Student Assembly

Voted No

Cecilia de Lencquesaing:
Although I do admire the effort President Salem and VP Williams have put in drafting this resolution and presenting it to us as clearly as they did today, I disagree with the prerequisite clause that attendance at Student Assembly meetings is necessary. It is true that attendance is abysmal, as Salem worded it. But I believe there is a very easy answer to that. What we do during Student Assembly meetings is not extremely interesting. We draft up resolutions on restructuring review committees, eligibility of big red bikes, approval of standing rules, … Frankly speaking, who cares whether Big Red Bikes complies with Requirement E in Appendix A, Section III! These are necessary resolutions but they are not fascinating: we are the plumbers that make student governance work. We are a necessary figure on campus but we are not a “fun” organization per say and sitting in on SA meetings as a voting member as well as a non-voting member is not always thrilling. For instance, when someone has something to say during the open-microphone, that person rarely stays until the end of the meeting. That is not a problem. That is why we were elected in the first place: to listen to the presentations, listen to the open microphone, think about it and come back with a response.

The whole “power-hungry” painting of the Student Assembly is grotesque. We have no power, just responsibilities. It is not the “power” to create a student ambassador to Doha but a responsible answer to student concern. Similarly, it is not the power to have a say on the Ujamaa Faculty crisis that interests us, but the responsibility to voice the student concern and endeavor to find a viable solution for students and administration. There has been a lot of discussion over the “pride and self-interest” of the Student Assembly members. Contrary to what Ray Mensah appears to believe, we do not “cry over a potential lack of power.” We are not “afraid” of resolution 4. We are student-elected representatives and make our decisions based on what we believe is best for the student body as a whole. Not for the twenty three of us. This is not a “conceited” statement, it’s simply our responsibility. When it is argued that Resolution 4 “takes some of our power and gives it back to the student body” I disagree. We have no individual power: we voice the concerns of the student body. I hope you understand the reasoning behind my negative vote at today’s meeting.