After a heated campaign, Harvard students passed a referendum on Thursday to replace the current Undergraduate Council (UC) with the new Harvard Undergraduate Association (HUA).
However, the state of club funding is uncertain following the adoption of the HUA, as the new Constitution contains conflicting sections that have prompted concerns from students, and messaging remains mixed from differing members of the UC.
The HUA Constitution states that the club funding process would continue as normal in the interim, yet it also claims that the whole UC and its most recent Constitution are abolished upon its passage. The authors of the HUA Constitution maintain that club funding would continue as normal through the UC.
Despite an assurance from the Treasurer that they had money for funding, members of the council were uncertain Thursday afternoon on whether they had the authority to do so. An email sent later by the Finance Committee Chair claimed “the UC will no longer be giving out club or GOHC grants.” A representative speaking on behalf of the UC President and Vice President disputed this and claimed the email was sent without their notice. An Instagram account run by the duo apologized for the sudden cancellation and that the Council was working to sort things out.
The Harvard Crimson reported that President Michael Cheng ’22 attempted to edit the Constitution after voting closed on Thursday to give a more explicit transitionary role to the President and Vice President, only to walk back the effort and claim he was trolling the other members of the council.
Constitutional Questions
The most recent version of the UC Constitution, updated in the Fall Semester after a dispute over referendum thresholds, states that a binding referendum on Constitutional measures instantly amends the UC council and bylaws. The referendum met both the two-fifths participation and two-thirds affirmation thresholds, meaning that the HUA Constitution was adopted following the vote.
The HUA Constitution has a transition section describing the steps in the process, but there are some conflicting passages regarding whether the UC remains operational during the interim.
On the one hand, the section promises that the club funding process will continue as normal through the remainder of the semester, overseen by the club Treasurer. The normal club funding process involves the Finance Committee and remains overseen by the UC Treasurer.
However, the same paragraph also states that all of the bylaws for the Undergraduate Council are instantly “deleted and invalidated,” with all funding immediately transferred to the HUA through the DSO.
The text also states that the new HUA will not come into effect until May 8th. An election timeline and rules are required by April 11th, and a deadline for an election by April 30th.
Representative Lylena Estabine ’24, one of the main contributors to the HUA Constitution, stated on behalf of the President and Vice-President that club and grant funding would continue as normal despite the dissolution of the UC. “It was always intended that club funding will continue as it did prior to the referendum until the end of the school year,” she stated, pointing to the section at the end of the paragraph. “The same goes for summer storage, since the funding for that has already been allocated.”
She also stated that they will announce concrete transition plans by Sunday evening.
However, other council members have stated that they are unsure whether the UC even technically active. Representative Ivor Zimmerman, who ran in the fall presidential election and has criticized the HUA, claims that there is no structure at all because of the dissolution. “As far as I can tell, not even Michael has the power to speak on behalf of the HUA. With the UC instantly dissolved, he’s not student body president; he’s just another student with no more authority than you or I.”
Finance Committee
Additional confusion was sparked by messages sent to students from the Finance Committee that contradicted messaging from other members of the UC.
According to UC Slack messages obtained by the Independent, there was discussion on Thursday afternoon about issues regarding club funding. Some members were questioning whether they had the money on hand or the authority to distribute the funds, given that the new Constitution suspended the UC structure and transferred the money to the HUA. However, other members also said that it would be fine to proceed as normal, since there was also a mention of the funding process remaining.
UC Treasurer Kimani Panthier ‘24 messaged at 6:45 PM that “Committee budgets remain and as per Dean Colleran, the process to give us that $125k [for club funding] has already been initiated.” He followed up by writing, “Dean Colleran’s word: ‘You all have money. Spend it.’”
At 6:56 PM, UC Finance Committee Chair Daniella Berrospi ‘24 sent an email to students awaiting a funding interview scheduled for that night informing them that they should not come to the meeting, as she claimed the Undergraduate Council would no longer give out grants because of the recent referendum.
Soon afterwards, the finance committee channel on the UC’s Slack account was also archived.
Representative Berropsi-Urbana did not respond to a request for comment at the time of publication.
Representative Estabine commented that the email was incorrect about the funding process. “I was not aware of the email being sent out, I’m not sure if she told anyone else on the council that she was going to send it,” she said. “It’s very disappointing to see and has caused some club leaders (who reached out to me after receiving it) unnecessary panic and confusion. Daniella’s resignation, while unfortunate, does not mean the end of club funding. On Sunday we will finalize plans on how to move forward, make up missed interviews, and get clubs their money.”
Reimagine Harvard, an Instagram account run by Cheng and de Kanter, posted on their story around 10:00 PM that night stating, “we apologize for the cancellation of club funding interviews tonight as that was due to an unexpected, but understandable resignation. Club funding this semester will continue, and we’re working overtime on concrete plans.”
However, Representative Samuel Taylor ‘24, who served on the Finance Committee, defended Daniella’s response, as he claimed that she had not received proper consultation on how they would handle the transition. “I think it would be pretty irresponsible to interview [clubs] without any guarantee that they’ll receive funding or what that process will look like.”
Representative Chris Cantwell ‘22-23, the outgoing parliamentarian, said that despite the messiness of the situation, “Among [the representatives] I’ve talked to, there’s a consensus that we need to fix club funding. We had procedural disagreements about how to make it happen, but I know there’s a commitment to getting things running again as soon as possible. I know people are working overtime on this.”
Other members of the UC were contacted for this article, but did not return comment at the time of publication.
This is a breaking news report. Updates will be added pending new developments.
Ryan Golemme ’23 (ryangolemme@college.harvard.edu), who’s sent out so many emails, writes for the Independent.