March 16, 2010

Letter to the Editor: Resolution 29 lacks vital details

Print More

To the Editor:

Re: “Reviewing the Reviewers,” Opinion, March 16

The SA’s passing of Resolution 29 poses serious concerns for the Cornell community, many of which seem to be overlooked.

For one, the resolution states that organizations cannot “duplicate” that of other student groups. Does anyone actually know what this means? Just how different do groups have to be? What about EARs and Minds Matter?  They do nearly the same exact thing (again, “nearly”), and both receive by line funding. After this past week, I doubt the Cornell community would want to see one of these organizations get the axe, but why should these groups receive an exception over others?

Secondly, what if a group isn’t SAFC funded?  If the point of the resolution is to more efficiently allocate resources, are two identical RSOs valid if one doesn’t receive funding?

Finally, this group will redefine politics.  Who decides what particular group gets the axe? Of the many finance groups on campus that do the exact same thing, which stays?  My bet is the one that is run by someone on the assembly.

The student body needs to continually question the actions of this committee.  Without the development of clear cut, public and objective criteria that answer these questions, the quality of student life at Cornell is in serious jeopardy. Without such things, nine people (up to five up of which may not be elected student represenatives) will seemingly control the establishment and operations of every RSO on campus.

Matt Koren ’12, chair, Student Assembly Innovation Council