Skip to content
Fee Transparency Project
Companion to the official sfac.ucsc.edu (opens in new tab) · About this site

March 8th, 2021

AgendaMinutes

Present: Brynna Downey, Charlene Proo, Sue Carter, Alvin Ho, Andy Huynh, Gloria Qiu, Isaac Karth, Mathew Sarti, May Alvarez, Vivian Pham, Venkatesh Nagubandi, Lisa Bishop, Lydia Jenkins-SLeczkowski

  1. Welcome and Introductions
  2. Approval of Agenda and March 3 minutes
    1. May motions to approve the agenda, Isaac seconds. No objections, motion passes.
    2. Alvin motions to approve the minutes, Gloria seconds. No objections, motion passes.
  3. Funding Proposal Discussion
    1. Links
      1. Google folder
      2. Ranked Evaluation spreadsheet
      3. Fill out thoughts ahead of time: Running document
      4. Previous award summary (as of March 2, 2021)
      5. Suggestions for next year
    2. Proposals
      1. #10, Slug Stories Database Move and 2022 Storytelling Events, $5,000
        1. Gloria shares that all first-years are required to share stories and they serve as a good source for research. She thinks that this is a needed tradition to continue especially during the pandemic when people are feeling isolated from the UCSC community. Funding even one of the positions would do a lot good for the program.
        2. Discussion that the program would still be able to continue without SFAC funding
        3. Motion to not fund, seconded, objection
          1. 4 yes to not fund, 5 nay to not fund, 0 abstententions.
        4. Gloria motions to fund for one student assistant for $840, Isaac seconds. No objections, motion passes.
          1. Mathew asks how they plan to advertise for this program? Gloria notes that their proposal mentions social media nad word of mouth. Slug Stories has been around for a while, so students in colleges 9 and 10 have to submit material for their core classes.
          2. Brynna notes that this can be an item addressed during next year’s funding call.
      2. #20, Student Representation in the Academic Senate, $5,000
        1. Alvin knows David and respects his advocacy. However, Alvin does not think this is the best use of SFAC’s funds. It does not seem absolutely necessary for SFAC to fund these positions.
        2. Isaac notes that there are very important conversations that happen in these committees. He does not want to restrict involvement in student government for those who cannot afford it.
        3. Mathew notes that there are other sources of funding.
        4. Brynna was a grad representative on CIT, and got a stipend and not benefits.
        5. Mathew motions to fund $4,000 as they see fit, Isaac seconds. Alvin objects.
          1. Alvin likes the idea of funding student positions, but thought this should be funded by something like a referendum. Brynna agrees, but says that they do not have that kind of funding this year.
          2. Isaac adds that, given that there is no chance of a referenda this year.
          3. 4 -yes, 3-no, 3 abstention. Motion passes.
      3. #9, Neurotechnology Hardware to Further Student Involvement and Development of a Synthetic Telepathy Project, $1,250
        1. Mathew asks if they could go to the colleges for funding instead?
        2. May says that if each college funded equally, each college would have to fund $125.
        3. Isaac suggests funding a few hundred dollars for peripheral items.
        4. Isaac motions to fund 560 for one of each of the electronic supplies (including shipping), Vivian seconds. No objections, motion passes.
      4. #15, iGEM Undergraduate Competition Funds, $25,000
        1. Mathew suggests being consistent in funding.
        2. Isaac is hesitant to fund lab supplies that could also be used for classes.
        3. Vivian notes that the proposal says that they would like to prioritize summer funding.
        4. Mathew likes the idea of funding team registration.
        5. Isaac wants to fund 5500 but that feels high for this late date.
        6. Mathew asks about half funding registration for 2750.
          1. Motion by Mathew, second by Gloria. No objections, motions passes.
      5. #27, Providing Research Experience to Undergraduate Students: The LEEPS Laboratory internship, $57,052
        1. Mathew asks how the group feels about implemented quotas? Isaac says that he is concerned about the low goal of women to involve.
        2. Vivian asks if LEEPS is run by grad or undergraduate students? Brynna believes that it is a professor applying for undergraduate research stipends.
        3. Brynna notes that LEEPS had a large carryforward.
          1. Lisa notes that
        4. Gloria notes that the demand for these opportunities is high. She suspects that students would want opportunities like this. 9,342 for one student is a bit high for a lower-ranked proposal.
        5. Brynna notes that the group is at a point where there is very little left to allocate.
        6. Gloria would like to know more about the grant funding. This seems like an all-or-nothing allocation.
        7. Mathew would like to know more about the backfalls, quota comment, etc.
        8. Isaac notes that the proposal was unclear, particularly in the funding shortfall question.
        9. Mathew motions to not fund, Isaac seconds. No objections, motion passes.
      6. #17, Resource Centers Year End Ceremonies, $58,000
        1. On the sheet, Lisa notes that the 18-19 award has not been claimed to DSAS yet.
        2. Isaac suggests explicitly asking what the carryforward of units is for future funding calls.
        3. Isaac suggests funding one third of the proposal, about $9,700.
          1. Isaac motions to fund $9,700 to fund one third of each line item, Charlene seconds. No objections, motion passes.
    3. Breaking Even
      1. SFAC operational carryforward of ~$25,000
        1. We have funded 25% more than available funds.
        2. Since SFAC has not been traveling this year, there is some leftover operational funding that can go towards the pool.
      2. Revisiting previously-funded proposals
        1. Brynna asks if there are any proposals that the committee would like to re-look at. Alvin and Vivian like the idea of starting at the highest funded proposals.
        2. Mathew suggests looking at the top three, and bottom three, in an alternating order.
        3. The committee agrees to visit the highest funded proposal: #26, the college funded writing centers.
          1. Sue recuses herself from the discussion.
          2. May motions to fund 4 student employees and the program director at $41,569, Isaac seconds. No objections, motion passes.
  4. Announcements & Updates
  5. Adjournment
    1. Isaac motions to adjourn the meeting, Vivian seconds. No objections, motion passes.

Upcoming Guests/Topics:

  • Funding modification request from Steve McKay
  • Funding Modifications to Right Livelihood College from 2019-2020
  • WAVESS/STARS 19-20 Funding Request Modification
  • Director of Budget and Resource Management Kimberly Register
  • TAPS Annual Budget Review