Student Council last night formally created the Green Initiative Funding Tomorrow Committee, which will manage its namesake sustainability fund students approved in a 2010 referendum. At a time when many groups are backing away from their commitments to the environment because of increased costs or a reduced sense of efficacy, Council's decision to follow through with GIFT is encouraging. If the initiative is to have a lasting impact, however, then Council must ensure that its committee has a permanent funding source, as well as functions that are distinct from those of the pre-existing Environmental Sustainability Committee.
GIFT's fundamental purpose is to provide grants to student-initiated sustainability projects on Grounds. Because these projects are expected to originate within the student body as a whole, GIFT complements the other outreach efforts Council is undertaking. Council's renewed emphasis on Speak Up UVA, for example, could solicit a number of ideas for sustainability initiatives that might merit funding through GIFT. By making money available to students with their own ideas for improving the University's environmental practices, GIFT will open up the possibility for a more diverse and creative array of sustainability projects.
The mechanics of grant allocation will be handled by the GIFT Committee, which will consist of seven voting student members and three faculty assistants. The committee will be staffed in the same way as a Presidential Cabinet committee, meaning Council President Dan Morrison will appoint a chairperson who subsequently will fill out the remainder of the positions. These individuals then will determine a grant application process and will award money to the projects that are deemed most worthy.
Yet GIFT must clear several hurdles before it can become institutionalized at the University. For one, Council should monitor the GIFT Committee's operations to ensure that it does not clash with the Environmental Sustainability Committee that already is a part of Council's Presidential Cabinet. Environmental Sustainability Co-Chair Kyle Guest, who was heavily involved in the formation of the GIFT Committee, indicated his committee's current responsibilities preclude it from taking on the additional job of grant allocation.
Morrison echoed this sentiment and asserted that incorporating GIFT into an existing body "would easily quadruple a committee's responsibilities." It therefore may be reasonable to create a body that is dedicated wholly to distributing money for student-led projects, but Council should watch both committees closely and make adjustments as needed to prevent their duties from overlapping.\nSecuring a long-term funding source for GIFT is of even greater importance. The Office of the Vice President of Student Affairs has agreed to provide the current council with $20,000 in seed money for GIFT, but there is no guarantee such support will be available in future years. "One of the things I would like to avoid with GIFT is having to haphazardly find funding," Morrison said.
For GIFT to avoid this fate, Council either must convince the University administration to continue funding it or pursue the institution of an additional student fee to pay for the grants. Morrison admitted the former option is "not entirely sustainable," but said he felt a student fee had broad support based on the result of the 2010 referendum. If such a fee is to be implemented, however, students most likely will need to vote on another referendum since the previous one did not explicitly endorse a fee or specify at what level it should be set. Even if students were to approve another referendum, the Board of Visitors still would have to approve the fee hike before it would be official.
In the meantime, GIFT's fate will hang in the balance. Council and the GIFT Committee can promote the initiative's longevity, however, by competently managing the money appropriated by VPSA and funding projects that will make a tangible difference for students and the environment in which they live.
Read More
CARTER: U.Va. Health owes clarity to transplant patients
By Nathaniel Carter | 3 days agoUnfortunately, this negative press is fully the fault of U.Va. Health — it failed to address significant stakeholder concerns when crafting its justification.
EDITORIAL: Upholding medical amnesty is a collective effort
By Editorial Board | 3 days agoUniversity leadership, Greek life organizations and students themselves must recommit to the safety provided by an effective and knowledgeable use of medical amnesty.
KURTZWEIL: Dockworkers’ unions cannot avoid the threat of automation
By Paul Kurtzweil | 4 days agoInstead of continuing to demand decreased automation, the union should work with the legislature in the hopes of driving investment into the reorganization of the current workforce.
