STAFF EDIT: ‘Vision’ not quite 20-20

Student Union elections are upon the Boston University community and with only one slate running, the process is going largely unnoticed. The customary endorsement from The Daily Free Press is not necessary, as the election of the unopposed Vision for BU slate is a foregone conclusion. Nevertheless, it is important that students are made aware of what kind of leaders they will be getting before they cast their votes.

There is much to like about Vision for BU. Their plan to improve administrative transparency by getting the administration to tell students where their tuition and student fees are going is a realistic proposition that students deserve. More importantly, this slate understands how to fix the internal problems that have plagued Union. The proposal to require transition papers for e-board positions to be filed from year to year is a welcome change, and will ensure that committees do not have to start from scratch on initiatives at the beginning of each academic year. The overall commitment to improving Union morale and raising Union awareness by keeping General Assembly members in touch with their constituents is encouraging.

But increasing visibility and reducing infighting among GA members is only the first step toward becoming an effective advocate for BU students. Convincing the administration to enact the changes that students want is a whole other issue. There are serious concerns about the timid strategy this slate is planning to follow in its approach to working with BU officials. For example, Vice Presidential Candidate Amy Mahler talked about finding out what the administration wants when making policy proposals. But what the administration wants, the administration gets; they are the ones making the rules. If Presidential Candidate James Sappenfield secures a seat on the University Council and other Union leaders are placed on university committees, then the Union must learn to treat BU officials as colleagues, not superiors.

Also disconcerting is Sappenfield’s plan to only sit in on the committee meetings that interest him. He may be knowledgeable about academic affairs, but as future Union president, he will be setting Union’s agenda, and must be well-versed in everything the group is doing. In addition, it is unfortunate that Vision for BU is not committed to bringing about change in a more timely fashion. Understandably, the bureaucracy at BU slows proposals down. But it shouldn’t take over a year, as the slate estimates it will, just to meet with BU officials and formulate a position on policies. As Sappenfield defended the lack of progress this year in academic areas such as advising, it was disappointing to hear him blame others for not giving him necessary contact information as the reason nothing has been accomplished. Committee leaders need to take the initiative to seek out this information by themselves instead of waiting for uncooperative leaders to provide it.

With Vision for BU at the helm, the potential is definitely there for Union to convince students who they should turn to when they need someone to stand up for their interests.’ But unless this slate rethinks its method of dealing with the administration, BU students will not see the change that Vision for BU has promised.