6The Daily Tar HeelMonday, February 4, 1985
I HlOAY. Editor
Joi i. Broadway. .jhjKmz Editor
Mark Stinni i oho. .1. Editor
Bl.N PlRKtWSKI. wt Editor
K11.1.Y Simmons, thtinrsity Editor
VANC i: TRIvFUTHI-N. Sun- and National Editor
MlXANlH Wtll-S. City VJitnr
DAN Tll.l.MAN. linsiuo -x Editor
Lynn Davis, n. ki Editor
Frank Kenni.oy. sports Editor
J en- Grove. Am Editor
Sharon Sheridan. Features Editor
Jeff Nfuviu.f.. rbotoVrarhr Editor
For BSM, WXYC funding
Tomorrow, students will be asked to
choose among a horde of candidates, t
who, in terms of numbers, might be able
to satisfy the requirements for extras in
the movie The Ten Commandments. But
the ballot doesrrt end there. Separate
referendums will determine whether
constitutionally guaranteed funding
should be provided to the Black Student
Movement and campus radio station
WXYC. Despite some philosophical
reservations about constitutional funding,
we believe both groups deserve the kind
of financial security that passage of the
referendums would bring. The organiza
tions are of such value to the University
that we can back the unusual step of
shielding their funding from political
fights within the Campus Governing
Council.
The Black Student Movement, which
has long fought the misconception that
it is an organization that benefits only
black students, is a vital component in
making University life a challenging
educational experience both in the
classroom and out. Through subgroups
such as the Gospel Choir, the Ebony
Readers, the Opeyo Dancers and Black
Ink, the BSM is a sanctuary for black
culture on a campus that has a shameful
record of attracting black students and
faculty. In its role as a recruiting tool,
the BSM helps the University meet its
minority representation requirements
under the consent decree with the federal
government. The referendum would
provide 2.5 percent of Student Activities
Fees (about $12,000 a year) to the BSM.
We believe it is money well spent.
Our fear is that without constitutional
funding the future of the BSM would
depend on the political makeup of the
CGC. While we see nothing wrong with
student organizations falling under the
financial scrutiny of the CGC, the BSM
has been subject to unfair attacks by
council members seeking to dramatically
cut its funds or to eliminate the organ
ization completely. Often the CGC
budgeting process has been subverted into
a kangaroo court by the enemies of the
For SLS fee
If there's any one thing that should
convince students to approve, the Stu
dent Legal Services fee referendum on
tomorrow's ballot, it's that the Campus
Governing Council last week unanim
ously decided to put the plan up for a
student vote. That means a lot, consid
ering that council members have con
sidered, approved and tossed out as
many ideas for funding the SLS as there
are anecdotes in Ron Reagan's bag of
tricks.
Throughout the discussions, everyone
agreed that there was nothing more
sacred on this campus, it seemed, than
Student Legal Services. They only want
to figure whether the group should be
fully or partially constitutionally funded,
or whether a separate fee controlled by
the CGC should be established. The
council went for the latter option, which
not only will provide a permanent
solution for SLS's funding problems, but
also will allow the CGC to keep tabs
on the organization's budget. It is an
admirable compromise students should
endorse tomorrow by voting "yes."
In doing so, they will be permitting
the CGC each year to consider SLS in
a "vacuum." That is, SLS will not be
in the same pod, vying along with 30
other student groups for the limited
amount of money that comes from
Student Activities Fees. Instead, the
organization will compete with no one
except itself; it will be evaluated in terms
of its worth to students. As Student Body
Treasurer Allen Robertson puts it, SLS
will be judged to get less money "not
because, say, the Fine Arts Festival
needs more money, but on its own
merits." Conversely, if members feel SLS
is worth giving more money, that money
will come in the form of a higher fee,
For Frank Winstead . . .
A nice, padded cell.
Satlg
Eur Jto
92nd year of editorial freedom
BSM. The organization is too important
to be left at the mercy of campus politicos
with an axe to grind.
The WXYC referendum would guaran
tee it 4 percent of student fees (about
$19,000 per year). The money represents
the minimum amount the station requires
to stay on the air. In the past, the CGC,
in an attempt to be thrifty, has attempted
to cut the radio station's budget, only to
find that it had to restore the funds later
to keep the station in operation. As weVe
argued previously, WXYC provides a
valuable alternative to the "bubble gum"
stations that dominate the radio dial.
WXYC's ability to remain on the air
without interruptions caused by funding
problems could be a factor in the renewal
of its license. We know that the variety
isn for everybody, but complaints about
format could hardly be answered by a
station allowed to go off the air com
pletely. Students should keep in mind that
having a spot on the radio dial is a
valuable commodity. Other area schools
are hungry for the frequency currently
assigned to WXYC.
Still, we are concerned about the
implications of providing constitutional
funding to every group the CGC sees as
valuable to the University. The Daily Tar
Heel currently receives 16 percent of
student fees and the Carolina Union
receives 33 percent. If students approve
the BSM and WXYC referendums, that
will leave less than half of student fees
to be allocated by our elected represen
tatives in the CGC. If the trend toward
sapping the CGC's funding power con
tinues, the council will likely continue its
alarming trend of harping on national and
international politics at the expense of
campus issues. Organizations provided
constitutional funding are a step removed
from direct accountability to students as
their financial operations are supervised
by boards of directors consisting largely
of appointed members.
Despite these reservations, we think
students should vote yes on the BSM and
WXYC referendums tomorrow. It will be
an investment in the quality of campus
life.
and not from other student groups.
That's not to say the Campus Govern
ing Council has a "blank check" (which
would be drawn on all students) to give
SLS mountains of cash. First, no CGC
is likely to in effect raise taxes and incur
its constituents' wrath. Second, the
University administration and Board of
Trustees have final say, and while they
usually respect students' wishes when it
comes to fee increases, they would put
a halt to anything obscene.
SLS requires about $75,000 a year at
present. If the CGC were to decide to
provide all of that from the separate fee,
it would cost students about $2.50 a
semester. Of course, the CGC under this
plan will have the option of only partially
funding SLS via the separate fee, leaving
the rest to be taken from the general
Student Activities Fee pot. The point
is, the CGC students retain
freedom of choice and review.
An appealing side-effect of the plan
is that by removing SLS from the general
budget-hearings process, the competi
tion among other student groups is
lessened. For every dollar the CGC
decides to provide SLS through the
special fee, that's another dollar to the
student groups. In that sense only it is
a Student Activities Fee increase because
it would make more money available to
those groups. Last year such a fee
increase attempt nearly passed, with 66.5
percent of voters two-tenths of a
percent less than needed favoring such
a measure.
Such sentiment, coupled with the
necessity of the Student Legal Services
to have some financial stability, should
convince students to cast a positive vote
on the SLS fee when they vote
tomorrow. ,
Campus referenda: A turning point?
By ALLEN ROBERTSON
On Tuesday, students will have the opportun
ity to dramatically affect the financial operations
and viability of Student Government and its 35
funded organizations through four referenda
concerning Student Legal Services, Black
Student Movement, WXYC and Student Tel
evision. As your student body treasurer, I hope
to provide the information necessary for us all
to make a reasonable decision on each of these
issues.
Each semester this year, undergraduates paid
$146.50 in student fees while graduate students
paid $144.50. Every student paid $73 for Student
Health Service, $6 for Health Service Debt
Retirement, $25 to the Athletic Association,
$15.50 for the Student Union Building and $10
for Student Facilities Debt Retirement. The
remainder of the total, $17 for undergraduates
and $15 for graduate students, is known as the
Student Activities Fee. The intramural program
takes $5 of the Student Activities Fee, STV has
received 50 cents -of it this year; and the
remainder, $1 1.50 for undergraduates and $9.50
for graduates, goes to the accounting entity
known as "Student Government."
Each spring the Campus Governing Council
appropriates Student Government's portion of
the Student Activities Fee, currently $453,700,
as well as $25,000 in summer student fees. In
accordance with the Student Constitution,
$157,591 (33 percent of the total) is appropriated
to the Carolina Union; 16 percent of the total
goes to The Daily Tar Heel; 15 percent of the
graduate students" fees ($19,200) is given to the
Graduate and Professional Students Federation.
Student Government must also pay $18,000 to
the Student Activities Fund Office for accounting
services and audits. With these items paid, the
CGC is left with $206,937, 43 percent of the
original total, to appropriate to any and all other
student organizations, including Student Govern
ment itself.
Last spring, 34 student groups requested
$322,000 in funding from the CGC, a level
comparable to previous years; however, the CGC
was able to appropriate $230,020 in 1982-83 and
$265,675 in 1 983-84 to student groups by drawing
on the surplus funds generated over the years
that Student Government and student fees have
existed. By last spring, we read how Student
Government's surplus position had fallen to
problem levels. Upon accepting the office of
Treasurer, I knew that during the 1984-85 fiscal
year, the CGC would have to adopt a balanced
budget. The Finance Committee, after its first
pass through all the budgets, found $242,000 of
worthy programming and services. I informed
them that they must cut $36,000 more and they
did so in a final marathon meeting. Later, after
the CGC passed a modified version of the budget
bill, the victims emerged: most organizations
were saddled with heavy fundraising responsi
bilities and suffered an average 25 percent cut
in their Student Government appropriation; the
Phoenix was cut from a weekly to a biweekly
publication, and the Fine Arts Festival was all
but eliminated. SLS, with its $75,000 budget,
.was an obvious target for aits and survived intact
only because of its tremendous support among
CGC members and satisfied student customers.
After the budget hearings last spring, I thought
RHA candidate Rogers: 'I would fight
By MIKE" ROD RIG O" ROGERS
All of my opponents have had a chance to
tell you, the public, why they are running for
Residence Hall Association president. The Daily
Tar Heel has gone as far as to endorse one of
my opponents, while failing to give me the credit
of at least being noteworthy opposition by
neglecting to recognize me as a candidate. Well,
I am writing to you, students of UNC, to
acknowledge the existence of another candidate
for RHA president, THE candidate for RHA
president, Mike Rogers.
One opponent advocates abolishing the RHA
programming board because he terms it ineffec
tive, and overloading the RHA governing board
with its work; and this has been called a viable
solution. Wrong! If the programming board was
given more power, then it could be effective.
Anything that is powerless is ineffective. My
opponents all speak of the implementation of
programming for South Campus, yet my record
while serving as governor of Hinton James
LETTERS TO THE
Parker, Holley
To the editor:
As representatives of on-campus
students in Student Government,
we strongly believe that Paul Parker
and Reggie Holley have arrogantly
and intentionally evaded their
responsibilities to represent all
students, especially our constitu
ents. Through a crafty, cooperative
manipulation of their positions as
student body president and Campus
Governing Council speaker, respec
tively, they killed an overwhelm
ingly supported CGC measure
a referendum on the mandatory
meal plan for on-campus students.
There is no greater arrogance for
an elected representative than to
deny the electorate a direct voice.
For president, Marshall
To the editor.
While the other candidates are
arguing over what they have done
and what they would do as student
body president, only Dirk Marshall
is focusing on how he would do it.
Marshall is the realistic candidate
for president; maybe that's because
he is an outsider and he is skeptical
of Student Government's
effectiveness.
Only Marshall is focusing on the
role of the student body president.
Only Marshall is telling us how he
would keep us informed and open
up Suite C to the mainstream
WOW, OAui,a. so For
IhtSLSPtR STUDfcKrb .
EACH 5MST&? ReaLU
about possible solutions to Student Govern
ment's strapped financial condition and other
ways of funding SLS. I considered the obvious
answer, an increase in the Student Activities Fee,
since 66.5 percent of those voting approved an
increasein a referendum last February; however,
because iCGC only appropriates 43 cents out of
each dollar, I realized that only a large increase
would significantly ease the budget constraint.
SLS, whose employees are paid much less than
comparable university lawyers and receive no
retirement benefits, would remain a target for
future budget cutters as employee salaries rise
with the cost of living. Finally I, along with
Student Body President Paul Parker and CGC
Finance Committee Chairman Wyatt Closs,
proposed a progressive solution to the financial
problems facing Student Government and SLS:
a separate and additional component of the
Student Activities Fees, to be known as the
"Student Legal Services Fee," to be initiated and
altered by the CGC as necessary for the sole
purpose of funding SLS.
A SLS fee would put the SLS in a vacuum,
where the service could be evaluated on its merits
in a rational way. This fee as proposed would
give SLS financial flexibility while retaining total
accountability to students through our elected
representatives on the CGC. This fee also has
the advantage of indirectly benefiting the other
34 organizations funded by Student Government
by eventually freeing up the $75,000 out of the
general pool of funds now used by SLS. The
need for a general Student Activities Fee increase
would be eliminated for years to come. Having
the responsibility to set the SLS fee would also
have several side effects for CGC members; it
would force them to be more responsive and
responsible to their constituents in dealing with
a real campus issue. We would also have an
incentive to find out who are representatives are
and force them tot)e accountable. All of these
effects would be positive steps toward installing
integrity in Student Government, financially and
otherwise.
already demonstrates such implementation with
events like the South Campus-Granville Semi
Formal that brought everyone in those areas
closer together. If elected, 1 would not begin,
but continue such programs. I would also bring
in people from every dormitory, people who are
not elected, people who are not subject to the
political whims of their contemporaries, people
who can honestly tell it like it is without fear
of losing political credibility. This would give
my administration an additional perspective, one
that my opponents fail to offer. I would continue
my record of community service I established
while governing Hinton James through central
izing community service projects via RHA, thus
building rapport between the dormitories and
the local community. And finally, but most
importantly, I would fight for your rights as
residents in the dormitories against housing
increases and other matters YOU deem approp
riate. So on Feb. 5 vote for Mike Rogers for
RHA president the candidate whose record
speaks for itself.
EDITOR
putting one over on students
Parker intentionally waited until
after the last CGC meeting before
elections to veto the bill in order
to circumvent our right to override
his veto by majority vote. The
constitution stipulates the president
has only 10 school days to veto a
bill in order to prevent such delays.
The CGC met 12 school days after
passage of the bill. So what's the
deal? As speaker, Holley was respon
sible for placing the bill in the
executive office for signature, thus
starting the 10-day count. Parker
said that took two days, although
the bill was fully prepared for
signature immediately. The veto is
dated Jan. 30, which was the date
of our meeting. Holley's comment?
"Tough luck, guys! Better luck next
time!"
In his official explanation of the
veto, Parker said the student body
was "heard" and "supportive" two
years ago. It's a dead issue only to
Parker; I don't know what they
think at the lodge, but in the
dormitories, the students are mad.
Parker accuses referendum suppor
ters of knowledgeably misleading
students "for personal benefit." We
are not running for re-election.
What are you doing, Parker?
Holley has refused to call a special
For
To the editor:
I applaud Brad Ives in his com
mon sense campaign for student
body president. I find it refreshing
to see a candidate who keeps the
proper function of Student Govern
ment in perspective; that is, to serve
the best interests of the University
community, particularly the stu
dents. Ives has directed his platform
strictly towards campus issues,
purposely avoiding involvement
with national or statewide affairs.
He vows to maintain that policy if
elected to head the Executive
Branch.
His campus-oriented policy
employs the divide-and-conquer
theory; simply put, a governing
body is more effective when it
student.
When you look at the parking
problem and the mandatory meal
plan; when you see the utter failure
of Student Government in trying to
convince the University to divest
funds from companies investing in
South Africa; and when you see this
round of candidates making more
promises as if they could deliver on
them by just wishing hard enough,
you see that Marshall is the only
candidate with a realistic approach.
Polly Winde
Morrison
X CAN'T
THAT viB
FINALS HAV&
On election day you will also find three other
referenda on the ballot: constitutional funding
, for the BSM and WXYC and another one-year
increase in the Student Activities Fee of 50 cents
per student per semester to directly benefit STV.
I believe that if you support the SLS fee you
must seriously question these three measures for
various reasons. The STV fee would be unne
cessary if the CGC can divert monies previously
used for SLS to organizations like STV. The
BSM constitutional funding issue has been raised
this year primarily as a reaction to last year's
budget squeeze. With that pressure reduced by
the SLS fee, the BSM can confidently remain
accountable to the students each year through
the CGC budget process. Constitutional funding
for WXYC may still be a desirable option even
with an SLS fee. Their monies are not used for
salaries or programming, but for relatively fixed
costs such as the operational expenses and
equipment maintenance vital to the continued
operation of a radio station.
Consider these facts and options. The SLS
fee, which could be implemented next year or
over a period of several years, would presently
need only a total of $2.50 per student per semester
to fully support the program, as compared with
the $73 we pay for the Student Health Service.
Whereas we students have no control over the
Health Service fee, we would retain complete
control over a SLS fee. I believe that this is a
measure worthy of your support, one which will
permanently fund SLS in an adequate and
flexible mannner and simultaneously ease the
financial pressure on Student Government. I
believe in the value of our student organizations
, and their services. Right now we receive many
benefits from the $11.50 and $9.50, respectively,
spent on the Union, the DTH and 35 other
organizations. Boosting our contribution by the
cost of a few cans of Coke would substantially
increase the amount of useful programming and
Services., -..:-. -.... .
Allen Robertson, a senior economics major
from Statesville, is student body treasurer.
for your rights'
Mike 'Rodrigo' Rogers
meeting io oveinde the veto, saing
that the referendum is "a political
issue." Darn right! And Holley is
running for student body president.
Desperate efforts are afoot to
place the referendum before the
students despite these manipula
tions. We cry out to everyone
let the students be heard!
Marshall Mills
CGC Student Affairs Committee
Ron Everett
CGC Ethics Committee
Tim Newman
CGC speaker pro-tem
president, Ives
concentrates on a smaller realm of
influence. There are enough prob
lems of daily concern to deal with
in Chapel Hill, much less Managua.
It is difficult enough for the average
voter to find a candidate with whom
he agrees down the line. Ideally,
each candidate would have to
announce or publish his stands on
a multitude of off-campus issues,
making it harder still to find a
satisfactory president, and render
ing the forum system altogether
unfeasible.
We need a president like Ives to
represent our interests here in
Chapel Hill.
Jon Baker
Connor
Ay J .'iW)