I feel that almost every time Stevens makes a good decision, a poor one follows not too far behind. The poor decision that followed Stevens’ outstanding communication regarding the COVID-19 situation? The decision not to refund any fees — most notably the Student Activity Fee (SAF).
About three weeks ago, all student organizations had a spending freeze while the Office of Student Life took stock of the remaining money in student accounts. This appeared to be to determine the exact amount of unspent money that remained from the SAF to issue a refund. As Business Manager for The Stute at the time, I distinctly remember telling Danielle that we would still need to spend roughly $12,000 — leaving $10,000 that would returned to the SGA’s operating budget, which would be used for a potential refund.
Then, last Friday, in an email, Provost Christophe Pierre and Vice President of Enrollment Management and Student Affairs Marybeth Murphy announced to the student body that the SAF would not be refunded, and any remaining money would be used “to address critical student needs resulting from COVID-19.”
I was livid after reading this email. How could the refund committee, a committee without a single student representative, make this decision about student money? Every action in the past month had pointed towards a refund. The SGA cabinet seemed to be blindsided by this decision and was not involved in making this decision at all.
The SAF is money collected for use by the entire undergraduate student body and allocated by the SGA senate. No undergraduate can be excluded from using the funding, and it is largely up to members of the undergraduate student body to decide how it is used. Stevens administrators deciding on their own to use the funds for “critical student needs resulting for COVID-19” does not fall into either of these criteria. The undergraduate students did not allow administrators to use it for COVID-19 relief, and it excludes members of the student body from using these funds.
Separate funds for student relief already exist. The “Impact Assistance Term Scholarship Fund” is for students who need extra financial aid due to a change in their financial situation. Additionally, a new fund, “Stevens Rises Relief Fund,” was created to aid students struggling during the COVID-19 crisis and has already collected over $15,000. While it is entirely unclear how the money in either of these funds is distributed, the university already has mechanisms in place to aid struggling students. That is, if the funds are given to students. According to the donation page for the relief fund, “Any funds that remain will be used to support the university’s response in returning to normal business operations.”
Additionally, Stevens will be receiving $3.1 million of federal emergency stimulus funding due to the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act. At least half of the federal money must be used for emergency financial aid grants for students. This is plenty of money to help students as well as support operating expenses; there is no need for the Student Activity Fee to be touched by administrators.
Stevens’ argument for not refunding any fees is that the financial situation for the next academic year is uncertain. They do not know how many accepted students will enroll next semester as deposits are not due until May 1. However, every year Stevens must rely on estimates on fall enrollment — why is this year any different? Stevens should just use conservative estimates if they are worried about declining enrollment. The SGA used conservative estimates for funding allocations for Fall 2020, so refunding unspent money from the Spring 2020 Student Activity Fee would not have an impact on the SGA’s finances.
Leftover money from the Student Activity Fee—that is, money currently in the SGA’s operating budget and unspent money in student organizations’ accounts—should be refunded to the entire student body. With the money unable to be used for the rest of the semester, it is only fair to give it back directly to the students, not roll over the funds. Rolling over the funds would disadvantage graduating seniors and transferring students who would not be able to take advantage of the increased funds available for student organizations and events in the next semester.
As much as I disagree with the decision to not partially refund the General Service Fee as certain services, such as the gym, are not available for students right now, I’m willing to give Stevens the benefit of the doubt on other fees as I am not as privy to their exact finances. However, the Student Activity Fee is different — it belongs to the students, and how it is used should be the student body’s decision.
Be First to Comment