COLIN PERRY
News Editor
After months of debate and deliberations, a new version of Statute O-6 of the Student Association (SA) constitution is expected to be finalized, setting new standards for what counts as a constituted group. If that sentence meant nothing to you, then that’s okay — but if you belong to any campus club, some of these changes may affect you soon.
There are over 150 student groups at Fredonia, but as of now, only 25 are constituted. Constituted clubs, like Pride Alliance, Music Industry Club or Performing Arts Company, are provided with their own budget from SA (which can range from $3000 to more than $100,000) because they are considered to provide a service to most of the campus community and often beyond.
SA President and finance and computer information systems double major Jason Burgos said that concerns about money and reach alike played a part in shaping the new version of O-6.
“We have gotten to the point where we can’t sustain more constituted groups because of our declining enrollment [and] less student activity fee money,” Burgos, who served on the O-6 committee before beginning his term, said. “We wanted to come up with a better way to define our constituted groups as more of an ‘elite’ status, so it’s not just this progressional thing your club can get to.”
The amended version of Statute O-6, expected to be finalized in the coming days, will require groups to have “a record of consistent contributions to a significant number of the student body [and] the campus community” as per the revisions.
There is also a new requirement forcing constituted groups to have succession plans in place. According to Jennifer Hildebrand, history professor and adviser to students during the O-6 committee process, this is to ensure that groups who positively affect campus at large continue to do so into the future.
“[We] want to make sure that once our students get used to the wonderful services that [constituted groups are] providing. We don’t then yank the rug out from under them,” she said.
These alterations to the original statute are the result of an entire semester’s worth of conversations, as the O-6 committee worked all last Fall to try and reach a satisfying new version of the policy. In the midst of that process last semester, senior political science and computer information systems double major and committee member Ralph Farrell attributed the length of the process to the diverse concerns on the committee.
“You can expect that with anything, really, when it comes to a group of people coming together to find a solution,” he said. “We’re coming from different backgrounds. We’re coming from different ideas and … we have to bounce off each other what will fit better for the campus as a whole.”
Burgos added that the process required “a lot of word choice,” meaning that the language formally adopted in the statute could potentially unfairly affect the ability of certain groups to become constituted in the future. He is optimistic that the coming revision of Statute O-6 will withstand the test of time.
“I think it’s a very good revision of O-6,” he said. “It gives us an opportunity to think a second time whenever we’re having a group go up for constitution. In ten years from now, I hope the future SA sees this as something groups have to work towards, not just progressionally go towards.”