ASWC is loaded and eager to give students money. This year ASWC had 462,400 dollars to spend on WEB events, clubs, individual student projects and more. It funded student trips to D.C., a yearbook, a green fund for environmental projects on campus and many other student initiatives. ASWC loves to make it rain on the student body, so long as you come and ask nicely.
That being said, it is important to make sure money is spent wisely. Practically, ASWC’s budget is finite and can only fund so much. Philosophically, ASWC has an obligation to the student body to use our money responsibly. A student fee (320 dollars this year) may seem minimal compared to the enormity of tuition, but managing nearly half a million dollars is another matter. To that end, it is crucial that ASWC remains accountable for the money it spends by requiring a basic oversight of spending by all ASWC-funded campus groups.
All campus groups that receive ASWC funding have their budgets approved by ASWC’s Finance Committee to ensure that money allocated to different groups is spent in accordance with ASWC rules and student body wishes. Furthermore, all clubs are required to have constitutions detailing how they do such things as elect their officers and organize club functions. These constitutions include the internal structures which decide how money is spent, which is of proximal concern to ASWC.
Until recently, there was no such requirement for campus media organizations such as KWCW, The Pioneer, blue moon and quarterlife. At the last Senate meeting, ASWC approved rules requiring that these groups have ‘governing documents’ outlining each organization’s structure. These documents require a statement of institutional purpose, leadership selection process, internal process of the organization and a means to measure the effectiveness of the organization in meeting its goals.
The proposed change, however, was not well-received by seniors Molly Smith and Derek Thurber, the editors-in-chief of The Pioneer. They saw an initial proposal requiring a ‘constitution’ as ill-suited to their organizational structure, which was jointly addressed by instead requiring more flexible ‘governing documents’. More symbolically, they felt that requiring these documents be submitted to ASWC directly “compromised [their] position as an independent student newspaper”.
Rather than compromise independence, however, rules like this ensure that an organization as large as The Pioneer be subject to the same basic accountability as any other campus groups. This year, The Pioneer received 41,616 dollars, the second highest allocation to any student group after WEB (KWCW got 28,420 dollars, blue moon got 19,000 dollars and Quarterlife got 4,000 dollars). Because it receives nine percent of the ASWC budget every year, The Pioneer‘s consistent and responsible management is of utmost concern to students.
The new rule gives these organizations the flexibility to organize themselves as they see fit. ASWC does not really care how this is done, so long as the document follows these five criteria. ASWC has no desire to influence the operations of these groups in any way: it just wants to uphold its responsibility to the student body that money be responsibly spent.
Internal structure and function is intrinsically important to the financial accountability of campus media organizations like The Pio. These documents would determine staff members’ salaries and imply the general areas of spending. While ASWC already approves campus media organizations’ budgets, leaving thousands of dollars to the discretion of one or two individuals is philosophically unsound.
Since clubs are held to similar standards while receiving much less money, it is only fair that organizations trusted with thousands of students’ dollars should have the same accountability. ASWC respects the importance of an independent paper, but wants measures to ensure that money is accounted for in the future. To continue the financial irresponsibility of funding large institutions lacking coherent guiding documents which account for the future would be a disservice to the student body, whose interests ASWC representatives are elected to represent.
ASWC is not over-reaching by requiring campus media groups to provide it with governing documents. For organizations whose chief leadership changes every year, it’s crucial to know that money is being responsibly spent. ASWC must allow groups to serve the interests of their readers and listeners, and more importantly, serve the student body by making the best use of student dollars and spending money fairly and philosophically.
Alex • May 10, 2011 at 1:58 pm
Sarah,
I apologize that it’s taken me such a long time to respond to your concerns, but I still wish to do so.
Before I address your specific points, it’s important to note the clear split in the way members of ASWC and members of the Pio view our relationship. I believe that certain comparisons of the ASWC-Pio relationship to the relationship of a state government and independent newspaper are ethically helpful, but not entirely sound. My limited experience with ASWC has led me to believe that it is less a ‘government’, so much as it is a financier of different student groups and increasingly often an advocate for students in various college affairs.
Members of the Pioneer are concerned that ASWC may expand its influence and threaten the autonomy of the paper. This is a valid concern for a non-student paper, however ASWC simply does not have these intentions. This is not the case now and has not been in my knowledge of these groups’ history. As such, I fail to understand the assumption that oversight will “compromise [the pio’s] position as an independent student newspaper”.
Clearly many on the Pio do not feel this way, and as long as this serious ideological divide exists between us, it will be difficult to parse out these finer points. It’s certainly a debate that can’t be resolved in Pio comments.
To your first point, the nitty-gritty of who writes the documents, keeps them, changes them, etc… is entirely up to the Pio. The only role ASWC may have would likely be the charge of the finance chair. Oversight is not about deciding what the Pio should or should not do editorially. It simply helps maintaining a degree of consistency. Like you say, incoming EICs are often new to the job of managing money, and as such it seems wise to protect against mishap where possible.
Secondly, I think a more clear articulation of what specifically the requirement of these documents would do to allow us to influence the Pio would be helpful. I’m new to journalism, so I fail to recognize the “major ethical problem” to which you refer. If the concern is over the requirement that the Pio give ASWC these documents directly, please explain to me the non-symbolic difference between this and just making them public so that the same person can find them.
I agree with your second point about the vast differences between other clubs and the Pio. But I don’t think that the Pio should be exempt from equitable oversight because they are different.
Third, I agree with you that the Pio must remain flexible and these documents accommodate this . ASWC’s by-laws regarding the Pio change constantly (changes which include Derek and Molly’s input). This malleability would certainly be preserved, and if anything these documents would give the Pio more autonomy to change their structure without having to go through ASWC.
Fourth, you seem concerned about the limitations of ASWCs plan. ASWC’s plan, however leaves nearly unlimited space for the Pio to develop any sort of alternative to traditional governing documents which would still cover ASWC’s requirements. How the six topics mentioned in the article get covered is up to the Pio, and if they want to work with their Board of Directors, fantastic. But at the end of the day, the BoD does not fund the Pio, ASWC does.
To your fifth point there is simply some miscommunication. When I say financial irresponsibility I don’t mean to imply that the Pio has acted irresponsibly. I am referring to the irresponsibility ASWC in granting thousands of dollars to a student group without a basic level of oversight.
As someone interested in both ASWC and the Pioneer, I truly hope that the two groups maintain a healthy relationship, which we generally have done this year. There are, however, broader philosophical questions about what our relationship should look like that deserve more discussion than comments on an article.
Sara Rasmussen • Apr 8, 2011 at 3:05 pm
Alex,
As a student and a former Pioneer staff member, I appreciate your perspective. It’s nice to see such an argument about the Pio, published in the Pio itself.
That said—I’ve got some questions and concerns.
First, after reading your piece I’m still not totally clear on these ‘governing documents.’ Who writes them? For what audience? What is done with these documents? Who has the right to change them, and when? Moreover, you write that “it is crucial that ASWC remains accountable for the money it spends by requiring a basic oversight of spending by all ASWC-funded campus groups.” Oversight by whom?
I ask these questions because clear answers are a crucial component to the definition of the relationship between ASWC and the Pioneer. You don’t write it explicitly, but via explaining the EICs’ position, you state that the documents would be “submitted to ASWC directly.” Any and every journalist in the world would (and should!) consider that to be a major ethical problem. (I also have a problem with the fact that ASWC selects the Pio EIC, but that’s another debate.) As the student government, ASWC should not have any such role with the Pio. As a newspaper, the Pio must be free of influence from ASWC. Sure, I agree that the individual students who pay for and read the Pio deserve a paper that manages its money wisely, but this management should not be via ASWC. It does not matter that “ASWC has no desire to influence the operations of these groups in any way.” It looks to me like this would create an ASWC influence, either way. I can only reiterate your quote from the EICs: this requirement “compromise[s] [their] position as an independent student newspaper.” It’s that simple.
Second, by structuring part of your argument around the requirements made for campus clubs, you seem to be implying that the Pio is somehow like “any other campus groups.” The Pio is not a club. Its structure and function are nothing like that of campus clubs. It is a newspaper, and I see no reason to justify ‘governing documents’ for the Pio because clubs on campus have them.
Third, you write that “internal structure and function is intrinsically important to the financial accountability of campus media organizations like The Pio.” Are you implying that the Pio presently lacks “internal structure and function,” and these documents would create it? Surely, as a columnist, you’ve noticed that the paper functions—it is, after all, published weekly. As for structure, I personally worked under three different editors-in-chief, and there is enough procedure to keep the Pio going with each transition. On the subject of transition, yes, the Pio leadership does change often. That is why it needs to remain as flexible as possible, even financially speaking. Circumstances, staffing, and editors’ strategies for the paper evolve every year, one reason why I’d like to know more about the malleability of ‘governing documents.’
Fourth, you write that “leaving thousands of dollars to the discretion of one or two individuals is philosophically unsound.” Sure. It’s a student newspaper, no doubt a new experience for whoever is managing the money. I’ve already blabbed enough about ASWC’s role here. What the Pio should develop is an appropriate alternative to ASWC’s plan. I would argue for budgetary oversight by the Pioneer Board of Directors. This board was only beginning to develop when I left the Pio, so I cannot speak to its role in the last year. Nonetheless I think a formalized procedure requiring their oversight and allowing Pio EICs to solicit their advice would be far more useful and far more appropriate for an institution like the Pio.
Fifth and finally, I quote: “To continue the financial irresponsibility of funding large institutions lacking coherent guiding documents which account for the future would be a disservice to the student body…” Do you have any evidence of financial irresponsibility within the Pio? Do tell.