The Student Assembly’s process of by-line funding has gained recent attention in light of assembly members’ controversial decision to cut Cornell Cinema’s funding. Although by-line funding allocates a portion of students’ tuition, known as Student Activity Fee (SAF), many students seem to know little about the process that has prompted much controversy on campus.

By-line funding sets the Student Activity Fee, a relatively small portion of each undergraduate and graduate student’s tuition, and directs it to 30 organizations whose activities “are of direct and primary benefit to the entire Cornell community,” according to the S.A. Charter.

Organizations that receive funds from by-line funding include the SAFC, which distributes the funding it receives to over 350 registered undergraduate student organizations on campus. The SAFC has no role in the by-line funding process. The S.A. and the S.A. Appropriations Committee decide how to allocate the SAF. Other organizations that benefit from by-line funding include the Cornell Concert Commission, the Class Councils and the Slope Day Programming Board.Student Activity Fee Allocation 2008-2010

The by-line funding process begins when groups send in requests for funding, stated in dollars per student, according to Chris Basil ’10, S.A. vice president for finance. With their request, groups submit important background information such as past financial statements, a breakdown of their expenses and rough projections for their future needs. These financial packets are submitted to the Appropriations Com­mittee one week before their meeting. It is the responsibility of committee members to read them and formulate questions ahead of time, according to Vincent Andrews ’11, S.A. vice president for public relations.

The Appropriations Com­mittee is comprised of 15 voting members and holds approximately hour-long meetings with groups before voting to recommend a specific amount. During these meetings, groups have approximately 15 minutes to describe their budget and organization and present their justification for their funding request, particularly if they seek an increase. This presentation is followed by a question-and-answer session with the committee.

Basil chairs the meetings and writes the rationale of the committee’s recommendation while the S.A.-at-Large votes to approve or disprove the recommended amount. An organization has the opportunity to appeal the S.A. decision, which Cornell Cinema did. To overturn the decision, the S.A. requires a two-thirds majority. Cornell Cinema failed to overturn the S.A. decision.

At the last S.A. meeting of the fall semester, all 30 decisions are combined into one piece of legislation, which is then presented to President Skorton and to the Board of Trustees. The legislation may be amended by a majority vote in the last meeting. However, if the legislation is not passed, the SAF reverts to $204.00 per student — the current SAF as it has been for 2008-2010 — and individual bylines revert to their current allocation.

In the spring, the S.A. votes on Appendix B rules for allocation of funds and makes specific rules for individual groups. For instance, EARS spends approximately 50 percent of their budget on publicity, but Basil explained that this use of funds is appropriate because one of the most important aspects of their organization is to make sure that students know that EARS is available to them. However, a similar allocation of funds would be inappropriate for an organization like the Slope Day Programming Board, Basil said.

“The standards and judgments are different for each group, and guidelines have to be reasonable,” he said. The new rules go into effect next fall with the new funding cycle.

In the case of Cornell Cinema, the Student Assembly voted to decrease their 2008-2010 budget by-line allocation of $11.00 and recommended reducing it to $8.60 for 2010-2012. According to Basil, the Appropriations Committee was most concerned about the fact that Cornell Cinema pays student salaries using funds from the SAF — an “improper” decision, according to the Basil’s rationale.

While acknowledging the benefit of the Cinema to the Cornell community, the rationale suggested that Cornell Cinema “restructure” over the next two years and become “more sustainable.” The rationale questioned attendance at the Cinema’s screenings and encouraged the Cinema to reduce the number of days it shows films.

However, Mary Fessenden, director of Cornell Cinema, said that the funding cut was “totally unwarranted.”

“Not one rationale holds up when you look at the facts,” she said.

Addressing the issue of student salaries, Fessenden explained that funding from other sources such as outside grants, departmental support or ticket sales could be re-allocated to pay student labor costs and not use SAF funds. She also noted the fact that the Cinema actually generates more income during its repeat screenings held on Sunday to Tuesday; they do not lose money on those days.

These and other apparent misunderstandings between the Cornell Cinema and the S.A. may be attributed in large part to the relatively little amount of time devoted to reviewing each organization. Apart from prior review of financial documents by individual committee members, every Monday night the committee hears the requests of three separate organizations, spending approximately one hour for each hearing.

Acknowledging the lack of sufficient time devoted to fully understanding an organization’s budget and organization, Andrews said, “It’s a concern and more time may have been necessary.” However, he added, “It’s hard to change the process because we’re funding 30 different organizations … but it’s a thing to be looked into.”

Since the Cinema is a complex organization due to its diverse funding streams, Fessenden said she wishes more time had been spent to gain a more full understanding of how the Cinema operates.

“Since different standards are applied to different groups, it seems unfair. It’s a double-standard with Cornell Cinema at the short end of the stick,” Fessenden said.

If the proposed cut passes at the end of the fall semester and is approved by both President Skorton and the Board of Trustees, the Cinema will have to make some hard choices.

Potential cost-cutting options include raising ticket prices for next year, consolidating some student positions and cuts in specialty programming, according to Fessenden. In the long run, she added, cutting specialty programming could potentially jeopardize outside grant funding — grants which were intended to fund these specialty programs — and lead to further cuts.

“The SAF is about opportunity for students,” Fessenden said, “yet the way [the S.A.] is applying the process seems all about reducing opportunities at a time when cultural opportunities are already being reduced.”

However, Andrews explained that members of the S.A. and Graduate and Professional Student Assembly are in a difficult position. “As students we’re trying to represent best the interests of students, and we also have to respect and work with organizations and be beneficial for everyone.”

According to Ari Epstein, assistant director of the Office of the Assemblies, the S.A. and the Appropriations Committee followed all the by-line funding process properly as directed by their charter. He stated in an e-mail, “It appears the organization received a fair hearing and respectful treatment, and the SA made a decision that is within its discretion.”

Regarding the overwhelming student response to the Cornell Cinema controversy, Andrews said, “S.A. members are very happy to work with all the different organizations in trying to improve student life on campus …We’re happy to see student involvement. It results in a better process.”

For now, Cornell Cinema’s by-line funded allocation of $8.60 is set until the final meeting of the S.A. to take place later this fall, at which time the amount may be amended by a majority vote.