The College's decision to postpone the implementation of the Organizational Adjudication Committee's student board ("Implementation of OAC student board postponed," Jan 13) was abruptly announced Tuesday following months of preparation and support from the student body. The reasons cited for delaying the board's first training session ranged from budget cuts to the Phi Delta Alpha fire and ultimately raised more questions than they answered.
Nathan Miller, assistant director of Undergraduate Judicial Affairs, attributed the delay to the "already full plates" many students and administrators are facing in light of impending budget cuts. With applications already submitted and reviewed, and training scheduled for the following day, it seems that much of the legwork was completed by the time the decision was made. While we believe Dartmouth students are concerned about the budget, our plates are always full, regardless of the economy. Dartmouth students are accustomed to juggling many commitments at once, and the administration should enlist our help by tapping students as competent and free resources that could reduce the additional pressures facing administrators.
Additionally, the abrupt cancellation of training signals a lack of communication between the administration and the student body that is reminiscent of the College's September decision to scrap the Alcohol Management Policy ("Spears says College will not adopt AMP," Sept. 24). Following a review committee's assessment of the current Social Event Management Procedures and two terms of soliciting student feedback on the proposed changes, the administration chose to return to the drawing board. That both initiatives AMP and the OAC student board strayed from their original timetables compromises student motivation and faith in the administration, particularly because the students who were involved in planning were not always central in the decision to postpone the projects.
It has been suggested that a lack of applications from minorities, unaffiliated students and women was the actual cause of the postponement. While this has not been confirmed, if it is the case, the administration should have confronted the problem of diversity when applications were first reviewed and solicited more student response instead of waiting until the last minute and making a seemingly hasty decision.
Substantial OAC reform was also part of the platform on which Student Body President Frances Vernon '10 was elected ("Vernon works to realize platform," Nov. 11). With the project delayed until at least this spring, Vernon and the other '10s who were instrumental in its development will have little, if any, time to oversee its implementation. Given that student leaders have limited tenures, it is crucial that administrators acknowledge the effect of their decisions on student-led projects.
We understand that this is a period of broad transformation at the College, but real action must take place on largely budget-neutral projects with this kind of student support, despite impending cuts. Budget cuts are either the convenient scapegoat for suspending the OAC board, or financial talks are preventing important projects from being put into effect. We are not sure which is worse.
