Deep Dive on Funding Circus

The February 21 issue of the Quest reported the Funding Circus results, and this article will provide some more information and context for the club funding allocations. Overall, 50% of the requested funds were allocated to 30 clubs. $10,024 was allocated to ten identity clubs, with Chabad at Reed receiving $0 due to not submitting a budget. Renn Fayre predictably placed first and received 61% of its budget, and most clubs received 25-50% of their budgets. Many signators noticed that their allocations and the overall funding pool were far lower than previous semesters, and Treasury released a statement to Senate Beat in order to explain the situation. The statement said that the funding for clubs comes from the student body fee, a $155 fee paid by all Reed students. Treasury pointed out that Reed has a relatively small student body fee relative to comparable institutions and that it has not been raised in several semesters, and that this semester's decreased enrollment gave the Senate a smaller pool of funds to allocate. The Feb. 21 Quest article"Senate Continues to Struggle with Funding Concerns" revealed that Senate has been failing to account for this decreased enrollment for several semesters, leading to unsustainably high spending, and that Senate and Treasury had not been communicating effectively about the state of their funding.

This semester, all signators were sent an invitation email that they needed to click on in order to join the Signators Google Group and be notified of the funding schedule. Many signators did not click the invitation or did not get added when they clicked it, resulting in several clubs missing their slots. One signator from the class of 2025, who requested to remain anonymous, shared, "I didn’t get funded, but I was annoyed that I had to receive the schedule from another signator late Saturday night in order to find that out. I didn’t realize that you had to click ‘accept invite’ to receive signator emails, it’s never been like that before and isn’t like that for any other Google Group I’m in." The signator also mentioned that in the past, the Funding Circus schedule has been sent out to the entire student body, and that they have "observed a down trend in Treasury's communicativeness overall this academic year." When the Quest asked Treasury about this, they told us that they cannot send all-student-body emails without approval.

Despite these troubles, Treasury still read and considered budgets for clubs whose signators did not make it to Funding Circus, sometimes with the help of Senate members involved in the clubs. Treasury told the Quest that they plan to add signators directly to the Google Group now and in future semesters. Treasury apologized to all club signators who did not get notified about the funding schedule as a result of this issue. In one example, Print Shoppe did not have their budget evaluated, but Treasury shared that they do have significant funds rolling over from last semester. This semester, Treasury automatically rolled over all leftover fall semester funds to the spring semester, meaning that many clubs have more money than is reflected in the Funding Circus results.

Tara Weling '25, current STEMGeMs and Joyous Whimsy Club signator, told the Quest, "I think that the change in policy not being communicated overtly represents the current administration's (false) belief that people aren't interested in most of what Senate does, and how they do it." This sentiment was echoed by other signators, with Tucker R. Twomey '25, current Reed Radio Lab and former Association of Reed Gamers (ARG) signator, stating, "It's my opinion that part of the woes Treasury are currently facing are the result of the Reed community at large being uninterested in doing the dirty work of governance that is actually required to run an administrative body of significant size." Twomey continued, "I think the opacity of Senate is a fairly significant problem in terms of my actions as a club signator—back when I was in charge of ARG, which was a time of us requesting significant amounts of money and also having a fluctuating position in funding poll, it did seem like our allocation didn't really correspond to anything quantitative that we could really measure or control," and stated that he believed that more transparency about Funding Circus results, Senate's budget, and how club funding allocations are determined would be "a net positive." 

When asked how Funding Circus went, Brennan Hunt '26, a current ARG signator, stated,"Of the systems I’ve seen for clubs to get funding across schools, it seems fine. I don’t like that Beer Nation gets to be a big exception to the rules.." In response to Funding Circus results, the Renn Fayre Czars, said, "We are grateful to be voted number one by the student body in Funding Circus and hope to provide as amazing of a Renn Fayre as everyone deserves. However, as we read in last week's Quest article, all clubs were funded about 50% of their requested budgets. We were especially surprised to see that Renn Fayre's budget was $10,000+ less than the past few years, considering members of Treasury and Senate told us multiple times last semester that our budget would stay the same, if not increase. It is unfortunate that these budget cuts will affect the celebration of Reed's largest graduating class. Despite this, we will be working as hard as we can to provide a fun, safe, exciting, and accessible Renn Fayre for the graduating seniors." 

Another signator from the class of 2026, who requested to remain anonymous, echoed similar concerns, saying that they had their club’s budget reduced by a third relative to last semester, despite gaining new members. They also stated that after Treasury's new rule a few semesters ago that all club budgets need to be formatted the same way, their differently-formatted budgets were still accepted, but this semester they were told to reformat their budget the day before Funding Circus, and they wished that Treasury had told them earlier since they submitted their budgets several days in advance of the due date. They concluded, "It feels as though at the moment Treasury is in a very tough position, and it feels as though they may not necessarily have the proper training or experience to deal with it in the perfect way possible. I hope they figure it out or things ease up."

Additionally, sports teams requesting student body funds is a relatively new phenomenon. In Spring 2022, the Sports Center did not provide funding for several teams, and Treasury did not fund them because sports team budgets historically had not come out of student body funds. Treasury shared with us that as of now, sports teams receive funding from the Sports Center and are also eligible for Top 30, and that Vice President Lucy Knight-King ‘26 reached out to the Sports Center this semester to improve their coordination about sports-related budgets.

Regarding whether Senate's funding concerns are one of the causes of the decreased club funding, Treasury responded, "Many factors went into the decrease in funds." Additionally, Treasury reported that they have been pulling leftover money from the Spring 2020 semester, which is now running out. It remains open to speculation whether this semester's drop in funding may have been less sudden if Senate had appropriately accounted for decreased enrollment in advance. It is important to note that in an interview with the Quest, Senate stated that the $7,500 spent over winter break without the approval of the full Senate or any Treasurers came out of their "rainy day fund," which is set aside for unforeseen circumstances at the beginning of each semester, so it did not affect this semester's total club funding allocation. They also stated that some of this semester's club funding came out of that same rainy day fund. 

According to Treasury, the fall wage review would have reduced club funding even further. However, this spring's wage review found that the fall wage review was not valid, and it had been based on a misleading figure that included $20,000 that Senate did not have. After Treasury provided Senate with a corrected figure, the new wage review accounted for both student wages and sustainable club spending. The student body budget, which includes Senate discretionary funds, club funding, student wages, and other expenses, is prepared by Treasury in coordination with the Business Office. Senate does not vote on this budget, but can go against a Treasury recommendation by increasing or decreasing the budget of a certain committee or pool of funds.