Issue date: 9/7/07 Section: Opinion

Section 2 part 13 of the SGA budgeting guidelines reads quite simply, "No money will be allotted for t-shirts or other articles of clothing." A simple enough guideline, but during budgeting cycles it finds itself to be a burden for numerous organizations as they struggle to find a way to both advertise their organization effectively and to build cohesion. These organizations, or at least the clever ones, often get around this rule by running "fund raisers." The current SGA guidelines for budgeting do allow for the SGA to allocate funds drawn from the student activities fee towards general fundraising. The money raised is not held to the standards of the SGA budgeting guidelines, in effect, money is created that is removed from the oversight of the SGA. Never mind the fact these organizations often request $1,000 just to raise $500 so that they can buy clothing; never mind the fact that these organizations then need to spend countless hours not on the original purpose of their RSO but rather under the guise of fundraising; never mind that these RSOs year after year struggle to find a way to wash the "fundraising" money allocated to them. Little facts, such as these do not matter to our governing organization who found it fit to consider themselves above their own guidelines and purchase personalized apparel of their own. I don't want to accuse the SGA of breaking their own rules, but rather, underhandedly using their discretionary fund to avoid the hassle of running their own "fundraiser." Make no mistake about it, the money used to purchase the SGA clothing was the same money that other clubs request when they too would like to build cohesion and advertise their own organizations. To make matters worse, they found it fitting to parade their newly bought clothing in front of every other RSO during the club fair showing that they not only write the rules, but are above them. Why is it that these people "elected" to represent and serve the student body and RSOs cannot follow their own rules, and prefer to use an account that they created, that they allocate to and that they oversee to circumvent the harsh realities that every other RSO on this campus faces. The fact of the matter is that the money raised by the SGA is called the "Student Activities Fee" and the current set of budgeting guidelines, along with the current set of bylaws, do nothing but create bureaucracy and red tape that RSOs either find themselves drowning in or spending time to find the way to circumvent. The SGA's purpose is described in their own constitution as being "The purpose of this organization shall be to promote the welfare of the full-time undergraduate students ("the Student Body") and the Stevens Institute of Technology ("the Institute") as a whole." This past week hours were spent debating the allocation of funds, which clearly support an organization on campus, over whether or not it conflicted with current bylaws; all the while the senators sat with their new personalized shirts on right in front of them. This sham must not be allowed to continue; our senators need to remember why it is that they are called senators. Not to represent their own self interests; not to find ways to deny funds to organizations that clearly work towards promoting student activities on campus; not to waste the time of their colleagues and other leaders to prove a fruitless point to no one but themselves. They are there to SERVE the RSOs and to oversee the allocation of funds to them, not to withhold money for personal purposes. We cannot allow our senators to continually misrepresent the interests of the student body while spending tens of thousands of dollars, raised through an activity fee, on matters not directly related to activities. If they find it appropriate to spend the students money on shirts for themselves why is it not fitting for other organizations to also spend money from the same source on the same purpose? Why is it that these "leaders" seem to be so detached from the plight of 40 or so RSOs that currently exist and continue to support what can only be described as red tape that inhibits the formation of further RSOs? It is my firm belief that the current set of guidelines along with the current bylaws are inadequate for current needs as demonstrated by the SGA themselves. Shame on the SGA for realizing this and rather than owning up to the errors in their own rules circumventing them. Finally, shame on them for allowing avarice and greed to get better of them.

Page 1 of 1

Article Tools