The ASWC senate voted on Sunday, Feb. 10 to raise the ASWC student fee an additional $14 for the academic year of 2013-14. The fee, now $350 per student, was raised to adjust for inflation and an expected decrease in student body size, as well as to provide more funding for club sports and allow for contributions to the Lifecycle Fund and ASWC endowment.

“When we’re asking the college to be very cognizant about the tuition increases they make every single year, that by nature happen yearly, we need to be cognizant of the increases that we make. However, I’ve always been of the opinion that [due to] our [past] increases you see a huge, very visible return in terms of student life,” said ASWC President junior Kayvon Behroozian.

Behroozian noted that campus institutions like the organic garden, The Pioneer, KWCW and WEB are partially or entirely funded by students’ contributions to the Associated Student of Whitman College.

“This relatively small fee [in comparison to tuition] has very tangible results in terms of your student experience on campus,” he said.

The senate meeting began with the ASWC finance committee proposing to raise the fee to $350, a number they had settled on after a three-and-a-half-hour meeting on Wednesday, Feb. 6. Their recommendation was eventually passed by the senate, though several senators attempted to amend the resolution to raise the fee an additional $2 to $352/year.

“If you actually added [the goals for funding] up, it would [require a fee of] $356, but we’re going to be making some hard cuts in finance committee to deal with that,” said ASWC Finance Committee Chair senior Sam Sadeghi.

Specific cuts were not mentioned during the senate, and will be discussed during budgeting later in the year. However, possible suggestions for tightening the budget were mentioned.

The ASWC green fund, which holds $1,000 of funding for green initiatives, could be combined with the contingency fund to allow flexibility in spending. This year, no requests concerning the green fund have been made, and the money has not been utilized. Should the fund be eliminated, requests concerning sustainability would still be financed through the contingency fund.

Another suggestion concerning efficiency was to encourage WEB to be more efficient with its funding, and ensure that only events that are well-attended and appreciated by the student body take place.

Dividing the student travel and development fund into two separate funds, one for development on campus and one for travel, could also help ASWC save money.

Sophomore senator Tatiana Kaehler suggested giving the finance committee greater control over club budgets, so that funds are allocated as they are needed rather than granted as a lump sum at the start of each year.

“I think we need less of a budget because that will motivate us to be more efficient in our spending. It’s ridiculous [that] some of the inefficient spending happens; I think our money has been well spent this year, but I’d like to see any new club initiative come through [the] contingency [fund rather] than them getting it in the budget,” said Kaehler. “I’d like to approve everything a club does for the first time as something that’s beneficial to the campus, rather than them having a lot of freedom to go around doing things and not being successful.”

Club Director senior Nick Chow raised concerns about the need for additional contributions to the lifecycle fund, which maintains equipment and technology used by ASWC and the campus media organizations, and the ASWC endowment.

According to Chow, these funds have been neglected for the last three years. The finance committee aims to contribute $10,000-$15,000 to the lifecycle fund and $5,000-$10,000 to the endowment, but Chow felt this was not sufficient, as an unexpected emergency could lead ASWC to fall back on the already-stressed funds.

Senior senator Fernando Medina encouraged raising the fee in order to provide scholarships for ASWC senators so that financially pressed students could run for office. First-year senator Allison Kelly spoke in favor of raising the fee in order to provide ample funding for clubs and activities on campus.

The amendment to raise the fee to $352 failed, with five senators voting to raise the fee and ten voting against. Three senators were absent, and counted as abstaining. The senate then voted on the finance committee’s original proposal, which passed with 14 voting in favor and one against.

“I thought [the fee] should be raised more to be allocated to developing student life, clubs and conferences,” said Kelly, who voted against the final proposal. “I respect everything the finance committee does, they have a very hard job, and [I think] that the number they did come to is very reasonable.”