By Jaime Hoerbelt
A Student Government Association proposal on appropriations funding Tuesday sparked a debate on SGA’s authority to spend money. A proposal was made to add a number of restrictions for appropriations funding to the SGA policy series. It indicated that SGA should not fund for more than four executive board members to attend conferences or for personalized clothing, table drapes and, among other things, decorations for clubs. Most of the issues dealt with inventory, the proposal is trying to make it easier for SGA to assure appropriated funds are being spent properly and limit the overall spending of clubs.
When it came to the issue of decorations, many senators were concerned about SGA. Opinions of whether SGA should be held to the same standards and rules as the clubs varied greatly around the table. Some SGA members were of the firm perspective that SGA was above the regulations it sets for clubs, others had the opposite point of view that SGA should be held to the same standards as regular clubs. Jared Berry, the Rules Committee Chairman and co-author of the proposal, replied to objections, “What I will say on that matter is SGA is a government.”
SGA President Brent Weitzberg did not agree that the organization should be held to a different standard than any other organization on campus. “Honestly, I like a lot of this proposal, except for section 21[regarding decorations]. As far as us being above the law, I don’t really agree with that,” Weitzberg said. “I think that I’m not the type of person that personally likes double standards, and through this [proposal] I feel that double standards could definitely occur by us being able to have decorations, but then clubs not being able to support themselves with decorations. I think that’s unfair.”
“We’re technically not a club. We’re an overseeing organization,” Weitzberg added. “Should we be held to a higher standard? I don’t think so. I feel like there should be a mutual respect between the clubs and the SGA itself.”
SGA currently uses its funds to decorate its office and other incidental expenses of that nature. The pool of money that the SGA draws from for decorations and such is the same pool that is distributed to clubs. Many senators agreed that SGA should fundraise separately to pay for minor expenditures.
The appropriations chairwoman and co-author of the proposed legislation, Kayleigh Tompkins, said, “Generally, [decorations have] been paid for by SGA, because we are not subject to the same rules as clubs, because we are the umbrella organization. That’s something that will be debated, and we have been debating forever.” Tompkins went on to say, “Generally, the amounts [of money spent] aren’t great enough to, in my opinion, change the rules, but I think that it depends on your interpretation of our constitution.”
“Basically, the SGA budget is completely separate from club budget. And we have budget lines all broken down, depending on committees and things like that. So basically, it’s structured completely differently from clubs,” Tompkins added.
The argument in favor of SGA spending relied on the governmental organization as a separate and different entity than any other campus organization, which would thereby not be subject to the same rules. “We have different purposes than a club, pretty much that’s just where I stand,” Tompkins said.
The proposal came in lieu of a perceived trend of reckless spending and lack of reusing materials by clubs. “We just feel that a lot of clubs haven’t reused, they’ve been buying new things for every different event,” Tomkins said. “And that’s where the cost basically gets too great, and all of these rules stem from the fact that we don’t have enough funds to fund the amount of clubs that we have.”
Many SGA senators feel their spending is already sufficiently regulated. “I personally feel that our comptroller is here solely to watch all of the paperwork that comes though any of the advisement centers, including our own, and I know that she would definitely, if she saw something that was really beyond the rules, would not sign it, even if it was for SGA,” Tompkins said.
Peter DiSilvio, the Club Affairs chairman, had a slightly different opinion of where SGA stands. DiSilvio held that as a governing body, the organization should be held to stricter standards than the clubs that they oversee. “It’s just that student government needs to be held, in my opinion, to a higher standard,” DiSilvio said. “There needs to be the ability to buy things for this office. Because, if we raise money, by rights it should go to clubs. I would much rather change the rules so that clubs can buy supplies for their offices or decorations for their offices, than take the power away from them.”
In the end, the proposal passed in its entirety.