Undergrads to vote on programming fee

Undergrads to vote on programming fee

Ballot referendum would raise funds for student groups

By Rashmi Nijagal

Daily Bruin Staff

In addition to voting candidates into office this spring,
students will also be confronted with several resolutions on the
1995 undergraduate election ballot.

Student council members decided last Tuesday to place a
programming referendum on the ballot which would add $3.50 to
student registration fees in order to raise more funds for student
programming.

If approved by students, $2.50 would go toward student
programming and $1 toward the UCLA Scholarship Resource Center,
which provides scholarship information as an alternative to federal
financial aid.

"I have seen for many years how many groups’ budgets have been
slashed and this year, some programs have been cut," said Todd
Sargent, financial supports commissioner and author of the
referendum. "We as student leaders have to be able to acknowledge
our shortcomings and one of them is that we are no longer able to
fund quality programs to the full extent because programming is
expensive and because so many more groups are programming. We
should be in the business of supporting these groups."

While most council members did vote in favor of placing the
referendum on the ballot, several aspects of the initiative were
questioned. York Chang, external vice president, raised the issue
of the Associated Students of UCLA’s (ASUCLA) financial
difficulties and asked whether students should be requested to pay
more money when the association is already required to use a
percentage of its revenues toward student programming.

"I am not against students voting on and supporting their own
referendum," Chang said. "But what I will not support is turning to
students first before all attempts are made to hold ASUCLA
accountable. (They have) a contractual programming obligation and
the fact is they have not prioritized programming. Don’t even
suggest putting it on the ballot until the other options are
exhausted."

Sargent, however, maintains that the students’ association will
still be held accountable to its obligations.

"I definitely feel that we should hold ASUCLA accountable to its
promise," he said. "We feel very strongly that they should be
following their guidelines, and I don’t believe that this would be
a cop-out for them. If anything, this is still not enough for
student programming ­ there is still more that needs to be
done."

In the 1993 elections, students passed the academic success
referendum. The referendum added $5 to undergraduate fees, sending
$3 to the campus retention committee and earmarking other moneys
for certain commissions, such as the academic affairs and community
service commissions. The 1993 initiative was used as a model for
the programming referendum on this year’s ballot, Sargent said.