April 19, 2011 12:03 am
Campus Farm Not as Expensive as It May Seem
As the student fee increase is being currently debated, one of the most talked about items that will be receiving the funding is the Campus Farm. While I understand why members of the SGA are emphasizing the importance of new additions to the overall budget as a way to justify the fee increase, I can’t help but feel that there is serious misrepresentation of how much money the Campus Farm receives from the SGA and how relevant the Campus Farm’s needs are to the current SGA budget conundrum.
Just to put things in perspective, the Campus Farm requested on average about the same amount of money or less than each of the following clubs: SEAC, FUSE, FGS, the Equestrian Club, the Sailing Club, SMUT, WSMUT, Avatar, Crew, and the Clay Shooting Club, among many others. Some clubs in that list have even received considerably more in one semester than the farm received for the entire year, including during the summer.
And yet these clubs are not having their names called upon, their relevance questioned or their existence put on the line to justify the fee increase (nor should they).
The only way that the Campus Farm differs from the above organizations in financial terms, is that like the Bike Shop and SafeRide (which receive, respectively, three times and four times the amount of money than the Campus Farm received), we use the money we receive from the SGA to pay workers over the summer, something clubs funded by Finance or Programs Board are not allowed to do. The SGA was previously funding the Campus Farm through the Community Garden Club, and yet this was not seen as cause for considerable budget discussions.
Funding the Campus Farm for one year is costing about $2.50 per student, which is less than 1% of the total student fee. While the Campus Farm does qualify as a new addition to the budget, it is not requesting that much more money than it did while it was a club. We just want to use the money differently than other clubs.
We don’t represent a burden on the SGA’s budget more than many other clubs, and would ask that people consider this before they question the farm in light of the fee increases. Fees need to go up anyways because they haven’t gone up in almost ten years; it certainly isn’t just because of the Bike Shop and the Campus Farm asking for tiny percentages of the SGA budget.
You’re right that only a small percentage of the Student Fee increase would go to the Campus Farm. The reason we keep harping on about it is because it’s the most at jeopardy; being our newest expense, the Farm would be the first thing to be cut if the referendum failed. When we say “save the Campus Farm by voting yes!” we don’t mean because all or even most of the extra $25 would go to you. It’s just that if everyone votes no, all the other clubs you mentioned still at least get something (though considerably less), while you guys are totally cut.
I don’t want this any more than you do; that’s why I’m campaigning so ferociously!
I know. thank you for all your hard work becky! we really appreciate it. I think a lot of other people really appreciate it too. I didn’t mean this as a criticism of you or anyone really in the SGA or otherwise. you all work really hard and not that many people take the time to understand what you do, but everyone has often mistaken opinions on it. you all do a great job and put so much effort into taking care of the student body.
still, I think this needed to be said. I don’t know if I’m allowed to respond to my own opinion piece lawl, but the campus farm is in a tough situation all around because by not being a club we’ve singled ourselves out, whereas, like you said, if we had stayed a club we would definitely get at least some money from finance board. now it feels like everyone has to support the farm all the time for us to even get a small amount of money, whereas other organizations that deal with the same or larger amount of money are not questioned. I think that point does get a little lost in the debate.
I agree Tess, and we should have done a better job of emphasizing the point in our campaign that the fixation on you was not due to a proportionately high allocation of the potential increase but rather due to a matter of continued survival. Just to note, though, if it passes we will be able to add you as a line item into the Operating Budget (like the Point News or Hawk Radio), so you will be ensured secure funding. If we win this fight, it will be the last one!