President of Graduate Student Senate expresses his frustration at the ‘strategic’ exclusion from essential meetings.
This letter is in direct response to Katie Quaranta, an Ohio University spokeswoman, and her statements defending administrative action surrounding the Dec. 8 Budget Planning Council meeting — the meeting where the vote to substantially raise tuition, room and board was unanimously approved.
Whether the initial meeting was rescheduled because Vice President of Finance and Administration Stephen Golding and Provost Pam Benoit held other engagements is beside the point — what students need to critically think about are the following necessary facts: (1) The votes to increase the price of the university’s three biggest revenue sources (a) tuition, (b) residential housing and (c) meal plans were lumped into one single meeting agenda; (2) this meeting was scheduled for the end of Fall term when their student representatives who sit on the council were busy, then rescheduled, and then rescheduled again hours before it was held at 4 p.m. on Monday, Dec. 8 — the first day of finals week. Interpret the facts as necessary, but in the end, it comes down to two unacceptable conclusions.
Read More: OU’s Board of Trustees raised tuition again. Here’s what you need to know.
The first conclusion is that a neutral, objective and procedural administration prioritized the attendance of administrators at these important votes over the attendance of student representatives — with neither of the democratically-elected student representatives, nor the Vice President of Student Affairs present to express how substantial increases in tuition, housing and meal plans might affect the financial well-being of future students, the vote was held anyway once Golding and Benoit could attend. This begs the question of what standards are set for prioritizing some members’ attendance over others’, and who gets to be the authority over this. The second conclusion, as I pointed out in my previous letter, is that non-neutral, goal-oriented administrators are strategic in when and how they reschedule committee meetings to influence the committee turnout and accomplish their goals — the goal in this case being to maximize the university’s revenue stream without any dissent on the official record.
In addition, Quaranta made a statement about why Student Senate President Megan Marzec was denied the right to a proxy, in which she indirectly quoted Golding, stating, “Since the budget planning process is cumulative, meaning that the information gained at each meeting builds upon the findings of all the previous BPC meetings, it is important to maintain consistency in membership and representation.” This reasoning is fallacious. There is nothing irresponsible about reviewing the BPC meeting minutes online and then sending a proxy in her place to vote on her behalf — in fact, this is a clear case of recognizing the importance of the student voice on the BPC and showing responsibility in sending a proxy when she cannot attend. Again, students should think critically and interpret the administration’s motive for denying her proxy as they see fit.
In response to Quaranta’s statement that Marzec and I were given enough time to voice complaints about the final meeting time, or contacted by the Office of the Provost or the Office of Finance and Administration, prior to the final rescheduling is explicitly false. The final meeting time of 4-5:30 p.m. — conflicting with my own final exam — was rescheduled hours before it was held, and was not communicated to all members. I openly challenge administration to show any communication record notifying me of the final rescheduling to 4 p.m. on Monday, Dec. 8.
Quaranta also denied that I tried to set up a meeting between the student government and President Roderick McDavis over college affordability. On Oct. 15, The Post was forwarded an email containing my talking points for that meeting with President McDavis — here are four quotes from the attached document: (1) “Since 1978, tuition has increased 1,120 percent — four times the increase of the CPI,” (2) “Minimum wage has kept even with the CPI,” (3) “Student employees at Ohio University are paid minimum wage,” and (4) “Student employees trying to work their way through college at Ohio University can only pay off one-fourth the college debt as student employees in 1978.” Again, when I asked President McDavis what his office could do to help, he said he would be happy to take a look at it, and when I pressed and asked how student government could play an active role, he said administration would have to decide whether to involve us. They did not.
On these last two points, which are not subject to interpretation, but are a matter of communication record, in the simplest possible language, Katie Quaranta is being salaried to lie.
Carl Edward Smith III is the President of Graduate Student Senate at Ohio University.
