By Travis DeNeal 21

College Republicans no longer need to worry about their fair share of Student Allocation Fee money, now that the financial woes of the Registered Student Organization appeals process is over.

One hundred bucks is 100 bucks, Erik Woehrmann, president of the organization, said. We can definitely put that money to good use. We can do that because of the high level of activism we have on this campus.

Advertisement

Undergraduate Student Government made the announcement of the end of the appeals process at its Nov. 19 meeting.

Joyce Newby, USG’s Finance Committee chairwoman, said that after refiguring the balance of the Student Organization Allocation Fund, Student Affairs notified her of a positive amount.

In addition, USG President Dave Vingren announced that the executive staff is transferring between $2,500 and $4,000 to the Finance Committee to help fund RSOs. The executive staff budget normally pays for expenses incurred by executive members during the semester.

The announcements follow a rocky RSO appeals process that began this fall.

Originally, the Finance Committee had announced that RSOs that did not receive enough funding during last spring’s RSO funding spree could appeal for additional funding. RSO funding reform also was a campaign pledge of the Action Party, which claimed a majority during last spring’s USG elections.

However, not long after the fall appeals process deadline was over, Newby announced that the SOAF account left over from last spring and a summer RSO appeals process had no money.

Now, though, Newby said there is a comfortable amount of money in the account. Newby said the SOAF account, which is managed by vice chancellor for Student Affairs Larry Juhlin, had not been adjusted during Juhlin’s absence earlier this year. Juhlin is recovering from surgery.

Advertisement*

When Juhlin returned, Newby said, he readjusted the account, which now shows a positive amount.

USG acted quickly on the announcement by allocating $8,800 to 18 RSOs.

Despite all the money being handed out, one RSO, which missed the deadline for the appeals process, attended the meeting and asked for an exception to missing the deadline and $1,000.

Mike Fontana, treasurer for Grassroots, said that because of a miscommunication at the beginning of the semester, the organization did not apply during the appeals process.

We came and asked the Finance Committee to make an exception, Fontana said. We did not get one, and we don’t think that is acceptable.

Grassroots, an undergraduate student literary magazine, does not have enough money to publish its annual journal.

Later during the meeting, Evergreen Hills senator Chet Lunsford made a motion to refer Grassroots’ appeal back to the Finance Committee.

During debate of the motion, some members of the Finance Committee were unyielding in their position.

All I can say is we ran an ad for a week letting RSOs know about this, and 20 RSOs followed the rules and got money, Mike Ruta, a College of Applied Sciences and Arts senator, said. Where do we draw the line?

A roll call vote resulted in a 14-14 tie. USG vice president Megan Moore broke the tie with an aye vote, which was applauded and cheered by half of the Senate and Grassroots members in the audience.

At the end of the meeting, Newby announced that the general funding process would begin Thursday, and that Grassroots members could apply for general funding rather than bothering with an appeal.

General funding uses money from the current fiscal year’s SOAF account to give additional money to RSOs. It is separate from the funding process the Finance Committee and USG performs each spring.

Heather Crego, a senior in English from Kankakee and co-editor of Grassroots, said she was pleased with the vote even though it was not necessary.

We want people to hear about Grassroots, even if we have to hoot and holler about it, Crego said. We don’t want to have to hoot and holler, but we will if we have to.

Newby said that although the Finance Committee was opposed to making an exception for Grassroots as a part of the appeals process, her committee did not oppose the RSO.

We don’t have anything against any group, and we’re not trying to say they didn’t need money, she said, but not all of the procedures for the appeals process were followed by the group.

We know it’s a good thing and that they need money we’re not arguing that.