This year, The Stanford Daily decided not to offer endorsements for special-fees groups as it has in the past. But we do hope that voters will carefully consider their options before determining which special-fees groups to support.

ASSU officials claim, based on historical figures, that there is a positive correlation between between the overall refund rate and the total amount of money granted to special-fees groups. Based on this, some have made the argument that when the quarterly fee grows larger, students are driven to request more refunds. If this is the case, this is one reason why it is important to look over the groups on the ballot with a particularly critical eye.

Now that the ASSU has instituted the policy that refunds have “real” consequences for groups — if a group has refunds in excess of a certain percentage, it is responsible for making up the difference — by voting for groups one does not particularly care for, one is risking that groups one truly does care about will experience higher refund rates. This is, of course, provided that there is indeed a causal relationship between the total amount of special-fees money requested and the refund rate.

In terms of criteria for determining which groups to support, special-fees recipients should serve the University community. Groups, especially those with a concentrated or core set of members, that do not benefit the greater community have plenty of other options for funding, such as Stanford Fund event shifts and letter writing. Special fees should be just that — special. Each voter should sit down and carefully consider which groups have meaningfully improved the campus community. And remember, if one isn’t sure about a specific group, one always has the option of abstaining rather than voting “yes.” If everyone adopts this approach, the special-fees system will not balloon out of proportion, and groups truly worthy of special fees will be able to enjoy their funding in full via lower refund rates.