Winter and early spring are perceived by many to be times of renewal and regeneration.  The commencement of a new year and a new semester only augment this sense of zeitgeist, this whirlwind of activity, and this sense of things beginning anew. However, within the hallowed realm of student life at our fair university, this time of year plays host to one procedure that represents some degree of continuum between the ages – the Student Government Association’s annual budgeting allocations process.

Though it is the bane of many an RSO treasurer’s existence, this allocation process serves a crucial role in the maintenance of the University of Massachusetts’ vibrant community of student organizations. It brings together organizations, their treasurers, and the Student Government Association in a timeless ritual that epitomizes all that is great with our republican system.

There are stratified systems of governance, a respect for hierarchy and the opportunity to procure funding through the demonstration of one’s positive impact upon the greater UMass community. For many groups, it will be a chance to promote the viability of their interests, value, and programming. It is, crucially, an opportunity for other organizations to spread their proverbial wings after extended periods of dormancy, for fate to announce that, in the immortal words of Bob Dylan, “…the loser now will be later to win.”

However, despite its unquestionable pertinence to the UMass community, the actual budgeting process is infamous for the arcane procedures and sometimes intransigent rules that characterize it. The SGA Senate Ways and Means Committee – of which the author has the humble honor of being Chairman – is primus inter pares amongst the entities which make the allocation process tick, and is the primary body charged with the synthesis and enforcement of funding policy.

But it tends to be perceived as either a faceless, bureaucratic committee whose penchants and propensities are known but to God, or as a group of sordid malefactors bent on strangling student life.

Thankfully, the reality is far different. Because of the mammoth breadth of its influence, and the not insignificant amount of money it is charged with allocating, the committee is amongst the most politically sensitive elements of the SGA, and is rightfully filled with the best, brightest and most experienced that the SGA has to offer. If this weren’t the case, then there would be no way that the allocation process could have sustained itself with so much enthusiasm for so long – indeed, the details of the process have suffered little change since the late 1990s.

Despite this air of venerability, it is acknowledged that the process does, from time to time, warrant reform to one degree or another. For the Fiscal Year 2013 allocation process, the committee has introduced a rubric that organizations will be asked to construct their budgets around. It will provide a list of criteria that both organizations and the committee will be asked to adhere to in their respective budgeting tasks, which will provide an unmatched continuum of efficiency and accountability.

In addition, the committee has rewritten its vaunted funding guide to make it more concise and relevant to the needs of organizations.  In addition, the committee will be meeting at least twice a week this upcoming semester in order to process budget requests as speedily as possible. This, however, will be business as usual, for the committee maintained a similar schedule in the previous semester to prepare itself for the challenges of the upcoming one.

Aside from all of these procedural reforms, politics is still the most communal of processes. Consequently, it is just as incumbent upon organizations to meet their obligations with regards to qualifying for funding as it is on that SGA to actually allocate funds. This includes attending at least one of the mandatory budget workshops to be held in the campus center on Jan. 28, 29, 30 and 31.

When the committee sits down on Feb. 24 – the deadline for organizations to submit budget requests – to begin the allocation process, it does so with the understanding that the allocation process is not a precise science. It is, in fact, the exact opposite – the act of allocation is very much an art form. It draws its strength from precedent, and causes those who participate in it to recognize its occasional human imprecision.

The process is also necessarily subjective, for there is no algorithm or equation that can effectively and absolutely determine the value of student organizations. That is a task that requires an understanding of the organizations as human, organic entities that need to be appreciated based upon the intricate nature of their interactions with the campus community. This is something that no abstract account statement will ever be able to reveal, and that no spreadsheet will ever be able to calculate.

In this sense, the Ways and Means Committee is charged with the most arduous of responsibilities: balancing the value of precedent with the financial realities at hand.  However, it is a burden that the committee bears with distinction, for through fortitude in this process this year, our campus’ vibrancy will be preserved for one year more.

Dan Stratford is a Collegian columnist. He can be reached at [email protected]