An Update on Funding for Student Programs
In the latter part of the 2018 Spring Semester, the University of Tennessee engaged in conversations
regarding the Student Programs and Services Fee (SPSF). Student leaders knew that these would be
long, hard conversations.​ For the sake of transparency, ​I have chosen to inform you of a somewhat
hush-hush meeting that occurred on Tuesday July 17, 2018.
At 2:30PM, an Ad Hoc Meeting took place to further discuss SPSF. The meeting was primarily lead by Dr.
Vincent Carilli, Vice Chancellor for Student Life and Dr. Shea Kidd Houze, Assistant Vice Chancellor for
Student Life & Dean of Students. Attendees included representatives from various student
organizations. Participants were specifically instructed by Dr. Carilli not to record the conversations that
were to take place and that doing so would be a disservice to the goals of the meeting (paraphrased). I
have two grievances with the Vice Chancellor’s request to not record this discussion. 1) Nearly every
person in the meeting was a student elected by their respective constituents to engage in conversations
about student issues. As a student representative, I have nothing to hide when it comes to discussing
the interests of my peers; though I cannot speak for my fellow student representatives in the room, I do
not believe that they do either. 2) The purpose of the meeting was to discuss how to allocate money
that is provided by ​students ​through “Option-1” so that ​student ​organizations​ ​can host events for UT
students.​ See the common theme? In the weeks following each hot-button issue faced by our campus
(i.e. The TWP, Changes in Leadership, etc.), UT students were promised transparency but certain actors
within our administration continue to default on that promise. Moreover, asking elected student leaders
to not record or discuss a meeting regarding their constituents is the absolute antithesis of the
transparency that we have been promised time and time again.
As for the meeting itself, the discussion was centered on 12 concerns that the administration continues
to hear from what it calls, “the University Community.” Throughout the conversation, however, the
administration’s lack of citing ​student​ (hey, there it is again) concern made it quickly apparent that these
are largely the grievances of lawmakers and parents—most of which do not even have the legal ability,
under FERPA, to see our MyUTK Billing Statements without the consent of a, you guessed it, ​student​.
The 12 concerns provided to meeting attendees are as follows:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.

The equitable distribution of [SPSF monies] among registered student organizations;
The excessive costs of select programs;
The calculated cost of attendance, per participant;
The use of SPSF funds for controversial speakers/events;
The “earmark” of SPSF funds for select student programming boards;
CEB’s use of approximately 1/3 of its entire budget on Volapalooza;
The annual duplication of “similar” programming;
The interpretation of the criteria used to allocate SPSF funds;
The composition of the Student Programming Allocation Committee (SPAC);
The complicated nature of the SPAC process for applying for funds for student-organized
programming;
11. The cycle of the allocation process (fall & spring semesters); and,

 12. Whether SPSF funds should be used at all to fund student-organized programming.
It is not my place to discuss each attendee’s opinion on the above concerns since they were promised
confidentiality by the Vice Chancellor. I will however, take a moment to remind the greater ​student
population that every ​student​ attendee was committed to the social, monetary, and expressive
liberation of their classmates at the University of Tennessee.
There are many questions left to be answered when it comes to SPSF and SPAC. It is true that money,
ethics, and law are interrelated with this topic. I urge all stakeholders to place fiscal responsibility in the
context of moral righteousness rather than placing moral righteousness in the context of fiscal
responsibility. For multiple years, I’ve watched issue after issue come and go—each time, our elders tell
us to wait, to compromise, to reconcile differences. Tapping into the orations of the late Dr. King, I stress
that progress never rolls in on the wheels of inevitability and that the time is always right to do right.
Respectfully,
AS