As it awaits a much-needed bailout, the undergraduate student government should construct a long-term plan to fix a flawed system of allocating funds.

On Friday, Associated Students UCLA will vote on whether or not to grant Undergraduate Students Association Council $75,000 to boost low surplus funds. If ASUCLA denies USAC the money, a large number of student groups that depend on programming funds for events in winter and spring quarters would receive less money.

While ASUCLA should approve the funds, it should do so in the form of a loan and not a bailout.

USAC should be held accountable for paying back the money over a given period of time.

ASUCLA executive director Bob Williams rejected the idea of a loan, asserting that it wasn’t fair for next year’s council to inherit the debt of this year’s.

But the reality is that the fiscal decisions of one council do carry over to the next, and USAC’s avoidance of this fact has brought about today’s predicament. The loan, which could be paid back over several years, would encourage USAC to be more precise in its spending and prevent future mishandling of funds.

At the same time, USAC needs to seriously examine its bylaws and find a long-term fix for this allocation system. The first step is to eliminate reliance on inconsistent surplus funds – a goal the council is already working toward.

Last week, USAC agreed to allocate only 33 percent of its original budget to student groups per quarter until the surplus from the previous fiscal year is confirmed. This limit will ensure that funds are evenly distributed throughout the year.

The council also needs to reduce its own spending whenever possible.

USAC President Emily Resnick said she intends to propose a decrease to the amount of surplus allocated to capital items contingency, a fund that receives 15 percent of surplus funds per year by default.

This fund constitutes $14,000 that can only be spent on new office equipment for student groups with offices in Kerckhoff Hall, which includes all of the student government offices. The high amount overfunds only some groups while taking away from others.

Despite its current woes, USAC continues to allocate funds for its own retreats. On Dec. 6, 33 percent of a total of $3,047.81 was given to USAC offices to fund five events, three of which were retreats. An additional four retreats were funded throughout January. Though USAC offices are as entitled to retreats as any other group, it reflects poorly on student government when members request significant amounts of money for these types of activities when there is a considerable lack of funds to go around.

USAC needs to think hard about the consequences for student groups if the additional ASUCLA funding is denied.

In dealing with the current financial situation, USAC needs to act responsibly by establishing a model of efficient spending that the rest of campus can follow.