IC SGA Vol. 3 (E-Board part I)

Welcome back (Kotter)! Some positive response to the blog so far. Its weird because I feel as if I am just talking common sense, but sometimes that's too much for people, and they decide either they can't take it, or discredit it because its too real for them. I would dare anyone to challenge me that SGA has been doing an excellent job this year, or that the Ithacan has been doing an excellent job covering student government actions. SGA may not be the U.S. Congress, but it is supposed to be the representative body for Ithaca College Students. If they fail to listen to the voice of the students, or are completely dysfunctional where they lose the respect of the people then they run the risk of not being recognized as the TRUE voice of the students. Where does it say that another group of people could organize and challenge the SGA's supremacy for student representation.? I know that the SGA is the current end all be all is the eyes of the students and the administration. The SGA is said to be the only recognized voice to the administration. But whose to say if that would be forever?

The only way the claim above would prove true is if the Student Government fulfills its commitment to operate as a productive organization. If they fail to live up to that, then anything is up for grabs, including complete dissolution, and starting from scratch. The reason any of this is even being discussed, even though some choice to ignore that there is any problems whatsoever, is the continued troubles of this years SGA. As much as it pains me to admit, the root of the problems must be laid at the feet of the Executive Board.

The current E-Board was elected with such promise, and had such designs of grandeur. The Reconstruction Team vowed to revamp the entire SGA and make improvements on the past few years. The plans were pretty generalized, but there was room and time to fill in the gaps. The problem was that the semester began, the SGA got going, and the plan never took shape. There has been no revamping, there has been virtually nothing going on this semester. Why has the SGA failed to live up the promises they made in April? Maybe the more important question is, why hasn't anyway (besides me) called them out before on their lack of action. I am trying hard to pointing out individual people, so please bear with me. It is not as if I have a personal grudge against them as a group, but rather personally worried about the state of the SGA in their hands.
Lets try to run down the list of problems related directly to the Executive Board this year. Maybe the first problem has to do with the actual size of the SGA. In the past year the E-board has increased in size, adding the alumni relations position, and the increased responsibility to the note secretary and the chairperson. No knock on them, but non of these positions are voted in by the students. And I'm sure they have good intentions, but in all honesty they should not wield as much power as they do during this session of the SGA. Its my opinion that an executive board with so much responsibility will function better with a small group of people working in better unison and cohesion, than a large group that has trouble communicating. I am all for diversity in a group and having voices from different perspectives, but when it comes to the E-board, they must be able to function, make decision, provide strong initiative and oversight. The senate is more for the diversity and providing the voice of the people. The executive board should be bringing the issues to the table, and starting the debate. This years e-board is exclusively reactionary, and has not shown the initiative for real CHANGE this year.

One of the other major problems has been the fact that two elected E-Board members served only half of the year. I cannot stress this enough; this is a HUGE PROBLEM. From day one the clock was ticking on these two members, and they were basically lame ducks before October break. It is truly unfair to the student body to try to get yourself elected when you know before hand that you can only serve half a semester. SELFISH is the only way to describe this action. And it doesn't matter how much good work they were able to do before the end of fall semester, because in January they will not be there. New elections were needed in December and now we have two new VP's coming in and having to learn on the job, and mesh with an E-board and senate who has been together since September. There needs to be strict term restrictions for VP's to prevent students who plan to leave mid-semester from being elected. We do the same for students who study abroad in the fall and return for the spring. It is discriminatory to continue that current practice. We shouldn't hate on those wanting to study abroad, but it is only fair to the student population for SGA members to serve a full term (student trustees are chosen knowing they can not go away for two years and must serve their position).

Writing this blog I realize that it is hard to fit everything in an entry without sounding like a pompous ass or going too long, and losing the audience. I just want to bring to light some serious issues, and I understand it is going to take some serious time and commitment before this comes to be. But for now, I am out. Be safe and be well. 1