Laptop chargers that frequently disappear, a trampoline being stored in a mysterious location, and an ice maker that is broken more frequently than not: all items purchased by the student body with funds from participatory budgeting (PB). Do these items actually have a real use? Are these unused items really what we should be spending our student government funds on?
“Plenary was meant to be a way for the whole student body to make their voice heard and have a say in where all the money goes. The treasurer wanted to put the student in student government, and having the plenary vote on where the funds go was an innovative way to do that” Treasurer Max Satterfield said when asked about the original purpose of PB. The reality of PB, however, has since deviated from its original, democratic use into something much less beneficial for the student body.
In my three years of high school, I’ve seen students come to the stage to propose PB items as the hum of conversation continues to mutter through the auditorium. As electric fans and speakers are proposed for sports teams, and funds are proposed for Mr. Conlon’s Turkey drive, no one seems to be paying more than passive attention. An unengaged, non-caring student body shouldn’t be able to determine how student government funds are allocated. No matter how loose the budget, student government funds should be utilized to foster a stronger, more inclusive student body, rather than just appealing to one specific group and that group’s limited interests. While a charger or an ice maker can be helpful for everyone, students aren’t able to respect the items enough to the point where they are worth our time and money.
No all-school email or engaging activity during plenary can solve the lack of purpose in participatory budgeting. This issue with PB isn’t a lack of knowledge amongst the student body about PB’s purpose, it’s that the money being allocated to a single, tangible item can’t make an impact on the whole of the Upper School in the manner that the Cabinet and Treasurer intend or hope will be the result. Toy lawn mowers aren’t changing the culture of the Upper School, and Bean Bags aren’t maximizing the democratic nature of our Student Government. For a well established Student Government, our participatory budgeting system should be more mature – avoiding proposals like JackTank (25 dollars to an individual student) – and one that is designed and run to optimize our democracy as a whole, not just certain individuals who fill out a form and step onto the stage.
By no means am I claiming that PB is corrupt. In fact, it’s the opposite: students are able to vote on an item of their choosing in hopes that the rest of the student body’s views will align with theirs. However, the student body has been deprived of PB that truly benefits them. Instead of funds to affinity groups or money towards committee activities, PB revolves around mostly tchotchkes and low-quality items with vaguely utilitarian purposes. This begs the obvious next question. If PB funds are redesignated, where should the Student Government funds actually go?
The Parker Upper School is made up of a mixture of student groups: affinity groups, student led clubs, committees, sports teams. Instead of miscellaneous items requested by the students, the Cabinet should be funneling Student government funds directly into committees, sports teams, and affinity groups, which, though they already receive a budget, would continue to prosper and thrive with more funds. Since all of these groups fall under the umbrella of student government – sports being regulated by the Student Athletic Council, affinity groups being directed by the DEIB coordinator, and committees being overseen by the Director of Committee Affairs- funneling funds directly into these groups would benefit the entire Upper School student population, also known as the entire electorate of Student Government. Everyone in the Upper School is a part of a committee, and much of the student body is involved in sports and affinity groups. In this case, Student Government’s funds wouldn’t be going unused by the plenary but instead directed to benefit all members of the community at once. Though the school assembles at the beginning of the year to discuss how helping one student helps all students at the Corinthians Morning Ex, a new and improved method for PB would meet the lofty goals of the Corinthians passage and create a connected system of mutually beneficial financial decisions.
In our thriving democracy, the voice of every student matters. From publications to Town Halls, there are so many ways for students to have their voices heard. Deciding how the Student Government funds are allocated, however, is not the proper forum for student expression.
