The Tufts Community Union (TCU) Senate's decision from last week's meeting to drastically reduce buffer funding in exchange for cutting ticket costs to student-group events has sparked a debate on the plan's sustainability, with opponents calling it unwise.
The Senate voted on April 5 to allocate $890 to buffer funding for the fiscal year 2010; outgoing TCU Treasurer Matt Shapanka told the Daily that was down about $40,000 from last year. The move came as part of the approval of the largest budget in the Senate's history.
In order to subsidize the costs of ticket expenses to certain student group performances -- a value Shapanka estimated stands at around $58,000 -- the Senate made a number of sacrifices, including slashing the stipends of the TCU president and treasurer and cutting the Boston Bus Shuttle.
The elimination of the vast majority of buffer funding also helped cover the funds necessary to give student groups an advance to replace revenue they would have otherwise received from certain ticketed performances. Members of the Senate's executive board generated the idea, Shapanka, a senior, said.
Buffer funding is money kept on reserve by the Senate to meet the unexpected funding requests of student groups throughout the year. It covers needs that the groups' budgets do not account for.
Even though it slashed the amount available in the group, the Senate will be able to allocate next year's surplus to buffer funding. Each year, student groups generally spend $100,000 to $150,000 less than they are budgeted for, Pickard told the Daily last week.
Next year's treasurer can reallocate that funding to the buffer fund, but the amount of money that will be available for that purpose is not guaranteed.
But Freshman Class Secretary Sarah Rauh said that the reduction of the buffer funds could impede the plans of student groups who have unexpected needs in the future.
"By eliminating buffer funding," she said, "the Senate is taking away funds that often cover costs for extra things that really make an event special and enjoyable."
No student groups were consulted on the decision to cut buffer funding, according to outgoing TCU President Duncan Pickard and Shapanka. Pickard said that senators did meet with different culture and arts groups, in particular, with regard to doing away with ticket costs.
Rauh said the Senate should have talked to student groups before making a decision on the issue.
"After all, it is their job to serve the student body," she said. "And not talking to the groups produced a decision largely shaped by their own personal opinions."
Pickard, who spearheaded the decision to cut ticket costs, explained that the buffer funding had not been allocated efficiently in the past.
"Looking from past years, we've always had at least $100,000 in unspent budget income from the previous fiscal year which always gets rolled into the surplus, and I think that's really wasteful," Pickard said. "It's really a win-win situation; I don't see how this can't work.
"There might be some glitches that need to be worked out," he added, "but I think we've set up a model that's sustainable."
Shapanka insisted that the elimination of ticket costs would not be sustainable and that the buffer funds would become vulnerable in the future.
"If I'm right, the surplus will get smaller every year and we won't be able to sustain the buffer fund from the surplus," he said.
At a meeting a week prior to the budget decision, the Senate voted 25-1-1 to tentatively move forward with the ticket costs plans, with Senator Sam Wallis casting the dissenting vote.
While Wallis, a sophomore, said he has actively worked to reduce student costs on campus, he echoed Shapanka's concern about the decision's long-term success.
"I don't think it's sustainable," he said. "I think budgeting out of a surplus and counting on a surplus is not good business or policy."
Additional costs down the road, such as the installment of an online ticket-purchasing system, might use up surplus money, reducing the amount of money available to cushion the buffer fund, Shapanka said.
He insisted that the Senate must collaborate with student groups for the policy to have long-term effectiveness.
"In order to make it sustainable, the Senate needs to prioritize and sit down with big groups on campus," Shapanka said. "If the groups are strongly against it, it won't stay around forever."
