[80] in UA Senate
Re: UA budgeting principles
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Daniel Hawkins)
Tue Oct 13 23:58:22 2009
Reply-To: hwkns@MIT.EDU
In-Reply-To: <4AD5432D.5070502@mit.edu>
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 23:57:38 -0400
From: Daniel Hawkins <hwkns@MIT.EDU>
To: "Alex Dehnert (UA Treasurer)" <ua-treasurer@mit.edu>
Cc: ua-senate@mit.edu, ua-discuss@mit.edu
--0015174766d6e7cb4f0475dd29b1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
I agree with most of this, but I don't think it's that clear-cut. For
example, PLUS is not something the UA ever intended to keep funding year by
year; we wanted to get it off the ground and then hand it off to SAO. That
doesn't mean that PLUS is more useful than other student groups'
initiatives, but it represents a goal to start new things that benefit
undergrads. I believe that goal is worthwhile, as long as we don't end up
perpetually funding things that aren't really our place to fund - maybe we
should come up with a funding cutoff time frame of two or three years for
such things?
-hwkns
On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 11:19 PM, Alex Dehnert (UA Treasurer) <
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
>
> Catherine Olsson wrote:
>
>> Ted Hilk wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> 5. The UA operating budget should be approved as it stands. Yes, I am
>>> concerned that we are spending so much money on PLUS and Athletics
>>> Weekend, but think that should be a target for future budgets, not the
>>> current budget. I am glad that there are concrete plans to hand
>>> off PLUS
>>> next year, and would like to see this promise held to. Thus I am
>>> considering authoring a bill requiring the management of PLUS to be
>>> handed over by next year as promised - is there support among other
>>> senators?
>>>
>>> Why delay fixing these issues, and for how long? T-shirts for Athletics
>>> in particular struck me as quite expensive relative to their potential
>>> benefit to the student body, and I would like to hear more about this. A
>>> number of my constituents have already approached me about fiscal
>>> responsibility, and I feel that more attention should be given to the issue.
>>>
>>
>> In terms of PLUS, I don't see it as a delay in fixing the issue. The
>> handoff is underway. I want to make sure it really happens as we are
>> promised it will. (Jed's comments just now are reassuring).
>>
>> In terms of Athletics weekend, I'm suggesting we delay because we need to
>> analyze the importance of Athletics Weekend, not cut it off as a knee-jerk
>> reaction or haphazardly try to make a move at tonight's meeting with no
>> overarching philosophy. The t-shirts are a large part of what get people to
>> come out to Athletics Weekend - without them, our funding would be *totally*
>> wasted. But, the question remains, is the event still worthwhile if we have
>> to provide such strong incentives for attendance? I think possibly, but I'm
>> not sure. Hence I don't feel comfortable acting *now*, and would rather
>> discuss the issue of our spending as a whole at a more leisurely pace.
>>
>> If someone could provide a well thought-out plan for how to cut Athletics
>> Weekend funding for this year, and present it at this meeting, I would
>> consider supporting it, but I haven't seen any, and can't think of any right
>> now.
>>
>> - Catherine
>>
>
>
--0015174766d6e7cb4f0475dd29b1
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I agree with most of this, but I don't think it's that clear-cut.=
=A0 For example, PLUS is not something the UA ever intended to keep funding=
year by year; we wanted to get it off the ground and then hand it off to S=
AO.=A0 That doesn't mean that PLUS is more useful than other student gr=
oups' initiatives, but it represents a goal to start new things that be=
nefit undergrads.=A0 I believe that goal is worthwhile, as long as we don&#=
39;t end up perpetually funding things that aren't really our place to =
fund - maybe we should come up with a funding cutoff time frame of two or t=
hree years for such things?<br>
<br>-hwkns<br><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 11:19 =
PM, Alex Dehnert (UA Treasurer) <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a href=3D"mailto:ua-=
treasurer@mit.edu">ua-treasurer@mit.edu</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquot=
e class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204);=
margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
As several people have pointed out, the UA spends quite a bit of money on e=
vents (about a third of last semester's budget) and focused projects (l=
ike PLUS --- about a tenth of last semester's UA budget). As Andrew Luk=
mann pointed out last week, committees are spending almost twice as much in=
Fall 2009's budget as in Spring 2007's budget.<br>
<br>
Unfortunately, it is now a little bit late to make major changes to the Fal=
l 2009 budget. Last week's meeting was intended to allow that, and we s=
pent 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 a=
mend that...)<br>
<br>
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=
.<br>
<br>
In some sense, there are (at least) two options for guiding principles to t=
ake in producing the budget:<br>
(1) Many of the UA-run events are more useful than the events and programmi=
ng (Finboard-funded) student groups would spend the money on<br>
(2) Alternatively, that events and programs such as Athletics Weekend or PL=
US aren't worth taking the money away from those student groups<br>
<br>
We've recently been defaulting to the former guiding principle. However=
, I would encourage the Senate to seriously consider which is preferable an=
d pass appropriate legislation indicating a preference.<br>
<br>
I would be *thrilled* to have such guidance, and would happily incorporate =
it into next semester's budget. (I warn you, however, that committee ch=
airs will probably be asked to begin budgeting in about two weeks.)<br>
<br>
Thanks,<br>
Alex Dehnert<br>
UA Treasurer<br>
<br>
Catherine Olsson 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;">
Ted Hilk 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;">
<br>
=A0 =A05. The UA operating budget should be approved as it stands. Yes, I =
am<br>
=A0 =A0concerned that we are spending so much money on PLUS and Athletics<=
br>
=A0 =A0Weekend, but think that should be a target for future budgets, not =
the<br>
=A0 =A0current budget. I am glad that there are concrete plans to hand<br>
=A0 =A0off PLUS<br>
=A0 =A0next year, and would like to see this promise held to. Thus I am<br=
>
=A0 =A0considering authoring a bill requiring the management of PLUS to be=
<br>
=A0 =A0handed over by next year as promised - is there support among other=
<br>
=A0 =A0senators?<br>
<br>
=A0Why delay fixing these issues, and for how long? =A0T-shirts for Athleti=
cs in particular struck me as quite expensive relative to their potential b=
enefit to the student body, and I would like to hear more about this. =A0A =
number of my constituents have already approached me about fiscal responsib=
ility, and I feel that more attention should be given to the issue.<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
In terms of PLUS, I don't see it as a delay in fixing the issue. The ha=
ndoff is underway. I want to make sure it really happens as we are promised=
it will. (Jed's comments just now are reassuring).<br>
<br>
In terms of Athletics weekend, I'm suggesting we delay because we need =
to analyze the importance of Athletics Weekend, not cut it off as a knee-je=
rk reaction or haphazardly try to make a move at tonight's meeting with=
no overarching philosophy. The t-shirts are a large part of what get peopl=
e to come out to Athletics Weekend - without them, our funding would be *to=
tally* wasted. But, the question remains, is the event still worthwhile if =
we have to provide such strong incentives for attendance? I think possibly,=
but I'm not sure. Hence I don't feel comfortable acting *now*, and=
would rather discuss the issue of our spending as a whole at a more leisur=
ely pace.<br>
<br>
If someone could provide a well thought-out plan for how to cut Athletics W=
eekend funding for this year, and present it at this meeting, I would consi=
der supporting it, but I haven't seen any, and can't think of any r=
ight now.<br>
<br>
- Catherine<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
</blockquote></div><br>
--0015174766d6e7cb4f0475dd29b1--
