SA: Resolution 20

Habitat for Humanity

Whereas, the Appropriations Committee voted that the SAFC did not err in denying funding to Habitat for Humanity for the weekly caravan trips during the semester by a vote of 0–10–0, and the SAFC decision will stand. The committee felt that an appeal was not the appropriate method to address the SAFC application issues and that the group should apply for SAFC Special Projects instead;

The Appropriations Committee voted that the SAFC did not err in denying funding to Habitat for Humanity for the South Carolina trip by a vote of 0–11–0, and the SAFC decision will stand. The trip does not occur during the academic year and therefore may not be funded by the SAFC;

Students Acting for Gender Equality

Whereas, The Appropriations Committee voted that the SAFC did not err in denying funding to SAGE for the “Where is the line?” event by a vote of 0–11–0, and the SAFC decision will stand. The organization explicitly said that they made an error on the application and as a result the committee determined that the SAFC did not err;

The Appropriations Committee voted that the SAFC did err in denying funding to SAGE for the books by a vote of 9–2−0. The committee felt that funding these books does not duplicate functionality existent on campus already. Since the books will have a more regular function and the use of one library book is unreasonable for many people at once, the committee felt that the SAFC erred in its decision;

The Appropriations Committee voted that the SAFC did not err in denying funding to SAGE for the Trifold Display by a vote of 0–11–0, and the SAFC decision will stand. The organization failed to submit an inventory report form;

Cornell Mock Trial

Whereas, the Appropriations Committee voted that the SAFC erred in denying funding to Cornell Mock Trial by a vote of 10–0−1. The committee reviewed the document that was deemed inappropriate by the SAFC and concluded that it may be considered appropriate documentation. The committee recommends that the group provide documentation with more official markings on it in the future (e.g. the first page of the rulebook or the URL from which the documentation comes from);

Native American Students at Cornell

Whereas, the Appropriations Committee voted that the SAFC did not err in denying funding for Doreen Rickard’s engagement fee and associated expenses to Native American Students at Cornell by a vote of 3–6−1, and the SAFC decision will stand. The committee felt that the group had adequate time to secure a letter of intent from the speaker and, furthermore, by using non-electronic sources of document transmission, the group should have had the LOI by the time of the appeal;

The Appropriations Committee voted that the SAFC did not err in denying funding for the bowling event to Native American Students at Cornell by a vote of 0–11–0, and the SAFC decision will stand. The committee felt that the bowling event was a social event and since the SAFC does not fund for social events, the SAFC did not err;

CIPAC

Whereas, the Appropriations Committee voted that the SAFC erred in denying funding to CIPAC for their additional budget consisting of advertising costs by a vote of 10–0−0. The SAFC had initially lost track of this budget due to the fact that the system was not set up to deal with multiple budget submission but since both versions of the budget were approved on time by the president, treasurer, and advisor, the SAFC is required to review the additional budget;

Sailing Team

Whereas, the Appropriations Committee voted that the SAFC erred in denying funding to the Sailing Team by a vote of 11–0−0. The committee reviewed the document that was deemed inappropriate by the SAFC and concluded that it may be considered appropriate documentation. Committee members cited past precedent as well as proof from the organization website as reasons for why the documentation should be considered valid;

Be it therefore resolved that, the Assembly adopt the following recommendations of the Appropriations Committee:

• The SAFC did not err in denying funding to Habitat for Humanity for both the weekly caravan trips as well as the South Carolina trip during winter break;
• The SAFC did not err in denying funding to Students Acting for Gender Equality for the “Where is the line” event as well as for the trifold display for the Arts Quad display;
• The SAFC did err in denying funding to Students Acting for Gender Equality for the books and these books will not be considered a duplication of resources on campus;
• The SAFC did err in denying funding to Cornell Mock Trial and the documentation for the travel event shall be considered valid;
• The SAFC did not err in denying funding to Native American Students at Cornell for Doreen Rickard’s engagement fee and associated expenses as well as for the bowling event;
• The SAFC did err in denying funding to CIPAC and the additional budget will be considered and reviewed by the SAFC as soon as possible;
• The SAFC did err in denying funding to the Sailing Team and the documentation for the team schedule shall be considered valid;

Be it further resolved that, the SAFC shall only allocate money if all other funding criteria not considered by the Appropriations Committee are met, including funding caps or other guidelines issues.

Respectfully Submitted,

Adam Nicoletti ‘12
CALS Representative
Vice President of Finance

Copyright © 2005–2019, Cornell University.