Comments on: GUSA Senate approves long-anticipated GUSA Fund, giving clubs a way to circumnavigate SAC

By: Vox Populi » Prefrosh Preview: On-campus news you can use

Vox Populi » Prefrosh Preview: On-campus news you can use — Sat, 06 Aug 2011 04:40:06 +0000

[...] boards (mainly SAC) over their bureaucratic processes and lack of accountable. GUSA responded by creating the GUSA Fund as a way for groups to circumvent their oppressive advisory [...]

By: Vox Populi » Vox’s guide to GUSA’s club funding overhaul

Vox Populi » Vox’s guide to GUSA’s club funding overhaul — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 20:08:00 +0000

[...] GUSA’s efforts to revamp club funding are twofold: there’s the legislation to create the GUSA Fund using $30,000 of the $51,412 that the six different funding boards have in their reserves, which [...]

By: Vox Populi » Funding board leaders roundly reject GUSA Fund

Vox Populi » Funding board leaders roundly reject GUSA Fund — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 02:09:08 +0000

[...] from all six advisory boards voted against creating the GUSA Fund at a Funding Board meeting today, but the Finance and Appropriations Committee will still be [...]

By: student leader

student leader — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 23:37:01 +0000

Way to go GUSA! Step by step, we’re going to solve the student activities funding problem. This is the first part of a long-term solution where clubs can be flexible, nimble, creative in putting on activities (the purpose of clubs in the first place) and not in jumping through hoops and playing Simon Says to get a few pizzas.

By: J. Stuef

J. Stuef — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 23:07:02 +0000

Gotcha.

Printed satirical newsletter? What are you talking about? Why would someone want to get that sort of thing funded?

By: Matt

Matt — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 21:39:15 +0000

On my reading, the GUSA Fund can give money to individuals with good ideas, but with the proviso that it is under the aegis of GUSA. This is because GUSA can give money for individual projects.

All events or groups on campus must follow the ‘Access to Benefits’ policy in order to get money. See here: http://studentaffairs.georgetown.edu/policies.html#AccesstoBenefits

GUSA must follow A2B, but doesn’t need approval from anyone in advance. Ditto with some other groups like the Lecture Fund, or the Hoya & the Voice itself (it doesn’t have to run each article by the Media Board — but it can’t sell ads to condom manufacturers or abortion clinics).

Groups under SAC, however, must receive approval for every event under the current policy SAC pursues. So even if they get GUSA money, they still need to run the events by SAC to get approval. I think it’s stupid and inefficient, personally, as do most people and clubs, I’m sure. But that’s the current situation.

So, GUSA can give money to SAC clubs (who would still need to get SAC approval) as well as individuals or non-SAC groups for initiatives or events (who do not need to get SAC approval). In giving money to unofficial groups or persons, it still must follow the A2B policy. So the GUSA Fund can’t give money to Hoyas for Choice, for example.

As for ReImagine Georgetown — it’s funded by the Corp, which is an independent corporation unaffiliated with Georgetown. It’s the same as me handing out money — I can do whatever the fuck I please with my money.

So, presuming that it doesn’t violate A2B, I could feasibly see the GUSA Fund being able to give money to an individual or individuals to finance a printed satirical newsletter (just as one example, cough cough). I don’t see how it’s any different from GUSA funding the “Georgetown Forever” movie several years ago. As long as it states it’s being sponsored by GUSA.

By: J. Stuef

J. Stuef — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 21:17:10 +0000

I agree with GU and am really disappointed that this does not have enough teeth. I was optimistic about this and would like an explanation on why GUSA can only give money to SAC clubs. Why can Reimagine Georgetown do that and not the GUSA Fund? This seems more like a way for GUSA to try to take some power away from SAC rather than a new method to fundamentally change the funding process for the better.

By: To GU:

To GU: — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 21:13:02 +0000

You’re misreading the article.

Clubs don’t have to go to SAC and GUSA to get funds. Clubs have the ABILITY to go to SAC -OR- GUSA to get funds.

This isn’t taking a single cent away from SAC’s allocation; this is all funds that would otherwise go unused.

All this GUSA Fund is doing is providing a supplementary option for clubs. We hope it will be more transparent, accountable and efficient. Clubs can submit funding requests on a Friday, get heard and approved on Saturday and have the funds in their account Monday morning.

Clubs are under no obligation to come to GUSA. But with the simplified, streamlined procedures, I don’t see why they wouldn’t want to.

By: Common Sense

Common Sense — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 21:06:10 +0000

While some clubs are certainly disorganized, SAC arbitrarily enforces its own rules to the point where clubs don’t know what to do. Say a well organized club is approached by a respectable speaker at the last minute. Normally, SAC won’t fund or even APPROVE this event. GUSA is hopefully the first step towards the systematic reform of SAC

By: GU

GU — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 20:46:26 +0000

This approach will just make it more difficult for clubs to get funding. Un-organized clubs complain about SAC funding and that they don’t have access to money on a whim…they will stay disorganized and will still struggle getting approval for things. Now clubs will not only have to go to SAC but ALSO GUSA? Let’s not start pretending like GUSA is effective…or should be setting an example for anyone.