Wednesday’s Forum

Tomorrow there will be a forum, and among the issues being discussed will be the question of whether or not the SGA ought to allocate money from the SAF to pay for cable on campus. So maybe we should review how we got here: Last semester, the SGA had to decide whether or not to extend our comcast contract, which would mean raising the SAF. They had a deadline to meet on this decision, since there was a budget to be made, and if the SAF was going to be raised, Andrew Pedro had to let the Powers That Be know. This is where the shenanigans began. Faced with this looming deadline, and somehow unsure of what the students would obviously want, the SGA decided to split the issue into two inherently inseparable parts: whether or not to get cable, and whether or not to raise the SAF. I say these are inseparable because the argument for not having cable is based on the notion that it is a waste of money. But that argument is hurt a great deal if it turns out that the students have paid for cable already, whether they receive it or not. Then there comes this new survey in which we find out what we should have known all along: the students overwhelmingly want cable. So on Wednesday night the SGA will appeal to the students (even though they already know how they feel), and will ask whether or not cable is a waste of money (even though the money is being spent either way). I was studying abroad in Paris while most of this cable business happened, and the more I hear about how the cable decision is being reached, the more disappointed I am in the SGA. My first meeting back I was shocked to hear that a forum was needed to figure out what the students want, despite the fact that any forum would be far less scientific than the survey we had JUST SENT OUT. But that’s not even the most disturbing part about this ordeal. By raising the SAF we have effectively already made our decision. It is dishonest for us to pretend that any serious debate can take place on this issue once the SAF has been raised. Look, I would have voted to renew our contract with Comcast last semester without thinking twice. But now the decision is even easier, and I find it shocking that there are any other Senators who feel differently. So for any student reading this, please, go to the Forum on Wednesday. But don’t talk about cable and let this ridiculous game play out any further. Talk about the awful Locknetics situation in the New Jarvis and the manner in which plans were made with no regard for input from the very people who would be living there. That is an issue that deserves your time.

7 Comments

• 
  Andrea Wise February 13, 2008 at 1:17 am

  While I see your point, having been here last semester, I see things differently. The current SAF was too low. Period. Regardless of the cable issue, we had to deny funding a bunch of legitimate student organizations simply because we didn’t have the money. Plus, the cable company was going to charge more to renew the contract. The SAF had not been raised in years, and thus, needed a raise. (LET ME REMIND PEOPLE THAT THE RAISE IS NOT THAT HUGE. It’s okay a couple of dollars, and the proposed policy is that as the price of tuition rises, the SAF will rise with to match 1% of tuition–2 or 3 dollars a year) Without raising the SAF we could not even CONSIDER paying for cable, as the funds did not exist. Now that we’ve raised the SAF, we can afford to pay for cable but we need to decide if it’s a worthwhile investment. It’s not that students won’t be getting cable that they’re already paying for–it’s that they are paying a fixed amount, what do they get in return? Cable? More recycling bins on campus? More student organizations getting operating budgets? How about trying to repair some of the machines in the Athletic Center? Or trying to bring Zipcars to campus? Getting ping-pong tables? (I think you get my point). If, at the forum, students tell us clearly that they’d rather us spend an exorbitant amount of money on cable, we might do that. But maybe if they see what else we could spend that money on, they might be willing to make the sacrifice.

  I don’t know, we’ll see.
• 
  David Kimball-Stanley February 13, 2008 at 1:37 am

  To clarify, I think the students have made their wishes clear. I am all for hearing what students want, but I think we’ve already done that with the survey, which was more effective than any forum we can hope to have. Furthermore, while I understand that my take is hampered a little by the fact that I was not here last semester, it should be noted that my take on the issues is corroborated by many senators who were at the meetings themselves. Anyway, I’m sure the issue will come up at the forum, since I’m just not influential enough to stop it. We should careful though, as we now run the risk of having to worry about how we weigh the forum against the survey.
• 
  Andrea Wise February 13, 2008 at 9:10 am

  First off, the survey was sent to a random sample of students with many issues–only a few pertaining to cable. Thus, the responses had an equal chance to be from students who have strong opinions either way, or from students who just don’t give a ****. By having a forum, we’re allowing students who feel really strongly about the issue of cable—and maybe didn’t get the survey—to voice their opinions.

  Secondly, why would we “run the risk of having to worry how we weigh the forum against the survey” if, according to you, the responses are going to be the same?
• 
  David Kimball-Stanley February 13, 2008 at 11:00 am

  I do think we’ll get the same answers. However, someone must think we’ll hear something different if we’re having the forum. So I don’t know how those who think this is a great issue for the forum plan on weighing it against the forum. I think that’s a fair concern. Also, while it was a random sample, the survey had a much larger sample than I think we can hope to get at the forum. And I really think this business of trying to weigh the value of opinions based on how passionately some people hold them is foolish.
• 
  Bryce Blum February 13, 2008 at 12:33 pm

  I think you both make some very good points. Let me start by saying that i trust the validity of the survey, as we obtained more than 300 responses with an impressive 42% response rate. More to the point, i trust it because it was overseen by James Hughes, who does this for a living and is quite good at it.

  That being said, the survey was not quite as clear as David makes it out to be. Yes, 82% of respondents said they thought the SGA should continue to pay for cable. However, only 45% identified cable as a student activity and 53% felt that it should be paid for by the Student Activities Fund. These are very interesting statistics. They show that 30% percent of respondents think the SGA has an independent source of wealth, and a quite substantial one i might add, through which it could pay for the new contract. What it also reveals is that there needs to be more education on the subject, which the forum has an excellent chance of providing. I agree with David that the students want cable. Who wouldn’t? But are they weighing that decision knowing all of the facts involved? Probably not. Wouldn’t it be great if there were a place for students to go where they could hear all sides of the story in order to help us make an informed decision (say 7pm TONIGHT in TERRACE ROOM B)? That being said, i will continue to support the new cable contract and will likely vote for it when it comes up. But i don’t think the forum is a ludicrous idea. It’s just another way for our constituency to voice their opinions.

  David, you raise an excellent point about how we could weigh the two separate mediums of response against one another. And, too be honest, I don’t think there is a very good response. I guess we’ll just have to go to the forum, see how many people show up, and what they have to say. I don’t think it is completely outside our grasp to try and weigh two different sources of information, though i do agree we’ll have to be careful. I just hope students turn out tonight and voice their concerns, good, bad or otherwise. That’s what governing is supposed to be about.
• 
  Andrea Wise February 13, 2008 at 12:37 pm

  I disagree–someone who feels really strongly that we should have cable should hold more weight than someone who kind of nonchalantly states “well…I don’t really use cable…I guess we could get rid of it” because the decision would have a bigger impact on the first person. Besides, maybe having cable in the survey wasn’t best, but I don’t see any possible downside to listening MORE to students opinions.
• 
  Andrew Pedro February 13, 2008 at 5:36 pm

  I really think that the concern stems from the process, so I would like to clarify the matter. As Andrea has already stated, the Student Activities Fee was not increased since 2001. Also, other NESCAC schools like Hamilton College for instance, maintain their SAF at 1% of tuition. After 7 years without an increase, the SGA decided to raise the SAF to 1% of tuition in order to afford cable and other student activities. In order to raise the SAF, we had to decide to do it last semester in order for the fee to apply to the new bill for the 2008-2009 academic year.

  If we had not raised the SAF last semester we would not be able to renew a cable contract without cutting the funding for other programs. However, at that time we had not yet received a proposed contract from Comcast. At this point we are now currently negotiating with Comcast and other service providers.

  I am fully committed to maintaining cable on this campus, but by doing so with the best deal we can negotiate. Once the negotiations are complete, which will be within the next week or two, we will present an agreement to the SGA. I firmly believe that we should not commit ourselves to do something before we actually know what we are committing to. While the process may not be ideal, we simply have to be patient and allow for the agreement to be presented to the SGA for a vote later this month.

  Also, in regards to the SGA holding a student forum later tonight, I think that students who are concerned about the process or want to understand the financial implications of renewing the contract, should come tonight. I don’t see us providing an opportunity to bring people together and talk about this issue as a negative. I think it is setting a great precedent and ensures that everyone’s voice will be heard in this process.