"That was part of the deal," says Seton. "The College wanted to have a say over where the grants would go and they wanted to give them out in larger blocks."

Student leaders downplay the significance of University involvement.

Stewart says that with only a few exceptions, the committee chose the same groups for grants that she and Cohen would have chosen.

"Ideally you want things in student hands but sometimes it ends up being more strategic to do it this way," she says, noting that the committee gives administrators a chance to see student need first-hand.

And student group leaders say the new money does not detract from the funds distributed by the council.

"It's just an additional source of funding," Doshi says. "It's not as if we can't go to the U.C. and get funds from them."

Seton adds that extracurricular groups have always received money from non-council sources, such as the Harvard Foundation and the Office for the Arts.

And some groups say administrators might be more even-handed than the council in their decision-making.

"I think it's nice that they're administrators and people removed from the peer situation," says Fuller. "I trust the U.C. to a certain extent, but especially in terms of our group, a lot of people have this innate prejudice against cheerleaders because we're supposed to be stupid or something."

With so many student groups and so little money to go around, Seton says the quantity is more important than the source.

"I would rather see the council have more rather than less control," he says. "[But] there wasn't much of a fight when the $25,000 proposal came down, because it seems like a reasonable suggestion. It was their money."