We take exception with the hasty manner in which these clubs were reviewed. The only explanation why these reviews were done over the course of two days was that the new government felt it was necessary to review all of the clubs formally. Why this process could not have stretched out over the course of the semester has not been made clear.
However, we are glad to see that the Judiciary Council has used Review and Recognition as an opportunity to slim down the number of clubs on campus. This provides the Budgetary Committee with the comfort of knowing that all of the clubs that come before them are worthy of funding.
The Judiciary Council should go back to the future. They should return to the former model of the Student Finance Committee (SFC) that assigns members an area of specialization, such as publications or club sports. This will allow the Judiciary Council to more carefully scrutinize and evaluate requests for review and recognition so that they may more objectively determine which clubs should be derecognized. The individuals assigned to each area would be responsible for keeping a more regular watch on clubs and they could develop relationships with a small group of club leaders.
Two final suggestions:
1) Clubs should be encouraged to fundraise parts of their own budgets.
2) The AAS should put out a non-binding student survey to get feedback on which clubs contribute most to the campus. This information could be used to gain a better understanding of the value of different organizations, but it is only a piece of the puzzle. We hope that the Judiciary Council would craft a coherent set of guidelines for determining which clubs to keep and which to derecognize if it is decided that our resources are being spread too thin.