A year ago, Student Life submitted a list of questions to Student Union executive candidates asking for campaign pledges and goals if they were elected. In December, Pam Bookbinder outlined her own vision and is now filling in as vice president. As election season approaches we can evaluate the progress of Bookbinder as well as President David Ader, Secretary Lindsey Grossman, and Treasurer Jessica Jones.
Overall, the execs achieved their goal of making SU more “user-friendly.” The SU Web site is now much easier to navigate and provides a great resource for all students. Student groups can find forms and information they need. Next semester the entire budgeting process for student groups will be online, as Jones promised.
Student representatives can better communicate with constituents, and non-SU students can oversee SU proceedings and are now better informed through SU all-student e-mails. Each exec member deserves credit for these improvements, and each member recognized Webmaster and Treasury Speaker Ed Banti for playing a major role in this reform.
Some of President Ader’s specific reforms have been less successful or have required retooling. He never established the “president’s page” in Student Life as he promised, instead opting for an SU newsletter that almost nobody reads. SU leadership retreats fell flat, failing to increase communication between different branches of SU; Grossman admitted that intra-SU communication is still difficult. “Free food Thursdays” were scrapped, and the Spark calendar is still under construction (although that’s largely due to programmer, not SU, problems).
Ader was effective at improving SU communication with administration. While he admitted SU cannot always change administrators’ minds, they can make certain issues a priority, as evidenced by the recent creation of a GLBTQA task force.
Ader, along with all of SU, began some much-needed internal housecleaning. This year SGAC imposed a moratorium on new student groups in order to ask questions, evaluate and, most importantly, said Ader, “not just do things because it’s the way we’ve always done them.”
Treasurer Jones also made progress toward SU efficiency and accessibility. She has reached out to student group treasurers through personal contact, and while her promise to have Treasury attend at least one student group event per week failed, she has tried to do so personally. She did a great job budgeting for the Presidential Debate, but not so much for the Environmental Initiative, which has stalled. She has had a tough time decentralizing power from execs, as she promised to do.
In her defense, she rightly claims, “People only notice my job when it’s not being done.” She has made numerous small accomplishments: helping new student groups get money, keeping track of each group’s budgets and getting quicker responses for budget requests and appeals.
Secretary Grossman has done well with the internal SU newsletter, smartly recognizing that beyond the student body, many SU members don’t know what each branch actually does. She has made efforts to get students more interested in SU and fights the challenge of student apathy regarding SU activities. She provides help with advertising and has offered creative ways to improve communication coming from SU and to promote student events. The SU report, though neglected, does contain a comprehensive report of SU, and the “How Things Work” publication is a vital resource.
But as evidenced with the Class of 2008 officers, it’s not clear that everybody in SU even reads “How Things Work.” And she still seems out of touch with general student opinions. SU is still very much a reactive organization in that it requires students to bring concerns forward. Grossman claims the administration respects SU as representing student opinions, though she’s not so sure SU always does so in actuality.
Vice President Bookbinder is making good on promises to improve SU recruitment and retention. She is making personal efforts to connect with and recognize SU reps, plan SU social events and encourage new people to get involved. So far, over 15 people responded to nominations to get involved. It’s too early to tell, but she seems to be on the right track.
Looking back, programs to make SU more efficient, responsive and better inform other SU members of activities seem to be quite effective. A top-down evaluation is an important step toward new reforms, and SU’s external audit should help them identify even more areas of improvement. The SU Web site is much improved, and a new version of the Spark will only enhance it. However, the same problems of student apathy and a lack of a real way for SU to reach out to students persist.