The Executive Slate would like to announce that it will not be forming an Ad-Hoc Committee on Funding, as had originally been planned in the fall.

After holding several publicized RSO forums (see past post), the Slate and ORCSA experienced lackluster attendance and input. Without the support and input from RSOs, the proposed reevaluation of the current funding model could not proceed as planned.

Instead, the Executive Slate will be amending the SG By-Laws to make Annual Allocations a better process. The first by-law change will mandate that of the eight elected students for the committee, four must be Voting Members of the Assembly and four must NOT be Voting Members of the Assembly. This change will put more Non-SG members on the committee and thus increase student input into the process.

The second By-Law change would create a third type of Annual Allocation meeting, called a hearing. Hearings, which would happen after the normal, mandatory Information Sessions but before the actual Committee Meetings, would be an opportunity for RSOs to sign up and advocate for their budgets in front of members of the Annual Allocations Committee. These will not be mandatory but will give groups a chance to speak about their budgets to the committee if desired. These will take place before the submission deadline, thus allowing RSOs a chance to modify their budgets at the Annual Allocations suggestion.  Read the by-law changes here.

We are also commissioning Eckhert Consulting to evaluate the past three to five years of student activities data to see if we can spot an emerging trend which would help us better advocate for changes in the funding model or the Student Activities Fee (Currently: $65/quarter for Undergrads and $45/quarter for Grads).

Finally I’d like to point out that just because the Executive Slate failed to build support and interest for this project does not mean any Assembly Member or Student couldn’t put together a proposal for a test project which would create a new, separate funding body. This project would have to be rigorously examined by the Slate, ORCSA, and the Assembly. Given the SG/ORCSA interest in Ad Hoc, I’m sure these organizations would be very willing to work with the interested parties to make something work.

The first step would be to talk to many of a certain category or type of RSO about what this body would look like, how it would allocate funding, its relationship to the central SGFC/AnnAl fund, and what restrictions it would place on groups which apply.

Another avenue would be for the group to instead write a proposal for the Uncommon Fund and ask the committee give funds so it can allocate funds in a new and creative way.

Comment here or send an email to me if you’re interested in either of these options (or on being on Annual Allocations). The Executive Slate wants to see change that makes life easier and better for RSOs but, unfortunately, we just can’t be the ones driving that change this time around given what happened in the fall.

-Scott