To the Editor:
It has recently come to light that a number of procedural errors occurred in a recent attempt by Student Life Committee to bring to vote their newly revised charter. The Review has taken the initiative to report on these matters, and the Senate has convened and lodged a formal request that these matters become the focus of further discussion. We'd like to take the opportunity to summarize what we see as the essential points of this issue.
1) The appointment of a Dean-level administrator to a voting position on a General Faculty committee is a violation of the letter and spirit of the Finney Compact, which stipulates that oversight of College affairs be entrusted to the Faculty, and by extension, to the students. It's a separation of powers issue - in Oberlin governance, like U.S. federal governance, executive and legislative ranches are held purposefully separate.
2) Robert's Rules of Order, to which SLC is subject, stipulates that all amendments to a proposal be voted upon prior to voting on the proposal as a whole. In this case, a vote was sought over e-mail that lumped amendment approval with approval of the charter as a whole.
3) Voting via e-mail is an area of committee bylaws that remains undefined. Certainly, a change this major shouldn't be regulated to a mere "tidying" vote at the end of the year. It should be noted that this proposal went to e-mail voting because a quorum of committee members was not present to discuss the issue at hand.
4) Student Senate was provided with a draft of the charter for their consideration and approval. Comments were made and approval was given. The proposed new changes to the charter were made without Senate notification and differ from the approval charter in several critical features.
5) The amendments were brought up in the last five minutes of the last SLC meeting of the year, after a three month drafting process, and only after four out of six students members were no longer in attendance.
We hope that the Student Life Committee sees fit to allow the kind of discussion that an issue of this weight merits.
Copyright © 1997, The Oberlin Review.
Volume 125, Number 24, May 9, 1997
Contact Review webmaster with suggestions or comments at ocreview@www.oberlin.edu.
Contact Review editorial staff at oreview@oberlin.edu.