Spring Break
EDITORIAL: Judge wisely when spending
Don't waste on luxuries now
Editorial | 3/3/09
Posted online at 9:22 PM EST on 3/2/09
/ Last updated at 4:09 AM EST on 3/2/09
Thanks to Brandeis' recent financial tailspin, the school is pursuing radical options, like the sale of art from the Rose Art Museum and less dramatic changes like discontinuing paper products in some residence quads to save money or generate revenue. In the face of these desperate measures, we question the wisdom of spending $3,000 to install a cell phone signal amplifier in the Usdan Student Center. Our situation demands more prudence on the University's part and more frugal advocacy on the Student Union's part.
The administration and students must examine their priorities. Better cell phone reception in Lower Usdan is convenient but hardly a necessity. In times of economic distress, such luxuries should be the first to go, well before art museums and even paper towels. This is especially true since the signal amplifier is such a minor improvement. It would not have been unreasonable for the administration to ask the Student Union to buy the amplifier rather than turning to the Office of Facilities Services for funds. If the Union felt strongly about the amplifier, it could have utilized its discretionary fund or held a fundraiser.
This amplifier is not the only situation in which the University has spent when it could have saved. In January, Cholmondeley's was allocated about $10,000 for renovations, which, according to Chum's General Manager Nirja Parekh '09, had not occurred in 10 years. The coffeehouse's peeling paint and shabby carpets are evidence of the need for such an effort, and the renovation was certainly more warranted than a signal amplifier. Unfortunately, this money would have been better spent in prior years. Today, allocating such a sum for what is, after all, another luxury is irresponsible. Even beyond choosing not to fund inessential projects, Brandeis could address other forms of waste in the community, such as leaving lights and computers on in the Goldfarb and Science Libraries, to save on energy costs and push the operating budget further.
We recognize that in the face of multi million-dollar deficits, $3,000 or even $10,000 seems like small change. But students upset about drastic money-saving strategies and worried about the University's finances can show their support by giving up luxury items; the administration can show the extent and sincerity of its efforts by retaining every possible cent for the necessities of the operating budget. In the wake of the Rose debacle and controversial money-saving proposals, a little shared scrimping might be a first step in better relations between students and administration.
The administration and students must examine their priorities. Better cell phone reception in Lower Usdan is convenient but hardly a necessity. In times of economic distress, such luxuries should be the first to go, well before art museums and even paper towels. This is especially true since the signal amplifier is such a minor improvement. It would not have been unreasonable for the administration to ask the Student Union to buy the amplifier rather than turning to the Office of Facilities Services for funds. If the Union felt strongly about the amplifier, it could have utilized its discretionary fund or held a fundraiser.
This amplifier is not the only situation in which the University has spent when it could have saved. In January, Cholmondeley's was allocated about $10,000 for renovations, which, according to Chum's General Manager Nirja Parekh '09, had not occurred in 10 years. The coffeehouse's peeling paint and shabby carpets are evidence of the need for such an effort, and the renovation was certainly more warranted than a signal amplifier. Unfortunately, this money would have been better spent in prior years. Today, allocating such a sum for what is, after all, another luxury is irresponsible. Even beyond choosing not to fund inessential projects, Brandeis could address other forms of waste in the community, such as leaving lights and computers on in the Goldfarb and Science Libraries, to save on energy costs and push the operating budget further.
We recognize that in the face of multi million-dollar deficits, $3,000 or even $10,000 seems like small change. But students upset about drastic money-saving strategies and worried about the University's finances can show their support by giving up luxury items; the administration can show the extent and sincerity of its efforts by retaining every possible cent for the necessities of the operating budget. In the wake of the Rose debacle and controversial money-saving proposals, a little shared scrimping might be a first step in better relations between students and administration.
Be the first to comment on this story