This covers the SGA meeting held on March 6.
Climate Check:
Sophomore Senator Khushi Kakadia brought attention to overactive sprinklers along Beneski Parkway, asking who she should contact. President Danny Nguyen directed her to Ernesto Gonzalez, director of Facilities Services, who would then be able to take action to address the issue. Vice President Caterina Mora added that Gonzalez is often busy, so he may not respond to such problems in a timely manner. Advisor Bernadette Buchanan said that it may be more efficient to place a work order through Asset Essentials, and then scale up efforts to contact Gonzalez directly if the issue goes unresolved.
Secretary Alexis Aguallo raised concerns over available dining options for resident assistants remaining on campus over the first weekend of Spring Break. Both President Nguyen and junior Senator Harrison Tinker said that Aguallo or her informants should reach out to the Student Dining Advisory Committee. Advisor Buchanan added that students could also reach out to the Chartwells nutritionist, Samantha Trevino, and she would help students find options over the break.
Sophomore Senator Odi Aneji has noticed asbestos in the walls of Storch Memorial Building, and expressed worry about its effects on the health of students. President Nguyen reminded SGA that Storch Memorial Building was constructed in the 1940s, which might make removal complicated. President Nguyen stated that realistically, removal was not immediately achievable; however, he recommended that concerned parties could talk to John Scherding, university architect, about whether or not the Campus Master Plan had plans to renovate the building in coming years.
Funding Requests:
TigerThon: Go Phund TigerThon Philanthropy – Partially funded $1,430.79.
Representatives from TigerThon, Gamma Chi Delta and Omega Phi presented their $2,724.29
collaborative proposal for an off-campus field day event. As a nonprofit organization dedicated to raising funds for the Children’s Hospital of San Antonio, TigerThon marketed this proposal as a chance for participating Greek organizations to provide philanthropy. The two Greek organizations are contributing both for their philanthropy requirements as well as to aid in the event’s outreach, as the presenters believe that Greek life’s involvement will boost attendance. Higher turnout rates mean higher revenue streams that can then be contributed towards TigerThon’s philanthropic donations.
The proposal’s budget was centered around the price of the off-campus venue, a dunk tank and fun water activities. However, the choice to hold the event at an off-campus venue drew some heavy contention from members of SGA. Secretary Aguallo asked if there were on-campus options that the presenters had considered instead, as it would be much cheaper. Junior Senator Joy Areola also emphasized the appeal of having the event on campus, as it would make the event more accessible to students who didn’t have the means to attend.
After much deliberation (and I’m talking about at least half an hour), junior Senator Andrew Phillips proposed that SGA partially fund the proposal, covering all costs except the venue rental. From there, senior Senator Adam Garza motioned to partially fund the proposal for $1,430.79, which sophomore Senator Bocar Diagana quickly seconded. The motion passed.
Swim and Triathlon Club: Swim Club Zones — Partially funded $1,734
Swim and Triathlon Club presented a $2,232 funding proposal for a trip to take part in a regional-level swim meet from April 26-28. The organization’s budget covered costs for the lodging and transportation of 11 students, emphasizing the opportunity to represent Trinity at a relatively local meet. In the past, travel opportunities helped the club to network with other swimmers, including Trinity alumni, and recruit more students in the future.
The main concern from SGA over this proposal was the cost of gas for vehicle transportation. Three vehicles were designated for student transport, with an additional vehicle for the coach. Due to a miscalculation, roughly $1,600 went unaccounted for gas expenditures, which came out to $402 per car. As a result, and after much discussion, senior Senator Nadesh Vaithianathan motioned to partially fund the proposal for $1,734. Junior Senator Ella Charbonnet seconded, and the motion passed.
International Humanitarian Crisis Initiative: Shine A Light Art Gallery — Fully funded $3,690
The International Humanitarian Crisis Initiative asked for funding for their April 15 “Shine A Light” art gallery, which will be open to all students and highlight the art of migrants, immigrants and the general international community in San Antonio. They are in the process of collecting art and finalizing vendor selection. Their budget covers catering, vendors, performances and more. Senators asked about potential art department collaborations and expected turnout. Senator Charbonnet motioned to fully fund, and Senator Diagana seconded. The motion passed.
Student Engagement & Development: Nacho Hour — Partially funded $1,218.66.
Wills Brown presented two funding proposals on behalf of Student Engagement & Development, formerly Student Involvement, the first being a proposal for $2,780.48 in order to continue funding weekly Nacho Hour events for the remainder of the semester. Over the course of an academic year, there are 29 Nacho Hour events, costing a pretty $11,780.38 in total. Student Engagement, however, had only been allocated a budget of $9,000 for Nacho Hours this fiscal year and needed SGA to cover the rest.
Brown disclosed that the price of Nacho Hours have increased with the transition from Aramark to Chartwells, mentioning that Student Engagement’s budget was not adjusted to compensate for those changes. Senators debated funding this proposal due to the university’s inability to provide Student Engagement proper funding in the first place, concerned that if they compensated for the university’s shortcomings, Student Engagement would continue to come to SGA for funding in the future. In the interest of preserving an 18-year-long tradition, Senator Phillips motioned to partially fund the proposal for $1,218.66, with junior Senator Omar Ratrut seconding. The motion passed.
Student Engagement & Development: Student Org Banner Printer — Fully funded $2,199.
Brown’s second proposal requested a new banner printer for the Student Engagement office since the one they have is eight years old and broken. With the cost of fixing the printer, just getting a new one was more cost-effective, especially because the return on investment would be huge. Senator Phillips once again brought up the issue of why the university wasn’t giving Student Engagement money directly, to which Brown replied that one-time requests in the past have not been approved. Senator Vaithianathan motioned to fully fund, and Senator Charbonnet seconded. The motion passed.
1902 with Phi Sigma Chi and TigerThon — funding decision tabled.
TigerThon came back with a second proposal, this time accompanied by a different Greek org, Phi Sigma Chi. Together, they proposed a second annual event at the nightclub 1902 on April 11 at the cost of $8,100.18. Last year, the duo saw over 400 attendees, raising around $5,200 for TigerThon’s philanthropic goals. Phi Sigma Chi was confident that they could increase attendance to 800 and increase impact in doing so, all while creating a safe environment for students to have some fun.
Renting out the venue came with a required $2,500 deposit and included a bar tap, which was heavily contested, as SGA funding parameters prevent the funding of alcohol. The presenters maintained that the bar could also sell nonalcoholic beverages, such as Red Bull and water bottles, and that the bar tap was a method for the venue to ensure a profit from the event. Vice President Mora and Advisor Buchanan ultimately ruled that the alcohol policy would prevent SGA from funding the proposal.
Things were further complicated when Vice President Mora also revealed that Phi Sigma Chi had outstanding receipts from purchases made with prior SGA funding. As designated by the SGA constitution, this would also prevent further funding from being allocated. Senator Phillips motioned to table the proposal in order to give Phi Sigma Chi a chance to address the issue with past receipts and submit them by March 13 for the following Senate Meeting on March 20. Senator Diagana seconded.
TU Forensics Society: National Debate Tournament — Partially funded $3,117.20.
The Forensics team asked for $8,045.08 to send their debaters to the end-of-year national tournament in Atlanta, where they would compete against prestigious universities like Harvard. Their expenses included flights, hotel rooms, van rentals, tournament fees and judging fees. Senator Areola said that there had to be more cost-effective options for a trip with just six students. She eventually motioned to partially fund flights and tournament fees, which Senator Charbonnet seconded. The motion passed.
KRTU Fest — Fully funded $8,099.50.
Students presented on behalf of KRTU, asking for funding for this year’s upcoming KRTU Fest. At the first iteration of the event last year, over 250 students attended and were able to watch a selection of performances from members of the Trinity community. This year, KRTU Fest is expanding, moving its venue off campus to Stable Hall at the Pearl, advertising the event through local newspapers and growing their set list. Senators became quite excited about the promise of this event given its success last year, leading Senator Garza to motion fully funding the proposal and Senator Diagana seconding. President Nguyen vocalized his own anticipation for the event, saying other members of SGA would see him “throwing it down” come April 13.
South Asian Student Association (SASA): Holi 2024 — Fully funded $3,374.99.
SASA presented for their annual Holi event to be held on March 23. Holi is the festival of colors, celebrating the arrival of spring and the triumph of good over evil. They said they expect 250 participants, and their budget included T-shirts and catering. Senator Ratrut motioned to fully fund, and Senator Aneji seconded. The motion passed.
SGA: Block Party — Fully funded $11,454.15.
SGA members presented round two of their funding proposal for the inclusion-oriented Block Party, this time for vendor items and merchandise. Senator Phillips emphasized the necessity of properly marketing this event, given the amount they would be spending. Senator Vaithianathan motioned to fully fund, and Senator Diagana seconded. The motion passed.
Constitutional Amendments
After three and a half hours of funding proposal deliberations, Senator Phillips began a mercifully short coverage of amendments to SGA’s bylaws and constitution, informing other members that he had spoken with Dean Jamie Thompson about the terminology used between funding proposals and funding requests. Senator Phillips clarified that all the presentations SGA had just heard were technically funding requests. He and Thompson would be changing the document’s wording to clarify this distinction.
The other notable change Senator Phillips alerted SGA to was taking campaign rules out of the bylaws and making them their own separate document. Changing procedures related to campaigns with the SGA election so close would be unfair and a conflict of interest, Senator Phillips said. As a result, the existing campaign rules were those in effect for the spring election. Senator Ratrut motioned to approve this change, with Senator Charbonnet seconding.
With that, Senator Phillips moved to table the discussion of all other previously discussed amendments until after Spring Break.
Officer Reports:
To close out the meeting, Vice President Mora praised SGA for their contributions and conversations throughout the long evening. Judicial Chair Pierce Jackson affirmed this but also said SGA could be more respectful of students presenting their funding proposals. Finally, as the meeting neared its four hour mark, President Nguyen reminded SGA that staff chats would pick back up after the break, and applications for next year’s SGA positions would open soon.
Anonymous • Mar 18, 2024 at 12:57 pm
SGA will cost cut until every organization and event on campus is dead or dying. The down-sizing of every event and partial fundings of events for years has been responsible for real and tangible impacts on student success and cooperation. If SGA continues to exclusively partially fund events, the student activity fund will only continue to grow and organizations will continue to die. SGA is culpable for this student spirit decline, and has done so for no reason other than their own sense of self importance and greed.
Anonymous • Mar 14, 2024 at 11:34 am
SGA and their funding meetings have some major ethical and financial problems.
First, on surface it looks like they are spending money like crazy on themselves. SGA should really think of the message it sends when it rejects full funding proposals based on cost effectiveness, while catering in dinner options for themselves every week. This is probably upwards of $1000 a month on food expenditure when the university already supplies food options. I’m not insane. Of course they have to eat. But why spend extra money that apparently is so scarce on Chipotle for every member of the SGA. It’s hard to reconcile the idea that these people are trying to save money for the university when buying meals that likely cost $10 per person 4x a month. Too good for a fully funded nacho hour for the whole student population, but not too good for burrito bowls for the SGA. That’s not right. Solution: submit receipts to the general student population, who then gets to vote on whether members of the SGA should have to reimburse the school for certain expenses. I personally don’t know why I should my tuition or general school funds should be used to buy them nicer than necessary dinners.
Second, they’re disinterested. Half don’t even seem like they are paying attention. They should not be praised. They should be more heavily monitored. Solution: Meetings should be held in a room big enough for more than 5 or 6 spectators. This is not a genuine venue for modeling democratic participation. Obviously we all know this, but they could make the illusion a little more believable.
Third, I don’t think they understand modern pricing. They seem baffled by hotel and car rental prices that are exceedingly reasonable in todays economy. They use these meetings to ask sometimes ridiculous questions like why aren’t you taking an uber for 9 people for 6 days 3 times a day because they legitimately believe that somehow this could possibly be cheaper than a one time car rental. It seems like this organization should be extremely in tune with average prices for events, travel plans, food, etc. IDK how they couldn’t be. It’s one of the only things they do. Solution: anything above $1000 should be out of the hands of SGA. They don’t know what’s going on so why should they have a say.
This comment is not to personally attack any specific members of the SGA. I’m confident most of them are nice people. But the way this association is set up is ridiculous and puts way too much faith into people who have let an extremely small amount of power inflate their own importance.