University of California campuses are reviewing the latest draft
of the 2003 student fee policy which could implement significant
changes in the student government funding system.
The draft, sent out by the UC Office of the President, must be
returned with comments from all UC student governments by February
of next year.
One of the major changes in the draft is the elimination of the
distinction between independent and officially recognized student
groups on campus.
Undergraduate Students Association Council President David Dahle
said this basically means all groups will be eligible to apply for
funds regardless of their political or religious standpoints.
“This will open up a whole pot of USAC funds,” he
said.
Budget Review Director Justin Levi said during past years, few
student groups were able to obtain funds. So those that succeeded
received a relatively substantial amount of money.
“Given that more groups will be eligible to apply for
funding, essentially what will happen in the long run is that the
allocation will even out,” Levi said.
Levi also said the basic qualifications for groups to receive
funds will not change.
“They still have to go through the process and prove that
their programs benefit the university,” he said.
The draft elicited mixed responses by independent student groups
that would be affected by the potential change.
Erin Walsh, chapter chair of California Political Interest Group
and coordinator for its Water Watch Campaign, said the possible
source of funding would relieve the pressure of a pledge
system.
Since 1990, CalPIRG has been obtaining its funds through a
pledge system. For adequate funding, the organization needs to
secure the pledges of at least 15 percent of the student population
at UCLA. The cost to the student is $5 each quarter charged
directly to their BAR account.
“With this new system, CalPIRG can focus more on its
campaigns than on sustaining the number of pledges,” Walsh
said.
However, not all groups see the new funding system as
significant to their activities.
Bruin Democrats President Kristina Meshelski, a Daily Bruin
contributor, said the group has been very successful in its
fund-raising campaigns so the new source of funds would not
significantly alter their activities.
“(The activities) would just be nicer and on a bigger
scale,” she said.
The draft also limits the funds allocated to non-university
organizations. Funding would only cover their basic membership dues
in regional or national associations.
Dahle said this alteration would not allow student government to
arbitrarily allocate funds to organizations.
“We can’t give more money than needed for basic
membership dues to a particular group just because we like
it,” he stated.
Lastly, the draft prohibits non-governmental organizations from
using the referendum process as a source of funding.
According to Dahle, this would permit only student government
use of referendum to vote on establishing or increasing compulsory
campus-based student fees. No other organizations would be able to
establish such a system.
However, he said the draft is not “retroactive.” He
said the current wording of the draft is unclear and may be
interpreted as applying only to future cases. Therefore,
non-governmental organizations such as Campus Retention Committee,
Community Activities Committee and Student Initiated Outreach
Committee currently using the referendum process for funding might
not necessarily have to change.
“That’s one of the things that needs to be commented
on,” Dahle said.
Steve Klass, chair of the University of California Student
Association, said the draft has come a long way in recognizing the
educational values of political or other activities that have until
now been denied funding. This includes lobbying and general
advocacy activities by or under the auspices of the student
government.
However, Klass said UCSA objects to the elimination of the
referendum process as a source of funding by student groups, as
well as what it sees as an attempt to limit the power of student
government in the wording of the draft.
UCSA plays a significant role in the evaluation of the draft.
Each UCSA representative, namely the student governments’
external vice presidents, brings changes in the draft to the
attention of student government.
Since the UCOP places a lot of weight on the comments from the
dean of students, Klass said it is beneficial for the EVP to pass
on the council’s responses to the dean’s office, in
hopes that student input might be included in the draft
comments.
When the draft is turned in to the UCOP, the office will then
compile comments, evaluate and incorporate them into a new draft
that will be distributed for review. After this the UCOP will be
ready to pass the finalized version of the 2003 student fee
policy.