NO on ASUCI's "My Student Life" FEE INITIATIVE

Excellent insight.  The elected officers within ASUCI are representative of your interests and beliefs in terms of policy and overall direction of the organization.  They only serve at the pleasure of the constituents.  

By voting no due to concerns about administrative costs within the organization, you and others are sending a clear message to the 5 newly elected officers.  By this virtue they will either fulfill the desires of their constituents by not allowing administrative costs to rise or they will face a conflict with the students that voted them into office to represent their interests.

ASUCI does do a great job on their campus productions - which is a credit to dedicated students such as Jun Wang (VP of Student Services), his staff, and the countless other students (both paid and volunteer) who give up their free time to make ASUCI its best.  It is not, however, a credit to the redundant administrators currently supervising these activities. The worry is that by handing ASUCI a blank check now (which will, first and foremost, be most readily accessible by ASUCI’s chief administrator Sandy Jones) that money will go to pensions, bonuses, retirement plans and salaries of career staff members instead of dedicated students. 

Anteater Express is a phenomenal campus service that is absolutely essential to students’ lives. Think of it this way: based on what you’ve seen and heard, do you believe that Anteater Express has done everything in its power to keep costs and overhead low before asking you for more money?  If you believe that, then yes, it’s reasonable to invest more in this program.

We do not believe in throwing the baby out with the bathwater. From our experience Anteater Express is an efficient operation, and they have earned the right to ask you for more money. We will be voting YES. 

There is definitely a possibility the fees could go towards increased efforts, but no guarantees.  I suppose the only argument here is why spend more and why send more?  Hard sciences would call this the minimum effective dose.  Why run for 100 hours a week if you can train successfully on only 50 hours a week?  Point taken and yes Lobby Core is a phenomenal program, but let’s call a success a success here and not clamor for more money when obviously what was had worked quite well!

The fees are completely **unrestricted**, meaning that there is no stipulation on where the money will go. If the past is any indication, administration WILL take a huge bite out of this increased revenue before handing the leftovers to the students working in ASUCI.

Here’s how the ASUCI budget is developed each year:
First, Sandy Jones (ASUCI’s chief administrator) does the math to find the total revenue expected to come in the following year ($18.00/quarter * 3 quarters * number of students). Next, she subtracts all the “fixed costs” such as equipment fees, rent, etc. Lastly she subtracts salaries of the career staff, making sure to include the salaries of possible new hires, bonuses she wants to dole out, raises, etc.. This makes up the lions share of the ASUCI budget. Lastly, the leftovers go to the newly elected ASUCI executive cabinet who divides this remainder among the 5 executive offices, the Legislative Council, and the Judicial Board. 

It is almost certain that increased revenue will give a free license for salaries, pensions, bonuses, etc to increase. Heck, ASUCI might even splurge to hire a few more administrators to help out! Why? Because more people doing the same amount of work means everyone does less of it, and in return gets more time to take longer lunches and more smoke breaks. 

First things first, thank you for an intelligent well thought question that provokes conversation.  As members of the student body who pay fees into ASUCI, we all have a voice to push for efficiency since we fund it and are the primary stakeholders in its current and future states.  And as a side note the two principals of the campaign have both served in the highest levels of ASUCI, one as an elected executive.

Heres why quite simply we are against the increases as they stand:

1. Yes, fees must go up eventually in order to keep up with inflation and California Price Index.  Yes, the fees have not gone up since the mid 1990s.  Yes, ASUCI as an organization has faced and will face problems if this is not adjusted.  BUT, is a 110% fee increase over 4 years really the best solution?  We believe no.  It is too drastic.  The fee should be tied to an index where it adjusts gradually.  Current students will be voting for an increase that will not affect them fully affect them, it will affect incoming students fully.

2. The organization packs a lot of punch for the $19/quarter fee students pay in, we realize this.  But here’s the problem, most of the money goes towards paying administration.  $800,000 for administration.  $250,000 for student life.  There’s a BIG problem there.  See for yourself, other campuses don’t spend nearly as much on admin fees, they put that money to use for students and student life.  We have a MAJOR case of administrative bloat.  Your money quite simply is going towards health benefits, pensions, and salaries of administrators.  We see this as a huge problem.

3. By voting no, we are sending a clear message.  Not that ASUCI is not important.  Not that we want a reduction in student life.  But that we want REASONABLE increases in the fee.  We want tangible reasons WHY we should vote for the fee (not vague promises).  And we don’t want administrative bloat.

Ask a Merced student how their social life is for $50-$90 per quarter and then let me know how throwing money at a problem is for a solution.

Thank you so much for your support!  School spirit is a renewable resource on this campus, one that takes passion, excitement, and love for your school.  Let’s make the most of what we have and consider our priorities.  A 110% increase over 4 years is simply not a good idea.  The key word here is reasonable.

The campaign is not at all against more social activities on campus.  We simply argue that ASUCI currently has a bloated budget primarily based upon administration costs.  Rather than throw more money at the problem, ASUCI should make more with what it has. It’s an organization for the students and by the students, not a series of job opportunities for adults to make $800,000 per year!