> think a project is a good idea but they will not really
> know, for whatever reason, that their idea should be
> implemented until they have tried. Committee's can make
> mistakes about what they want to do in the upcoming
> semester, especially since they are budgeted for so far in
> advance. If a committee cannot fulfill their obligation
> for the project then it is acceptable to remove the line.
> In my mind there are not separate issues.
>
> Having the reallocation of money be reversible makes no
> sense. The committee leader should not release the money
> unless they are 100% sure they wont need it. Secondly, if
> they find they have changed their mind it is always
> possible to ask for more money from discretionary. I
> don't think this will ever happen, so its not a very
> strong objection to the bill.
>
> The treasurer does by no means have the right to reduce a
> committees budget mid semester. If you are afraid of the
> committee being overruled by the committee chair then we
> can say the committee must unanimously (2/3, whatever)
> approve of the reallocation of funds. I however, think
> you are more concerned with the power in the treasurer.
> Remember, the Senate still has ultimate control because
> we do now have the right reverse his decision.
>
> Note, this bill will only last for this year unless we
> decide to renew it.
>
> Paul
>
>
>
> Ted Hilk wrote:
>
>
> That the Treasurer may reallocate funds from one
> part of the UA
> budget to the pool of funds that
> the Finance Board helps allocate to student groups
> for the next
> funding period;
>
>
> Regarding this pool: if the applicable committee chair
> later decides that this decision was made in error, is
> there any way for it to be reversed? Given that the
> money is allocated to a "pool of funds" rather than
> directly to the groups (hence implying some time delay
> before the money is actually out of UA's control),
> shouldn't such reversal be an option? If not, why not?
>
> That such reallocations must be approved by the
> committee chair or
> other officer in charge of the
> budget area losing said funds;
>
>
> Would it be possible to clarify, in the text of the
> bill, which specific positions are allowed to do this
> for which specific budget areas? I feel that the
> existing wording is a bit vague, given the powers
> involved.
>
> That the Senate, Finance Board, and [a]affected
> Chair must be
> informed of each such reallocation;
>
>
> Is there a reason why this line does not say "by the
> next meeting of the Senate"? While understanding the
> importance of delegation, I believe that timely
> information is necessary to allow for review of the
> decisions.
>
> Finally, I would like to note that I'm not by any
> means opposed to the principle of this bill. I agree
> that leftover money from our operations should go to
> student groups. I just want to make sure that Senate
> exercises caution in doing so, and more time for
> discussion was necessary to meet this aim.
>
> Thank you,
> Ted Hilk
> EC Senator
>
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 9:18 PM, Alex Dehnert
> <adehnert@mit.edu <mailto:adehnert@mit.edu>
> <mailto:adehnert@mit.edu <mailto:adehnert@mit.edu>>>
> wrote:
>
> Since we postponed this a week...
>
> If you have questions: Please ask them explicitly.
> Otherwise, no
> guarantee that you'll get an answer... I'm not psychic.
>
> I'll probably put together some more information
> shortly, but I
> encourage some discussion to happen here besides that.
>
> ~~Alex
>
>
> Alex Dehnert wrote:
>
> I wrote a bill which is available at
>
> http://web.mit.edu/ua/senate/UAS41/2/moving-money/moving-money.pdf.
>
> The bill authorizes the treasurer to:
> * reallocate funds from a committee to the pool
> of funds that
> the Finance Board helps allocate to student
> groups for the
> next funding period; and
> * Requires that such reallocations be approved
> by the
> committee chair losing said funds; and
> * That the Senate, Finance Board, and affected
> Chair must be
> informed of each such reallocation; and
> * That such authorization shall expire at the
> end of the
> 2009–2010 fiscal year unless renewed by Senate.
>
> I'm happy to answer any questions that you have.
> It would be
> awesome if we can get most questions out
> *before* Senate, so
> that Senate can be short without being much less
> effective.
>
> ~~Alex
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Alexandra Jordan
>
> MIT 2011
> Earth, Atmospheric, and Planetary Science
> Political Science
>
> amjordan@mit.edu <mailto:amjordan@mit.edu>
> 916.813.7740
>
>
>
>
>
>
