Last weekend the Undergraduate Council spent more than $8,500 to bring God Street Wine to Springfest. They took the stage at approximately 3:30 p.m. and played for a grand total of 90 minutes. (Think about it: $8,500 of your term bill fee spent for a band which charged approximately $100 a minute. Not to mention the other costs of putting on this event, that totalled more than $15,000.)

The audience, while enthusiastic and undoubtedly grateful for the opportunity to see a commercially successful band actually perform at Harvard, numbered no more than 300 people (and I'm being generous). This amounts to a subsidy of almost $30 per person for those who actually stuck around to see the band do their $100 a minute thing.

I'm not trying to suggest that Harvard has a wonderful social scene and that there is no need for events such as Springfest. Far from it. What I'm getting at is that the council's latest attempt to get people out of doors and into the sunlight would have been just as successful without spending $8500 on a band that a majority of students hadn't even heard of.

Frankly, I was more impressed with the student bands who charged nothing (and commented that they would have liked to play more) than with a band that took valuable money away from student groups. Springfest should continue to happen, but the council should direct more of its money toward student groups where it can have a greater impact.

Each fall, the council sets its budget priorities. This year, after a protracted fight, several of us on the council, including popularly elected President Lamelle Rawlins and other student leaders, managed to raise the percentage of the budget going to student groups to 63 percent.

This totals $73,735.20 out of an annual budget of $117,040. The remainder of the money goes either to overhead (elections, photocopying, etc.) or to the Committee Fund, from which money for events like Springfest is allocated. Unfortunately for students, much of the money that goes to the Committee Fund ($32,771.20) is wasted on unnecessary items like $8,500 bands.

I don't dispute that the Campus Life Committee does good things. You probably remember the Yale Victory party in Loker Commons, the Shuttle Buses to the Airports, the Spring Fling, and yes, even the First-Year formal. Most of these events, however, cost the council--and in turn students--very little money.

In fact, both the First-Year Formal and Spring Fling actually made a profit. The Victory Party cost less than $500 thanks to generous donations from corporate sponsors.

On the other hand, most of you won't recall Club Loker. The event cost hundreds of dollars, and yet the majority of attendees were council members. But perhaps you will remember last year's Casino night. No? Oh, that's right, only 30 people showed up to the event, which cost students $3,000. Contrast this with the wildly successful Cultural Rhythms and the Hyperion Theatre Company, which both receive funds from the council.

These are just a pair of the popular events on campus funded largely by the council's grant process. And it is groups like these which should be receiving more from the council's limited budget--they actually know how to use the money wisely. Taken collectively, the impact of just $1,000 spread among various student groups is enormous when contrasted with the benefits derived from having God Street Wine play at Springfest.

And what about the House Committees? Remember the Leverett '80s Dance? The Adams Masquerade? Perhaps you will attend your house formal?

Each House Committee this year received a $500 block grant from the council to do with as they wish. However, even this small amount of funding is not guaranteed because of the council's reluctance to recognize the will of the student body as expressed in December's referendum.

Well over 100 student groups apply each semester for the limited funds that the council gives. The Finance Committee tries to make every dollar impact as many Harvard students as possible, but this is often difficult given our budget constraints.

We denied funding this year to several groups, including the Collegium Musicum, WHRB and the Harvard-Radcliffe Orchestra. Many others had their grant requests slashed to a fraction of what they needed. When money is scarce, it should be allocated in the most efficient method possible in order to impact the largest number of students.

The bottom line is this: The council needs to stop wasting money and allocate more to student groups. We should be giving money to organizations that put on events that actually attract people.

Last fall, I co-sponsored a referendum that would have moved the council in this direction. It would have allowed students the chance to directly increase the council's allocation to student groups. Unfortunately, accusations of 'politics' were thrown about in an attempt to subvert the will of the student body.

By moving the date of the vote, the opponents of the proposal managed to defeat it by artificially lowering turnout. Even so, more than 70 percent of those voting wanted to give more money to student groups.

It's time to give students a voice in how their money is spent. Perhaps when the council's general elections are held this fall we can actually vote to determine where our money is going. It's time students had a say in the council's budget priorities.

Only then can it truly claim to represent the will of the students body. Only then will it gain legitimacy in the eyes of the students.

Michael O'Mary, a sophomore living in Quincy House, is the Director of Student Group Issues for the Undergraduate Council.

The audience for God Street Wine numbered no more than 300. This amounts to a subsidy of almost $30 per person.