[box type=”info”]In a previous version of the article, we incorrectly stated that the KSU’s creation of the hospitality manager position directly caused the budget deficit. A structural deficit like the KSU’s accounts for an ongoing issue, not a singular cause.[/box]
At last night’s King’s Students’ Union general meeting, the year’s budget was passed with a $9,882.40 structural deficit. The projected shortfall was announced and illustrated by financial vice-president Alex Bryant.
“What this means is not that we are $10,000 in debt or we’ll end up $10,000 in debt, but it does mean that if we continue spending the way we have in the past that we could have some problems,” said Bryant.
Complications with the budget were catalyzed by the creation of a new union employee, the hospitality manager. In planning the budget, the 2012/13 KSU executive did not expect Nick Wright to work during the summer. Bryant attested that Wright did much necessary work before the fall term began.
“We originally thought having two people would cost less than one person, but because of the amount of work that the positions have had to put in, it’s actually going to cost us a bit more,” said Bryant.
The new budget forecasts that the hospitality manager will be paid $9,040 more than originally anticipated.
Another unnecessary expense discussed at the sugar infused Candy Kebab General Meeting was last year’s printing expenses – an extra $4,322.
“We want to keep our printing under control,” said Bryant. “It may have just not been tracked as well as it need to be (in the past), but we’re going to work on that big time.”
Also passed at the meeting were constitutional amendments, as well as appointments to various committees, including: the Watch’s Board of Publishers, the Grad Week Committee Selection Committee, the WUSC Levy Board and the Academic Committee.
Here’s the KSU’s budget as amended at Thursday’s meeting:
You can contact Alex Bryant at financialvp@ksu.ca.
Categories
KSU projects $10k deficit
The King’s Students’ Union’s yearly budget has been passed with a $9,882.40 structural deficit. Complications with the budget were catalyzed by the creation of a new union employee, the hospitality manager.
3 replies on “KSU projects $10k deficit”
“Complications with the budget arose from the creation of a new union employee, the Hospitality Manager.” This is actually untrue. While the creation of the Hospitality Manager is definitely the newest change to the union, it is one of many changes which have let to this structural problem. The first staff position of the union, for example, was a huge change that presented a huge cost (I speak, of course, of the position of Internal Coordinator). The Galley is another example of a radical change that the union has undergone in recent years.
Other changes in the union have been more subtle. In the last few years, the union has grown exponentially in popularity and scope of engagement. This means that our expenses are higher for office use, for budget lines such as events and campaigns, and that the work load has grown for our executives and employees.
The structural deficit is actually indicative of a larger, really wonderful phenomenon – people are engaging with the union way more then they ever did before. A growing union means growing costs, and what we do about this deficit will determine how we feel about our union.
Hello Anna,
As journalists, we take great concern when our work is publicly decried as “untrue.” So we will explain our rationale in coming to the conclusion that the new Hospitality Manager position complicated this year’s budget.
1. The projected structural deficit in the amended 2013-14 budget is $9,882.40
2. The difference in salary for the hospitality manager between the original 2013-14 budget and the new amended budget is $9,040, – the majority of the structural deficit.
With these figures in mind, it is evident that the additional salary complicated the budget.
That being said, we will be looking into this story further and will seek differing perspectives on this issue.
Thanks,
Evan and Pippa
Sorry Editors, and I know how serious an allegation of “untruth” is to journalists, but I have to give this one to Anna. The additional salary expenses complicated this years and future budgets, yes, but it’s not the direct cause of a structural deficit.
Structural deficit is caused by a permanent expected imbalance in expenditures/revenue, it’s not one additional expense being added on – it’s saying the budget will always be out of whack if nothing’s done, not that there’s overspending because of one thing. AKA, an ongoing beast that has snowballed because of a lot of growth, as Anna outlined.
You wrote in direct causality where there is little more than correlation of one factor among many – the similarity of the figures has nothing to do with it.