Student Assembly Finance Commission
April 4, 2011
5:00 p.m. — 6:00 p.m.
B12 Day Hall

I. Call to Order

The Meeting was called to order at 5:00 p.m.

II. Roll Call

Commissioners

Calvin Baldwin, Edward Barton, Charlie Feng, Jacob Frank, Matthew Gruber, Erich Heintzen, Catherine Kim, Charles Kim, David Kim, Rahul Kishore, Lawrence Kogos, Stephanie Lau, Chris Lee, Lauren Rosenblum, Robin Shapiro, Diana Simpson, Kevin Song, Holden Steinhauer, Margaret Szerbicki, Yong Kai Tan, Andrew Verri and Jessica Zhao.

III. Business of the Day

Vote on guideline changes/ Ad-hoc recommendations update/ Recruitment

L. Rosenblum said that the purpose of this meeting is to discuss and vote on guideline changes, give an update on the ad-hoc committee recommendations which will soon be heard by the Student Assembly, and then talk about the upcoming recruitment. She referred to the guidelines changes she wrote on the board, which are summarized as follows:

Guideline Changes

1. Local event: room reservation or proof that venue fees are necessary to reserve a room.
2. Durable goods: new bullet point to make the requirement for an inventory report more obvious.
3. Travel events: groups need to give documentation confirming the location of where an event will occur (if not included in the Proof of Travel Event documentation).
4. Special Projects: groups who received no funding in any categories other than Administrative Expenses or received $0 are eligible to apply for one special projects funding.
5. Travel Event: the $1500 cap on international travel does not affect groups traveling within 400 miles of Ithaca, NY.
6. Durable Goods: clarify in the guidelines that storage must be on campus.

L. Rosenblum asked if anyone had any problems or questions with the changes. She did not think that the change about international travel was necessary.

K. Song added that this issue only affected two groups this year that applied for funding to go to Canada.

M. Gruber said that as a member of a group that was affected, he felt that this change was necessary. He questioned the purpose of the international cap.

L. Rosenblum said that the cap was put in place to cut down on the amount of money being spent for sending students away from campus.

D. Wong added that it would also help prevent spending a significant amount of money on only a few individuals.

M. Gruber said that if his group had known that the travel funding to Canada was limited, they would have applied for travel funding elsewhere.

L. Rosenblum asked the commissioners where the line should be drawn for the international travel cap. She said that a 400-mile radius would cover the major cities in eastern Canada.

R. Kishore thought that excessive spending on travel was a big issue for the SAFC. He thought the commission should keep the rule as it is, rather than just add another point that would encourage more travel.

K. Song brought up the point, however, why should a group going to California should be full funded, when travel to Canada, which is less expensive, should be limited. He introduced Roneal Desai ‘13, the At-large Minority Representative to the Student Assembly, who joined the commission at the meeting.

R. Desai brought up the point that if a group is going to a closer location, such as New York City, they more likely they are to bring more students. The more miles traveled, the less students are likely to come and thus fewer individuals would benefit from funding. He added that the 400-mile mark was logical, since the distance is similar to Washington, D.C., which is a popular request for travel funding.

H. Steinhauer agreed that 400-miles made sense. It encompasses the major cities of Toronto and Montreal.

R. Kishore thought that $1500 is enough to pay for many students to go to Montreal or Toronto. Loosening this restriction would take away funding for other organizations, and this change applied to so few groups, any way.

L. Rosenblum asked to commission to move on towards voting on the guidelines changes.

Guideline Changes 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6:
In favor - 21 Opposed - 0 Abstain - 0

Guidelines Change 5:
In favor - 14 Opposed - 6 Abstain - 1

All guideline changes were passed.

L. Rosenblum asked commissioners to go to the Student Assembly meeting on Thursday to vocalize their thoughts on the ad-hoc committee recommendations. She went over the recommendations, which include the following:

Ad-Hoc Committee Recommendations

1. No mid-year reversions.
Benefits: would make things easier for the office. Negatives: would initially lower caps, because funds would not revert in the middle of the semester.

2. Year-long budgets instead of semester budgets.
Benefits: helps groups who request more funds in the spring when caps have been historically lower; potential for commissioners to have to review only one group application instead of two. Negatives: harder for co-chairs to decide on caps with nothing to model allocations out of.

3. Two hearings in the spring semester.
Benefits: more groups are likely to get funding; potentially cuts down on the number of fall hearings. Negatives: greater time needed by the SAFC.

4. Commissioners review budgets and notify groups about initial allocations before hearing. Groups are allowed to turn in extra documentation at hearings.
Benefits: at end of hearings, caps/cuts email goes out with the real allocation; groups that are fully funded do not need to go through the hassle of a hearing; gives a groups a second chance to submit their allocation. Negatives: Budget reviewing time increases for commissioners; caps are lower because more groups get funding; groups may become confused with the new process.

5. No more co-organized events.
Benefits: easier for they office since they do not have to open more accounts; fewer budgets and hearings for the SAFC. Negatives: might increase the risk that groups will try to double-dip by applying for the same thing.

L. Rosenblum said that spring funding might be able to accommodate groups that want to do something before budgets are due in fall. One difficulty is that it would be very difficult to estimate year long caps.

J. Zhao said that many groups need the higher co-orgs caps in order to get adequate funding for their event. Without it, they would only be able to get 2/3 of what they need for that auditorium.

D. Wong agreed that co-orgs have large scale events, which usually operate to allow groups to get more funding.

R. Desai said that a lot of groups hold large events without co-orgs. He found no reason these organizations would not be able to accomplish this without a co-org budget.

K. Song said that these ad-hoc committee recommendations will be discussed at the Student Assembly meeting on Thursday.

L. Rosenblum said that the second info session on Thursday is at the exact same time as the ad-hoc/ SA meeting.

K. Song said that for Thursday, 5 commissioners should go to the recruitment info session, and as many commissioners as possible should go the SA meeting to support the opinion of the SAFC.

R. Kishore reiterated the purpose of the information sessions, which are to explain to potential new commissioners what the SAFC is, and give a feel of what it is like being on the commission. It also allows commissioners to meet with applicants, and make recommendations. He also explained the new points system that was discussed at last week’s meeting.

K. Jenkins said that she would send out a Google doc for everyone to sign up for either the info session or SA meeting on Thursday.

IV. Meeting was adjourned at 5:45pm.

Respectfully Submitted,
Valerie Pocus
SAFC Clerk, Office of the Assemblies