SGB votes not to limit spending on programs

The Student Government Board voted to approve a modified version of a resolution to cap the… The Student Government Board voted to approve a modified version of a resolution to cap the funding of some organizations’ programs last night.

The most heavily debated clause of the resolution – which the board voted down – states that no organization may receive more than $5,000 per program.

The resolution was broken into seven parts, of which six were approved. The amended resolution that passed set limits for club sports, conferences, recognition and award programs, off-campus leadership retreats and social events.

“Competitive sports clubs may not receive more than $5,000 in support per fiscal year for all aspects of participating in competition,” states the resolution. In addition, no organization may receive more than $2,000 to attend a conference, and no individual delegate may receive more than $750 to attend a conference.

Allocations chair Rhajiv Ratnatunga called the decision “hypocritical,” because some organizations were having their funding capped and others weren’t.

Ratnatunga also said while caps may not appear necessary right now, he is expecting the number of groups requesting funding to double from 55 to 110 in the next year.

“(SGB) is living in the here and now,” Ratnatunga said. “It’s a fine line they’re walking.”

“There are more groups (forming). The money stays the same,” President Shady Henien said to the full house of students in attendance to witness the vote. “You do the math.”

One major disagreement over the resolution came over the clause stating that SGB may ignore the cap if deemed necessary.

“The ‘if deemed necessary’ is the only part that’s irking me,” board member Bianca Gresco said.

“Your resolution basically says nothing,” former board member and presidential candidate Will Powers said at the meeting. “You’re saying, ‘We, the SGB, will not fund programs over $5,000 – unless we feel like it.'”

Board member Joshua Carl, along with others in favor of the resolution, said that it would provide a guideline for future boards to follow.

“Right now, it’s just based on precedent,” Henien said, saying that this should not be the case.

“Without this, we have no credibility as a board for allocating money,” board member James Priestas said.

The clause limiting program funding led some people to question how the board would determine which programs need to be funded above the $5,000 cap.

“If you aren’t at my programs, how can you judge which programs are worth going over $5,000,” asked a representative from the Rainbow Alliance – one of the student organizations that would have been immediately affected by the cap.

“We’re not thinking of right now. We’re thinking about the future,” Ratnatunga said. “There’s no budget problem now, but two, three, four years into the future, we’re going to come to a very, very bad situation.”

Read The Pitt News later in the week for more information.