SA, presidents obliged to voice student opinion; Rice obligated to listen

By Staff Editorial     10/9/08 7:00pm

Monday night, Dean of Undergraduates Robin Forman and Vice President for Finance Kathy Collins faced a Farnsworth Pavilion jam-packed with students and their representatives at the Student Association's weekly meeting (see story, page 1).Forman and Collins presented a rough description of and fielded questions about the future changes to Rice student organizations' finances.First of all, we would like to thank all of the students who attended the meeting. Any proposal with such wide-reaching ramifications as this one demands open and frequent communication between undergraduates and administrators, and those of you who voiced your opinions took important steps to facilitate that communication.

Secondly, we would like to thank Forman and Collins for meeting with students at a time so far outside their normal working schedules. We realize that SA meetings are often difficult for the average undergraduate to attend, much less two administrators with their own houses and families.

However, we want to emphasize that the discussion must be considered far from over. While it appears that the final result - the transfer of organization funds from external to internal accounts - has been set in stone, Monday night's meeting made it perfectly clear that little of the path leading to it is concrete.

---

---

This decision should have been reached as a result of joint student-administration conversations. Instead, students are being asked to provide feedback and suggestions for a predetermined final result. This gesture reeks of unfulfilled promises, ignored student input and a fundamental misunderstanding of exactly how the colleges and clubs at Rice work. In the end, all of this current rhetoric of "student input" cannot be legitimized unless it is clear exactly how said input will affect the Office of Finance's ultimate course of action.

Members of the administration who are in a position to direct this financial overhaul must keep in mind the attitudes underlying student comments and criticisms. Many student leaders feel as though the change was sprung on them without warning, and the majority of them are fearful, suspicious and angry about it. Instead of blowing this off as mere overreaction, the administration should recognize it for what it is: the responsible reaction of any student leader charged with the use of organization funds to support organization members. Students want answers to a number of questions, and it is perfectly reasonable considering they have been used to a system of financial autonomy. Will our spending freedom be taken away? Where will the line be drawn regarding the university's ability to control club funds? The simple assurance that "not much will change" is nowhere near satisfactory. The only way to make these measures absolutely clear is to put them in writing and submit them to the Student Association for feedback. Only through a written proposal, open to student changes and backed by the administration's assurance that these changes will be taken into account, can Rice reach any sort of solution that does not alienate the student body any more than it already has.

At the same time, the SA and college presidents must remember their responsibilities to keep the student body informed and able to be heard. The SA should write down its stances on the most important issues in this change and fight to the end to ensure its opinions are not minimized or put aside. The college presidents, who meet regularly with Forman and Collins, are surely by now exhausted by all this financial hullabaloo and are probably weary of the strong reactions members of their respective colleges have had to the proposal. However, this is not a legitimate reason to refrain from actively informing their entire colleges - not just elected officers or those members who attend meetings of their government bodies - of these changes and explaining the discussion and potential consequences. The presidents and their treasurers are in a position to best understand and effect these upcoming changes, and they must learn how to deal with their twin roles of representative and educator, even if it means they have to inconvenience themselves to do so.

Our final point of concern regards institutional memory. Forman and Collins repeatedly promised the attendees of the SA meeting that they had no intent to begin regulating college or club purchases or infringing upon their financial autonomy but on several instances declined to agree to sign a document outlining this promise. If Forman and Collins really mean what they say, they should be sure to include such a document in the final plan to ensure that future student leaders enjoy the same fiscal freedoms we do today.

---