"The constitution provides a means of review into the propriety of the SFC's actions. We're operating without precedent here," said SGO President Michelle Oliveros-Larsen '02 at Monday's SGO meeting. "I think it's good for us to go through this process and possibly increase efficiency in light of the past. There is the potential for the Senate's later creation of a process of appeal through the Senate."
"I can't tell you how long the investigation will take," she added.
Will Johnson '03, treasurer of the SGO and chairman of the SFC, agreed to step down from the review board due to the obvious conflict of interest, while Haynes will advise the board as a non-voting member.
Johnson and Haynes declined direct comment to The Student pending the official inquiry, which arose directly from allegations made by the crew team against the SFC, including charges of impropriety, inefficiency and injustice in their allocation and appellate processes.
"I will not comment on the crew team/SFC matter," said Haynes. "It is a student issue, and I have no comment. I look forward to hearing the findings of the SGO once they investigate the allegations."
On Monday night, the crew team addressed the SGO in a speech given by Baker Franke '02, following the team's failed attempt to secure $2,500 for van rentals that allow them to travel to and from their boat house.
"Twenty-five hundred dollars seems like a small price to pay to keep a team around that has been at Amherst since 1865," said Franke to the SGO. "That's a measly drop in the bucket of SFC funds; I can't see how the SFC can justify not giving us that money when we have informed them that they are going to put the crew program under."
"We look at historical spending patterns and, regardless of how much money we give a club, they will spend 85 percent," said Johnson at the SGO meeting Monday.
The SFC cut the crew team's budget from $13,640 last semester to $11,860, which Franke declared would put the team into debt, or cause it to be unable to compete. He continued his address to the Senate, providing refutations for the justification the SFC has provided the team for the cuts.
"They told us that they had warned us last semester that they would cut our budget," said Franke, "but, if I say, I'm going to punch you in the face, and then I punch you in the face, that doesn't justify my doing it."
"They also noted that we charge dues and that other clubs don't charge dues, so that is another reason to make a cut. It is true that crew team members have to pay $100 per semester, but we wouldn't have to if the SFC or athletic department gave us more money," added Franke. "Finally, they say that we have alumni support, but alumni supply us with boats; we can't pay for van rentals with boats. Our SFC budget is our operating budget."
SFC chief of staff Jorge Alves '02 responded to Franke's statement with assurances that the SFC had "maxed out" all the funds that it could allocate and was forced to cut the crew team's funding, especially in light of the "alternative sources" they have available to them. He cited fairness to other clubs on campus and restraints in the SFC's own budget as further justifications for the cuts.
Following the SGO meetings, there were several conversations between SFC and crew team members, from which arose another SFC justification of the cut, as their records showed the crew team in possession of a bank account in excess of $4,000. The crew team confirmed that this money was used to give their coach a raise last year.
"You may as well give us zero dollars if you're not going to give us the money to keep us going," said crew team member Matt Gordon '03 after the meeting. "This isn't going to be over when we get the money."
One matter that the crew team, SFC and SGO, as voiced by Oliveros-Larsen, agreed upon was that an effort should be made to get the athletic department more involved in funding the crew team.
"The athletic department needs to play a much greater role in supplying financial support to the crew team," said Franke. "It's in the interests of the College, as an institution, to support us, and not let a measly $2,500 shut us down."
An appeal by the crew team to the SFC for discretionary funds totaling $2,500 was being considered as of today. Regardless of that decision, the SGO will continue its investigation into alleged improprieties.
In addition, the SGO will take this opportunity to review the functioning of the SFC, including issues of disclosure brought up by Franke.
"The SFC is not even operating within the guidelines of the Student Handbook," said Franke at the meeting. "Budgets are public documents-they're supposed to post what everyone asked for and what everyone got. They haven't."
"We plan to put the budget information online, with an increased level of efficiency from previous versions. We're working on that," said Alves. "It's a question more of the technicality of things being put up. However, all of that information is available upon request."
According to budgets provided by the SFC, more money was initially allocated this semester to the athletics and tournaments subcommittee than in the previous two semesters. Those figures reached a high this semester of $59,499.22, after totals of $54,247.85 last spring and $51,099.66 last fall. Coinciding with a drop in the amount requested, this meant that the percentage of initial requests fulfilled rose about 10 percent, from 51 to 61 percent.
However, in the midst of these budgetary increases, the crew team saw it's budget cut $1,780. Meanwhile, the ski and sailing teams received increases of $4,792 and $2,330, respectively. While Alves claimed that the crew team received the largest budget of any organization, the ski team received $965 more than crew this semester.
Also brought into question by Franke was the non-existence of a subcommittee made up of one representative from each of the members of the athletics and tournament division of the SFC, a measure which is called for by the Handbook. SFC members cited the impracticality of filling a committee, when several committee chairs ran for their positions unopposed.
"Nonetheless, we as students have the right to know where the money is being allocated," said Franke. "We are supposed to have a representative on that subcommittee. Everything is going on behind closed doors."
Another of Franke's allegations of misconduct involved the misplacement of the crew team budget, which he claimed was submitted on time. Several other clubs around campus voiced similar concerns in regard to mishandling of budgets and alleged dishonesty.
"We were told that there were discrepancies in the old budget, so they asked us to resubmit it," said Seth Fitzsimmons of NOTE, a technology club on campus. "When we asked for the old one so that we could fix the discrepancies, we were told that they had left the folder out on the windowsill, the janitors had left the window open and it had been rained upon, making it illegible."
"It was frustrating to be told that there were discrepancies, suggesting that it was our fault," said Fitzsimmons. "Only when I pushed did they admit the truth."
Johnson declined to comment on the NOTE issue.
The Amherst Review also faced budget problems when they were informed that they had not submitted a budget. The Review goes to press at the end of next semester and indicated that they will need SFC money in order to do so.
"At this point we haven't gotten funds," said Sam Masinter '04, who works for the publication. "We don't want to point blame-we know some things were lost in their move, but we're not sure whose fault it is."