THIS WEEK, students have a much bigger opportunity to influence the University's future than many may realize. The voting period for University-wide elections began yesterday and continues through Sunday. By choosing the next slate of student leaders, voters have the chance to select individuals who will partner with administrators to determine what policies shape this institution going forward. These decisions are not trivial.
At the "top of the ballot," students have a choice between two candidates in the race for Student Council president. Third-year College students Dan Morrison and Evan Shields both are experienced in the workings of Council; both are motivated, thoughtful and well-versed in how business is conducted at the University. But Morrison has demonstrated that he has the temperament and careful pragmatism necessary to lead an organization charged with representing some 20,000 undergraduate and graduate students.
To his credit, Shields has racked up a number of endorsements from student organizations. But the temptation for many groups is to choose a candidate that gives lip service to a preferred cause or project. That impulse is understandable and perhaps necessary to a point - many of these organizations are, after all, advocacy groups. But it means that students must be especially scrupulous when considering how much weight to give such recommendations.
For example, student safety has - for good reason - become a defining element of this race. Shields' platform indicates that he wishes to push for the purchase of "at least one more van" for the often-maligned SafeRide program, a service that provides free transportation for students during late-night hours. That kind of easy fix excites people, but the situation is, in fact, much more complicated. The investment for just one new van could top $50,000 in its first year alone once one factors in the costs of a vehicle, insurance, driver salary, maintenance and fuel.
To put that in perspective, Council's entire budget for the 2010-11 academic year was $76,491, not including appropriations money intended for distribution to other student groups. Certainly the funding could come from elsewhere, but it becomes clear that serious trade-offs must be considered. Unfortunately, silver-bullet solutions are few and far between.
A similar problem arises from proposals such as Shields' intent to lobby for an increased police presence in off-Grounds residential areas. The issue is not that administrators or police are unaware that crime is a grave concern and simply need to be pushed by students to pay more attention. Police coverage is expensive to finance and it is unfair to expect Charlottesville to redirect resources from elsewhere in the city to suit the University's wishes.
If Shields is implying that University money or other resources are being misallocated, he ought to be explicit about what must change. A candidate for Council president must be realistic and upfront with students about the nature of the challenges facing this community.
Morrison's approach is somewhat different. He has researched how the University's peer institutions have addressed student safety, and his platform recommends the most cost-effective options he discovered. One suggestion is to implement smartphone safety technology using GPS, which allows students to synch their locations with University police computers; police are then notified of any suspicious movement. Morrison says he is not opposed to discussing with University officials how to revamp the SafeRide program, but he stresses that feasibility is the key. That kind of insight may not fire up students, but it reflects the sort of level-headed, disciplined weighing of costs and benefits that is indispensable for a Council president. This logic applies to any number of issues apart from safety.
In other words, students must be sure not to confuse concrete goals with overextended campaign promises. This is particularly true given Council's operational structure - most initiatives arise from the 11 presidential committees, not from the executive officers. Perhaps the most important trait for a Council president is to be a thoughtful critic of what the organization's members seek to accomplish. The president is less someone who sets a specific agenda of projects than someone responsible for charting the overall direction of the organization - and someone who must understand the challenges inherent to each of Council's goals when it comes time to defend them.
Student leadership is most effective when its representatives demonstrate they have what it takes to work with University officials productively. Otherwise, students relinquish their ability to have a say in what direction this university takes. Shields' willingness to advocate earnestly on behalf of students is commendable, but Morrison is the clear choice to ensure that Council realizes its potential during the next year.
Ross Lawrence was the 121st editor-in-chief of The Cavalier Daily.
Read More
WILLIAMS: Donald Trump will be a threat to student loan forgiveness
By Ryan Williams | 20 hours agoTo be sure, this is not a problem of the University’s making. Nevertheless, understanding the uncertainty of financial accessibility in education, the University must step up to the plate.
PATEL: Personal development courses support students beyond the gradebook
By Heer Patel | 5 days agoThe University must rethink its approach to education beyond traditional major-specific requirements and mandate personal development courses.
EDITORIAL: Commercialization threatens U.Va.’s educational mission
By Editorial Board | 6 days agoAfter all, measuring the University’s worth in terms of accrued capital, operational efficiency and numerical rankings molds this space into just another cookie-cutter institution.
