RUSA moves to suspend club funding pending U. action on booking policies

On Thursday, the Rutgers University Student Assembly passed four bills, one of which will suspend student organization funding used to purchase from University departments starting in November, pending the administration's inaction on student concerns about academic space bookings.

Introduced by the Assembly President Jack Ramirez, a School of Arts and Sciences senior, the "Resolution to Advocate for the Opening of Academic Spaces" comes after the University changed policies governing meeting spaces available for student organizations.

Under current guidelines, the more than 500 student organizations at Rutgers can only book spaces after 10:30 p.m., Monday through Thursdays, something which the Assembly argues will pose unnecessary hardship on student leaders and groups and force them into a "bidding war."

In his remarks on the bill to the assembly, Ramirez said this particular issue has been brought to the administration's attention since the start of his first term in 2023.

Since then, he said he has sat in on meetings with various large, student-run bodies at the University, including various fraternity and sorority councils and the Rutgers University Dance Marathon, all of whom have concerns about the updated booking policy that has been disregarded by the administration.

Notably, Ramirez also called out Rutgers—New Brunswick Chancellor Francine Conway for failing to meet with him and other members of the Assembly, including financial officers, on this issue. This lack of communication and buy-in from the University signals to the Assembly that the administration does not match their dedication.

"Efforts have been made on so many different levels to have these conversations, and yet, we still stand here today with no meeting set up," he said. "We still stand here today with no progress made since August frankly, and so I believe that the student body is fully prepared — I can't say the same about the administration right now — regarding this issue."

Keeping those conversations and the implications the bill would hold for the student body as a collective in mind, Ramirez said that he was opening up the bill to an Assembly vote, rather than passing it via an executive order.

While an overwhelming majority did end up passing the bill with nine affirmative votes and three dissenting, it did not pass without pushback. Concerns about communicating the intent and implications of the bill on student organizations were at the forefront of those remarks.

Regarding concerns about awareness of this bill, Ramirez said he trusted in the Assembly's public relations team and social media posts, as well as communications with the press and community partners to make sure its purpose and existence were relayed to the public.

Separate concerns about student organizations being able to advocate for or against the bill resulted in the proposition of an amendment to the bill, which would require that at least 60 percent, or approximately 220 organizations, vote in agreement with the bill.

Before the amendment was put up for a potential motion, Ramirez validated concerns student leaders had about the scope of the bill's implications but that he believed the decision would be the "absolute best next step for our University."

He also said it would be "impossible" to get 60 percent of student organizations to respond to the bill.

The amendment was eventually put up for consideration, but only received one motion from the representative who proposed it. A second to the motion would have been required for the amendment to pass, resulting in it ultimately failing.

While the bill comes in response to a specific change to room booking policies, it also arises at a time when the Assembly has already announced a referendum to increase student fees on tuition bills that would allow the body to preserve funding for student organizations.

This bill could have major implications for student organization funding beyond the Fall 2024 semester, given that the Assembly allocates funding and reclaims unused money by semester rather than annually. The bill, as currently written, does not clarify whether funds affected by the suspension will be reclaimed if the measure progresses through this semester.

"I understand the concern off the bat (of) what this may mean for our organizations, but I understand the concern deeper for what the implications are if we don't have such a resolution to this issue," Ramirez said. "I've been in this position for a year and a half. I understand the gravity of our student fee, I understand the nature of our administration and I understand the nature of this University … And I believe that this is the best and most appropriate step forward."

Editor's note: This article includes edits to the 10th, 11th and 12th paragraphs to clarify the communication before the amendment was presented and the nature of gathering 60 percent of student organizations to vote on the bill.