Great success. 4/6 EMU building proposals passed the Student Building Fee Allocation Committee. Of the passed proposals include: the lower level, the outdoor barn, KWVA, and the Craft Center. Unfortunately the master plan and ASUO proposals did not pass.
This year proved to be advantageous for the EMU. It is now up to next year's board to continue the momentum and get the master plan on the administration's priority.
Sunday, April 27, 2008
Thursday, January 17, 2008
Field Trip EMU 1.0
House Committee
Yesterday called for the best meeting we've had so far in the House Committee. It was one of those meetings where you knew that your decision affected more than 20,000 students directly. The meeting involved traveling to the Outdoor Program shed, emu lower level, ASUO Office, KWVA, Craft Center, and then back to the Umpqua Room. After an hour of listening to some amazing building proposals, I gained more insight into the aspirations of the emu. (Something I take seriously when I know that my involvement could be passive or very active.) On the tour, I found that the green technology of our Outdoor Program is something to envy: rainwater collection for toilet and washing systems, select heating, and extensive sun usage. The Outdoor Program's proposal expected an increase in revenue, which is an advantage to all incidental fee paying students! The Craft Center's proposal sought to finance an outdoor covered area for welding and glassblowing classes that would provide a spectacle of lights and sounds for the emu. Great marketing, no? Further, Craft Center revenue would also increase.
Yesterday called for the best meeting we've had so far in the House Committee. It was one of those meetings where you knew that your decision affected more than 20,000 students directly. The meeting involved traveling to the Outdoor Program shed, emu lower level, ASUO Office, KWVA, Craft Center, and then back to the Umpqua Room. After an hour of listening to some amazing building proposals, I gained more insight into the aspirations of the emu. (Something I take seriously when I know that my involvement could be passive or very active.) On the tour, I found that the green technology of our Outdoor Program is something to envy: rainwater collection for toilet and washing systems, select heating, and extensive sun usage. The Outdoor Program's proposal expected an increase in revenue, which is an advantage to all incidental fee paying students! The Craft Center's proposal sought to finance an outdoor covered area for welding and glassblowing classes that would provide a spectacle of lights and sounds for the emu. Great marketing, no? Further, Craft Center revenue would also increase.
Some of the more expensive projects involved renovations to the ASUO Office, KWVA radio station, and large portions of student space (the lower level). Like the outdoor program and craft center, these proposals were just as important to the emu and student life.
In the Umpqua room, we decided to prioritize the proposals in a strategic fashion that would allow for the most support from the Student Building Fee Committee. Due to negative connotations of the word "prioritizing," it quickly became taboo, but it's idea was still used. The general consensus was that all proposals warranted support, but what needed to be done was a strategic prioritizing, or ranking, or "tier system." The Master Plan (running at $75 million) was ranked last, but in no way a reflection of its necessity. It's position as last meant more of a symbolic gesture; that is, it encompassed the general concern for a newer emu. The lower level (at $1.7 million) was designated as the first tier, our first big push. Historically, the Student Building Fee Committee grants a large portion of their funds to one extensive project and then the remaining money to smaller endeavorers. Therefore, it seemed adventageous for us to push our 2nd largest project first, especially because its funding seemed very realistic.
The hardest part of our process, however, was determining the fate of the Outdoor Program, Craft Center, ASUO office, and KWVA in our tier system. It was initially suggested that placing the ASUO and KWVA into the 2nd tier would gain the emu a political advantage. With ASUO representation on the Student Building Fee Committee, many thought that pushing for the ASUO Office after the emu lower level would gain support for our remaining projects: the Outdoor Program and Craft Center. I did not prefer this option because of several reasons. One, we did not know what the other proposals were going to be, so we had no idea of the likelihood that the SBF Committee would fund 5/6 emu proposals. If they would, the emu would get more than 75% of the building fees. This goal seemed unclear and would prove disastrous for the Craft Center, Outdoor Program, or KWVA if the funds went elsewhere. Second, I did not feel that the ASUO Office proposal made any substantial improvements to the general student body. It provided for more computers and office space for the Executive, and maybe a couple more spaces for the Senate, but when the current space is inefficiently used (wasted office hours on Facebook, socializing, etc.), it became hard for me to rank the ASUO Office before the Craft Center, Outdoor Program, and KWVA. Granted, I agreed that many problems within the ASUO could be resolved over more space, but if they received funding over the other three programs listed due to our tier system, I would feel terribly for the larger student population, who use the Craft Center, Outdoor Program, and listen to KWVA. Third, (and final), we did not know that playing politics in the Student Building Fee Committee would work. As representative of the student body, any ASUO rep on the committee should reason that funding the emu in any way affects all students. Whether it be through certain groups or by improving revenue sources, student i-fees go down, more students find activities to engage in, and the emu remains functional to all existing and new populations.
In the end, only three tiers were designed. I was happy about this decision. We decided that the 2nd tier would house the ASUO, KWVA, Craft Center, and Outdoor Program. All four of these programs served different groups of people directly, but any of these would benefit every student, one way or another. We passed the motion to present the following tier system of support to the EMU Board:
Tier 1: EMU Lower West Level
Tier 2: ASUO, KWVA, Craft Center, and Outdoor Program
Tier 3: EMU Capital Renovation (a.ka. Master Plan)
And so the proposals move to the full Board and will soon meet their fate in the SBFC.
In the Umpqua room, we decided to prioritize the proposals in a strategic fashion that would allow for the most support from the Student Building Fee Committee. Due to negative connotations of the word "prioritizing," it quickly became taboo, but it's idea was still used. The general consensus was that all proposals warranted support, but what needed to be done was a strategic prioritizing, or ranking, or "tier system." The Master Plan (running at $75 million) was ranked last, but in no way a reflection of its necessity. It's position as last meant more of a symbolic gesture; that is, it encompassed the general concern for a newer emu. The lower level (at $1.7 million) was designated as the first tier, our first big push. Historically, the Student Building Fee Committee grants a large portion of their funds to one extensive project and then the remaining money to smaller endeavorers. Therefore, it seemed adventageous for us to push our 2nd largest project first, especially because its funding seemed very realistic.
The hardest part of our process, however, was determining the fate of the Outdoor Program, Craft Center, ASUO office, and KWVA in our tier system. It was initially suggested that placing the ASUO and KWVA into the 2nd tier would gain the emu a political advantage. With ASUO representation on the Student Building Fee Committee, many thought that pushing for the ASUO Office after the emu lower level would gain support for our remaining projects: the Outdoor Program and Craft Center. I did not prefer this option because of several reasons. One, we did not know what the other proposals were going to be, so we had no idea of the likelihood that the SBF Committee would fund 5/6 emu proposals. If they would, the emu would get more than 75% of the building fees. This goal seemed unclear and would prove disastrous for the Craft Center, Outdoor Program, or KWVA if the funds went elsewhere. Second, I did not feel that the ASUO Office proposal made any substantial improvements to the general student body. It provided for more computers and office space for the Executive, and maybe a couple more spaces for the Senate, but when the current space is inefficiently used (wasted office hours on Facebook, socializing, etc.), it became hard for me to rank the ASUO Office before the Craft Center, Outdoor Program, and KWVA. Granted, I agreed that many problems within the ASUO could be resolved over more space, but if they received funding over the other three programs listed due to our tier system, I would feel terribly for the larger student population, who use the Craft Center, Outdoor Program, and listen to KWVA. Third, (and final), we did not know that playing politics in the Student Building Fee Committee would work. As representative of the student body, any ASUO rep on the committee should reason that funding the emu in any way affects all students. Whether it be through certain groups or by improving revenue sources, student i-fees go down, more students find activities to engage in, and the emu remains functional to all existing and new populations.
In the end, only three tiers were designed. I was happy about this decision. We decided that the 2nd tier would house the ASUO, KWVA, Craft Center, and Outdoor Program. All four of these programs served different groups of people directly, but any of these would benefit every student, one way or another. We passed the motion to present the following tier system of support to the EMU Board:
Tier 1: EMU Lower West Level
Tier 2: ASUO, KWVA, Craft Center, and Outdoor Program
Tier 3: EMU Capital Renovation (a.ka. Master Plan)
And so the proposals move to the full Board and will soon meet their fate in the SBFC.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)