Necessary Review Of Transparency of the Councils

The debate over the return of Naval Reserve Officers’ Training Corps to Columbia has raised important questions about our University and its students, and the way in which we influence, and are influenced by, national policy. Unfortunately, it has also raised questions about the transparency of our student councils.

The original meetings about the upcoming NROTC forum included a handful of student organizations selected by the undergraduate councils. These meetings were secretive, unrepresentative of the student body at large, and alienating, in that they privileged certain student organizations over others. Negative media coverage following the removal of one (uninvited) student group from one of these meetings was the only way to extract a promise of transparency from the councils.

That promise remains unfulfilled. One open meeting was held. No communication followed this meeting, and no second meeting took place. In that one meeting, and in individual meetings with various councils, students and organizations were specifically told that the time frame of the survey and its wording would be discussed in an open meeting.

The undergraduate councils unilaterally decided on the survey’s time frame and wording without input from the student population. Though they have responded to criticism by pushing back the date of the survey, the fact remains that they mismanaged the process of creating it, and in doing so, marginalized many students and student groups.

Many of the undergraduate councils campaigned on ending divisiveness among student groups and promoting a larger sense of campus unity. The councils, by favoring certain groups over others, by failing to understand organizational constituencies, and by repeatedly withholding communication, have only further divided students on this campus.

In the coming weeks, our campus will feel the onslaught of passions surrounding NROTC. But as our campus grapple with the dilemma of how to best promote inclusion, let us not forget that our student leaders must also be inclusive, available, and forthright.

When we elected our respective councils, we were promised a transparent, welcoming environment that would replace bureaucratic politicking with open channels of communication. Unfortunately, during this process, the opposite has been true.

In writing this, I seek not to issue a blanket indictment of our student leaders. Rather, I implore the councils to re-examine the way in which they involve students in planning processes, the channels through which information is disseminated, and the goals of openness and solidarity that they pledged to us when we voted for them.

The author is a Columbia College sophomore. This article represents the opinions of Chicano Caucus, Columbia Queer Alliance, CU College Democrats, Everyone Allied Against Homophobia, Lucha, Proud Colors, and Students for a Democratic Society. They will be holding a “Voices of NROTC” today from 7-9 p.m. in Lerner Cinema. The event will feature a panel of experts to discuss the legal and ethical ramifications of NROTC returning to campus.