The Student Organizations Oversight Committee (SOOC) handed down charters for new clubs this week. Eight new clubs joined the existing 99 clubs that were chartered last May, making for a grand total of 107 on campus. Only a few more clubs were approved this year than last year.
“We only lost two clubs over the course of the previous year,” said SOOC Chair Brian Kim ’13. Among the newly chartered clubs are Students for Justice in Palestine, Polar Bear Nation, Model United Nations, and the Colby-Bates-Bowdoin Alliance. According to Kim, at least one more club is expected to be chartered next week.
Many of the new clubs were represented at the Student Activities Fair earlier this year, but some have only recently been given official recognition. “There were a lot of clubs, but not all of them were chartered at that point. Only the ones that are chartered get funding,” said Student Activities Funding Committee (SAFC) Chair Charlie Cubeta ’13.
“We told clubs to be in the Student Activities Fair even if they weren’t chartered yet because we didn’t want them to miss an opportunity to get the word out and be at a disadvantage,” added Kim.
Neither Kim nor Cubeta believe that the increased number of clubs will affect club funding significantly.
Cubeta did point to a few clubs, such as the Yellow Bike Club, that now have operating budgets. Unlike discretionary budget clubs that request for funding at various points in the year, operating budget clubs are given all of their funds at the start of the academic year to allow them to have flexibility in their spending. Thus, more operating budget clubs can have an impact on the discretionary budget.
However, Kim said that the SOOC does not set a maximum number of clubs.
“Regardless of how many clubs there are, we can find ways to make room for them,” said Kim. “Given how big our budget is and how many groups we have, there’s a lot of shuffling we can do to make things work.”
Kim also said that in the past year the SAFC has shifted its philosophy regarding funding management. In past years the SAFC funded clubs conservatively in order to create a “cushion” in case clubs overspent. As a result, the SAFC has had upwards of $20,000 in surplus at year’s end.
Last year, Kim and the other members of the SOOC and SAFC began paying closer attention to the money they give to clubs. By paying closer attention to where money is allocated, the SOOC and SAFC sought to minimize the chance that clubs will exceed their budgets.
“We want to get the best value per dollar in terms of student benefit,” said Cubeta. According to Kim, experienced SAFC members have allowed the board to manage funding more effectually.
As a result, the SOOC has been able to charter more clubs while the SAFC has been able spend most of its budget.
“We know exactly what we’re doing, we know exactly how much people need to do the things they want to do so we’re being very efficient, “ said Kim. “People won’t actually feel the effects of less money because they’ll be able to the same things with less money.”
Editor's note: A previous version of this article incorrectly stated that the certain clubs receive funding based on their operating costs, not based on a decision made by the SAFC. In fact, operating budget clubs receive all of their funding at the beginning of the year. The amount they are given is determined by the SAFC. The article also incorrectly stated that the SOOC funded clubs and the SAFC chartered them. All clubs are funded through the SAFC and chartered by the SOOC.