Monday, March 2, 2009
A Letter to Barry Belmont of START and His Response
Barry,
I think what you guys are trying to do is great. And I also think that your ideas are very good at a very basic level. I was glib and condescending in my response on the Sagebrush website, for that let me apologize. This is an absurdly long email, but I hope it helps convey my sincere hopes and concerns for your success.
I would love for you guys to succeed on a number of issues including getting rid of waste in ASUN, improving club funding models, making programming more cost effective and responsive to students, and many other things.
What I had hoped to convey through my post was that your platform appears to lack actionable ideas.
Even though you didn’t ask, I’m going to provide a critical analysis of your planks that interest me and make suggestion on how to improve both the message surrounding the plank and how to make the plank a idea that can be implemented.
All Voluntary Student Senate
This plank focuses on the senate only. There are 21 senators, each getting paid $401/semester. That is $8,421 per semester out of student fees this year of $1.3 million, or 1.3% of the student fees paid into the budget. All expenditures on the senate total $38,662 or 3% of the budget. The budget of the executive board is 7.2%, yet it is never mentioned in your platform. Why? The senate controls all monies spent in ASUN, including wages paid to executive officers of the Associated Students.
Your platform also says, “Unless a good deed is done voluntarily, it has no moral significance.” A consequence of this stance that START has been asked to address several times is what about students who cannot afford to work for ASUN? Only those who are rich enough to be able to afford to volunteer (for a good senator) 10-15 hours per week minimum therefore lack virtue? This corollary actually suggests perhaps senators should be paid even more, so all students who feel a desire to serve students can, regardless of particular economic situations. I would appreciate a response.
Your own figures indicate 43% of the budget of the Association is consumed by Professional Salaries. My calculation actually came out to 48% for this year, if all positions had been filled. Regent policy requires only that ASUN has a business manager. While I personally believe ASUN has grown beyond just a business manager, I do not think it should cost $625,000 per year to run ASUN before any students are even paid. While it is laudable you are aware of the Constitution provision forbidding disapproval of contracts and salaries, that does not preclude anyone, including the Senate, from working with Sandy, Student Services, or the Board of Regents on this issue. Why is it START is unwilling to address this issue? Do you not view it as wasteful? Do you view it as a necessity of running ASUN?
Another part of this issue is credit hour reimbursement. Do you believe, especially during a crisis, the University will give ASUN over $16,000? ASUN would have to pay for the waivers. The political reality is ASUN will have had its per credit fee grow by nearly 100% next year, when compared to four years ago. The University is unlikely to be receptive to ASUN seeking a $16,000 handout. Further, even if credit waivers were secured, by whatever means, it would have a detrimental effect on a student’s ability to receive financial aid. Are you aware of this consequence? If so, are you indifferent? If so, I refer you to my prior points on the equity of voluntary service.
One are I think it would be both prudent and fair to look at cutting costs would be the retreats and the banquets, but the retreats serve as valuable team building exercises, while the banquet is a way to congratulate and thank students for serving. Is it necessary, no. Does it serve a purpose, yes. You call it wasteful spending without addressing other issues related to the spending. Do you feel retreats and banquets serve no purpose? Or do you feel the same thing could be accomplished for free or at least substantially less money?
Improving Programs
You claim “[c]lubs are awarded money without scrutiny.” I agree. There are Constitutional reasons, however, that there are not discriminating rules. The government has not right to act as an arbiter with regards to this. And even if it tried, do you not see a situation arising where clubs are funded in an even more irresponsible way; clubs with friends in powerful position getting more money for instance. It is very easy also, to create standards but what right do you feel the government (remember the ASUN is a government no different that the US except in scope, scale and importance) has to decide, probably somewhat arbitrarily, who gets money?
Spending Student Money
Your claim that “[t]here is not an incentive to save money” is again correct. This is a perennial problem with government. There is some fascinating research on the subject, but I am honestly curious: how do you propose addressing it?
The idea of creating a merit based system is a good one. However, it already exists in law. The biggest problem with this is that ASUN lacks the infrastructure to generate the kind of reports that would make evaluating services possible. It could be created, but it would cost money and take time. Further, there seems to be a lack of interest on the part of the Director of ASUN to make it easier to review programs (especially a pet program like Campus Escort). By law, and I’m unsure of the citation—I’ll find it and let you know—programs must go through a review process to get continued funding. I believe the process operates over a period of two or three years.
What I would like to see in your platform are more details on how to create a review process given senators will have been office for about a month by the time the budget is created. Once the budget is created, programming starts pursuing contracts for events, money starts getting spent. Although the budget can always be amended, by the time the senate as the requisite knowledge to make an informed decision, it may be too late to make a change? What process or method does START propose to address this concern?
Then there is what I would refer to as empty rhetoric: OrgSync, additional advertising potential (review my comments on the Sagebrush website), moving Homecoming under the Department of programming, ASUN speakers, the ASUN wastes valuable time, and stop raising fees (my biggest question on this is: How?). I am also curious as to what rule set or method START envisions replacing Robert’s Rules?
I hope you take me sincerely when I say I think what you guys are trying to do is good, but there is a lot of stuff you don’t know that is going to stop you in your tracks when you try to get stuff done. I’ve been watching and participating in ASUN for four years; I’ve seen a lot of people with good ideas not get anywhere because they were unaware of the resistance they will encounter from with the ASUN establishment and the because they lacked a deep understanding of campus politics.
Shane Steinbauer
And the response
Hello Shane.
First of all, thank you for this response. It is very insightful. I apologize, but I fear my response might be as long as your concerns. Please bear with me.
All Voluntary Student Senate
This pillar of our platform was decided after numerous heated exchanges between the members. Many brought up the exact same points (only the rich can run...) and I can see and understand this position. However, as you mentioned a good senator should work say at least 10 hours a week. Well for the 16 weeks of the semester (let's call it 15 for the sake of argument) that totals 150 hours worked for $400. Or roughly a wage of $2.70 an hour. It can be said that our senators are working for peanuts already and with this budget crisis it seems more pressing than ever to save ever last penny. What better way to show that we (senators) stand with the students than in refusing our pay to help them just that little bit more. I agree, the amount is minuscule, but it is such a simple and powerful gesture towards those we serve that the START members agreed that refusing the pay or using it as a means to give money back to students was the best idea. Obviously it might be hard to achieve and we certainly couldn't (wouldn't) force other senators to refuse their pay, but the option for senators to refuse their pay should be on the table.
Or...and this was also part of the debate...we should pay the senators what a normal job would pay...that way it would be more of a real job and not just some hobby for some people. But from looking at the attendance records, legislation passed, and overall performance of previous senates, it does not appear that the senators even deserve to be paid that much. I'm sorry to be blunt, but in all honesty it doesn't appear that most of them have earned what a minimum wage job would pay. We in START didn't think that throwing more money at senate would solve this problem (it hasn't solved many other of their problems) so we once again leaned on the side of volunteerism.
Also, as you have seen, there is a conspicuous lack of mentioning professional salaries and the executive board. During winter break when we were going over all the budget numbers we saw that these two take up considerably more money and if anything should get docked it should be these. We were fully prepared to come out and say cutting pay to these people or passing resolutions saying we don't want to pay so-and-so anymore because they haven't lived up to their job title...basically everything you've mentioned. Before we solidified our position we talked to numerous senators, ASUN staff, Eli Reilly, and even Sandy herself...many meetings about many things to see what could possibly be done. In so many words we were told that it is practically impossible (as a senator) to cut the pay to anyone but the senate (possibly judicial...). Sandy said she didn't feel entirely comfortable about the idea of the senate evaluating professional salaries and that that was her job to do. Honest to goodness, we tried to see what could be done, but answers were hard in coming and when they came, they were generally "no, you cannot do that." So rather than make promises that we weren't entirely sure we could keep, we decided to stick with senators' salaries for now...and if the opportunity presented itself at a later time, reopen the idea of professional and executive board salaries. Certainly, no one can think that we would be unable to say that we wouldn't go that far...I mean we're cutting our own pay, what makes people think we wouldn't be afraid to cut theirs? In conclusion, there is no mention of it for the simple reason that when we were asking about this we were utterly stonewalled.
Credit Hours
This seems to be our most misunderstood stance...I think I may rework the wording on the website. We are not talking about monetary reimbursemtn in the amount equal to credit hours. For instance, three credit hours = $400 or something. No. What we had in mind is that on our transcripts a simple three simple elective credits (that don't affect the GPA...basically pass/fail) would be added for each semester worked. That way senators are reimbursed for their time with three extra credits..but not with money. It wouldn't cost anybody a thing...I mean besides someone going into our accounts and transferring three credits. This position was met by a compromise between the members (many disagreed with it), but we figured it was a form of reimbursement and could possibly pave the way to "failing" a bad senator. Right now senators get their $400 a semester regardless of how good they are. If, in the future, someone could possibly "fail" being a senator, we believed this would provide a strong incentive to do good.
Retreats
Many memebers, having attended banquets and retreats felt that they don't serve the purpose they were designed to do: namely, leadership building, frienship building, commradery, etc. This isn't based on studies of what other groups do when they go on retreats or what the effect of these are "supposed" to be, but rather on the personal opinions of the members who have attended them. That being the case, we also felt more prudence would be exhibited if the ASUN was granted money the same way other clubs were, by asking for club funding. If the ASUN thinks these banquets serve a purpose, let them convince the club commissioners the same way all other people asking for money do.
Improving programs
We understand that the senate has little power to affect club funding. This is good. We do not believe the senate should be deciding to get into the club funding business. You are absolutely right, the government has no right to arbitrarily assign value labels to certain things or to help their buddies out. We do not want this. Our stance in improving programs is meant to highlight its importance (so that others may make note of it on this campaign and for the year to come) and also the prod the club commissioners into fixing the muck they set for themselves.
If you do not mind, I will finish the rest of my response tomorrow, but right now I've got to finish up some homework. Thank you once again for being level-headed about this and responding in a reasonable manner. All too often I have been met with people slamming hands down and yelling "you know nothing!" ...It's depressing hearing all the bad things said about you for no other reason but that you're running. C'est la vie. So I just wanted to thank you for taking the time to respond to me, I'll finish this up as soon as I can tomorrow.
-Barry
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment