Activities budget: Newspaper stands return, $250k for club sports

This morning, GUSA’s Finance and Appropriations Committee released its student activities budget for the 2012 fiscal year. Clubs requested more than $1.6 million in funding and received $800,000, as per the plan established in last semester’s Student Activities Fee Endowment reform.

“Although we had more money to give out this year, we were faced with much larger funding requests than last year,” the report reads. “Student organizations realized that SAFE Reform meant more money was available, and they responded by requesting more money to meet the needs of their groups.”

The highlights of the budget include $14,000 for the oft-underfunded College Readership Program, which was suspended last semester, as well as $150,000 for the Center for Social Justice’s Advisory Board for Student Organizations. According to the report, Fin App allocated the money to restore CSJ ABSO’s reserves, expand ABSO groups, sponsor Alternative Spring Break trips, and purchase vans. $12,500 was allocated to CollegiateLink Software, a student organization management tool.

Despite not receiving its total request of $125,500, the Student Activities Commission saw its funding increase by the largest magnitude from the previous fiscal year — it received $90,000, more than triple the amount it received in 2011. (Earlier this week, SAC voted use its reserve money to cover a potential budget shortfall in the event that GUSA reduced its funding.) The report explained that the money will cover approximately 85 percent of funding requests — if the numbers include outside funding sources.

“Because of the very large requests from advisory boards this year, unfortunately we were not able to give anyone their full request. We are confident, however, that this drastic increase in SAC’s allocation will allow it to fund clubs at a much higher rate than past years,” the report reads.

The Advisory Board for Club Sports received $250,000, the largest share allocated from the budget. The money will be used to subsidize club sports teams and fees.

Groups that requested funding now have a week to appeal their amount of allocated fund. Then, Fin App will vote on the budget. If it passes out of the committee, the GUSA Senate will vote on the budget no sooner than a week later.

[Editor’s Note: Due to an error in the FinApp report, an earlier version of this post reported that SAC requested $225,500, not $125,500 — the actual amount requested.]

GUSA Fin App’s student activities budget

10 Comments on “Activities budget: Newspaper stands return, $250k for club sports

  1. I love when SAC, comprised of students who have never in their lives worked for one of Georgetown’s publications or the radio station or even GUTV, decides when a camera — a SPECIFIC ITEM — is or is not necessary. The Media Board is hard enough to convince that a specific upgrade is important, so when they finally come around, it’s just truly outstanding that SAC has provided that oh-so-necessary check on spending.

    SAC and GUSA always complain about their dissatisfaction with the student media…well maybe if SAC got out of the business of setting media policy, and instead left that to the people who pour countless hours into actually working on those projects, then journalism/media at Georgetown could actually flourish.

  2. @Hoya/Voice Fan (Alum)

    GUSA made this budget not SAC…I believe FinApp needed reasons to justify why everyone’s budget had to be cut. They received 1.6 million in requests for a 800k budget.

  3. Can anyone think of an student activities administrator or three whose salary would be better spent on actual student activities?

    Or is their input really all that valuable?

  4. SAC has no control over the budgets received by publications, or by sports, or by any community service activities. Those all have separate advisory boards (media board, club sports and APSO, respectively). GUSA allocates budgets to all of these advisory boards, of which SAC is simply one.

  5. @ Ben Sinister – Uhhhh, Bill McCoy?

    Also, Student Publications fall under Media Board, not SAC.

  6. Also I love that they included a cover page for a draft that has 5 total pages…sweet. Maybe they’ll set aside some budget $$$ to have a few copies professionally bound for posterity.

  7. “Furthermore, GUSA never demonstrated that the needs Georgetown’s clubs necessitated a fee increase. There are now legitimate questions as to whether GUSA, which appropriates the money from the fee, will allocate the influx of new funds according to students’ best interest. The organization of the referendum has not inspired confidence in GUSA senators’ ability to best represent the students who elected them.”
    -Georgetown Voice Editorial Board, 12/9/10

    The media was quite harsh in attacking SAFE Reform, suggesting there was no indication that student activities required such an increase in funds. Clearly it did. (I’m sure the Media Board, under which The Hoya and The Voice operate, was quite glad to receive the additional funds.) I hope our media doesn’t sell the creativity, ingenuity, and activism of Georgetown students so short in the future.

  8. I think it still is to be seen whether GUSA allocated the funds efficiently. A 300% increase to SAC has the potential to fund some great new student programs and events, but it also has the potential to be wasted by groups that are recklessly spending just because the money is there to spend.

    I don’t think the Hoya and the Voice were selling shot the “creativity, ingenuity, and activism of Georgetown students” as much as they were trying to make sure that they money was going towards these worthy goals instead of $65,000 worth of pizza parties…

  9. Pingback: Vox Populi » GUSA FinApp updates proposed budget

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>