By Sean Murray
Arizona Daily Wildcat
December 3, 1997

ASUA ads necessary

Editor:

In response to last Wednesday's article about ASUA expenditures for the recent referendum, I would like to offer some clarification. First the facts. The total spent advertising this endeavor was alot [sic] closer to $1,500, not the reported and exaggerated $2,000. True, the Daily Wildcat was paid about $1,200, and the banner did cost 4,250, but only another 450 was spend [sic] for flyers an posters. Now for the rationale. Close to half the money came from the Dean of Students, required a student referendum for this issue. It is the sole responsibility of the elections committee to organize and certainly PUBLICIZE elections. Despite the disappointing outcome, the ads in the Wildcat were necessary. If $1,200 is so outrageous for advertising, maybe the Wildcat should consider greater discounts to university departments. After all, the ads were to inform the student body. The sign purchased is reusable for other student elections, which happen AT LEAST every Spring. The article failed to mention this. Lastly, while Fast Copy may have $285 on the ASUA account, I can assure you that only $50 was spent from ASUA on promotional materials. All of which advocated a neutral position, encouraging students to simply get out and vote. Recall, that there was record voter turn out for this election. Maybe this was due from [sic] the diligent publicity efforts on behalf of ASUA?

Sean Murray
ASUA Treasurer