Student government election rules
Expecting students to trust ASUU officials to wisely use a budget of more than $1 million is asking a lot, especially considering the Associated Students of the University of Utah doesn’t seem to trust candidates to run open and unfettered campaigns.
For years, student elections have been governed by a tangle of impractical rules. This year, candidates were allowed to announce their candidacy at the end of January, but weren’t allowed to campaign until the second week of February. Even then, students have to wait until March 2 before they can pass out food and other campaign materials. With all the time constraints, candidates spend almost as much time filing silly grievances against one another as they do campaigning.
Granted, ASUU elections are not on the same level as state or national campaigns, but the overbearing rules give ASUU elections an air of artificiality. If ASUU can’t trust candidates to run responsible campaigns without play-by-play directions, why should students trust student leaders at all? Some provisions such as budget caps and rules against vandalism make sense, but ASUU should allow students to campaign when, where and how they want. MISS.
ASUU database proposals
All three ASUU presidential candidates are offering some sort of online database as part of their campaign. The GO Party plans to create a centralized scholarship database that would assist students in financing their education. Although such a database would be a great help to students, what really caught our eye were transparency measures by the Revolution and Synergy parties. Both have proposed similar plans to post ASUU spending records on the Internet. Transparency is always an encouraging sign, and accounting for ASUU spending would help build student trust. Informing students on how their student fees are used also promotes involvement and accountability. All three proposals are steps in the right direction. HIT.
Permit Refunds
When gas prices peaked around $4 a gallon this summer, the Utah Transit Authority tacked a fuel surcharge on the U’s contract for transit passes. The U made up the difference by increasing the price of campus parking passes. After gas prices plummeted, UTA dropped the surcharge, leaving the U with a $24,000 surplus. Instead of keeping the excess funds, the U announced their intent last week to return the money to parking-permit holders. In principle, the U should be commended for passing the savings on to students. In practice however, the refund is probably more trouble than it’s worth. A typical student with an E Pass will receive a refund of $1.65, while anyone with a U pass will receive $3.30. Although Commuter Services claims to be working on a direct deposit system for the refund, it sounds logistically improbable to us. In the absence of direct deposit, even more money would be spent printing thousands of $1.65 checks.
Although the refund is well meant it isn’t practical. Instead of offering some extra pocket change to students, Commuter Services would do better to keep the money to invest in parking maintenance or help subsidize future cost increases or projects, such as the construction of a parking structure. MISS.