University of Virginia Library

Defeat Of The Surcharge

We don't know who really deserves the
blame for the defeat of the $2.50 surcharge
to the student activities fee which would
have gone to benefit the transitional
program. Probably SAC and the Student
Council are both at fault, but one thing is
certain: the real loser is the University.

The Student Activities Committee reportedly
never got around to considering
the merits of Council action to support the
Transition Program by taxing the students.
Instead, the members extricated themselves
from the problem of endorsing the proposal
by maintaining that the whole matter was
out of their jurisdiction. According to SAC,
the money raised would not go to a
student-run activity, but would be appropriated
to the faculty members who will be
running the transition program. They
therefore reasoned, that since the transition
program was not a student activity and
Council would not be able to approve the
budget for it, the surcharge should not be
added to the student activities fee.

Council might well have passed a more
tightly worded motion, omitting any reference
to the still rather nebulous black
studies program. Again, it was a case where
the necessary homework was left undone.
Council might have asked that the money be
added to the comprehensive fee. But they
felt that the student activities fee was their
proper domain and that Council requests
regarding it would carry more influence
with the Board. Probably, the Council
members who supported the first motion
will seek to pass another one requesting a
surcharge on the comprehensive fee.

The point is that Council shouldn't have
to do that. SAC was narrow-minded in its
rejection of the request, failing to take an
overview of the situation. Lawyers often
attack a substantive issue on a procedural
basis: i.e. overturning an unfair conviction
because some small segment of the due
process aspect of the law was abrogated. We
suspect that SAC did the same thing.

For here was a moderate student
proposal, presented to the Administration in
hopes of taking a rational and peaceful step
towards ameliorating the University's racial
imbalance. One would expect, in view of the
irrational steps that have been taken at
other schools to achieve the same ends, that
the Administration would have bent over
backwards to accommodate it. Instead, a
technicality was seized upon to thwart it.
Questions have been raised as to the validity
of the Administration's support for racial
progress before. We find it hard to believe
that the money to fund the program could
not have been found somewhere. SAC's
action lends credibility to those suspicions.

We can only register our disappointment
in the action of SAC, urge Council to pass
an amended form of the same resolution,
and hope that the Administration tries to
meet the students halfway the next time.
Actions such as Tuesday's serve only to
plant the seeds of frustration which may
yield a harvest of tragedy for the University.