In these tough economic times, every student and organization is scrambling to stretch a buck and stay afloat.
And while we understand that there won’t always be room in the budget for expansion, a little fiscal responsibility from the powers that be at the Student Association is all we ask for.
In reviewing the cuts to this year’s budget, an extra $55,000 turned up from a savings account that should have been reviewed by the director of finance much earlier in the process. While the Student Association had been quick to administer cuts to organizations, it is disheartening to find that those controlling the budget couldn’t get it right in the process of identifying available funds.
In their rush to bring down the gavel on budget cuts, they may have missed their own exclusionary clause outlining the eligibility of a campus club. Such is the case with State Singers.
Even if State Singers implements an exclusionary policy, why is this an issue now, after years of existence? Why single out music clubs and strike fear into campus clubs over the availability of funding now after years of receiving funding?
S.A. officials need to take care to avoid sloppy mistakes. They have funded organizations like State Singers for years; they should know how they are structured. They should know if they have a cap on student involvement, or if any policies are against the S.A. constitution.
We understand that balancing a budget can be difficult. But recklessly not paying attention to over $50,000 in savings, or to how a club is truly run? That is just sloppy.