More reporting needed to answer some critical questions
Andy Boden
Issue date: 10/8/09 Section: Letters
It's good to see your reporters covering an important, yet interesting topic that has provided much dialogue for this campus. However, it seems that there are many questions that are unanswered at the moment. Student Senate has been working hard on the new Davies project for a couple years now, and I can understand why it would be frustrating for them to have to reconsider the plans after they've been finalized.
Student Senate President Michael Umhoefer mentioned a disconnect between the student body and the tree and the fact that many students didn't even know of the tree up until this controversy began to surface. However, if there are any students who should have known about the tree and the problems it might have caused, it's our elected student leaders who have been planning this project.
No one in Student Senate can make an excuse to claim ignorance, or to completely disregard the tree, just because the majority of the student body didn't know of the tree until now. And from reading the responses to the other articles relating to this issue, some have said that people had the opportunity to express their concerns all along, while others have said they had no way of knowing of the threat to the tree's existence until recently. What I want to know is what Student Senate knew about the tree, if anything, and its potential obstacles during the planning process and what considerations Senate made in regards to it, if any.
It's unfair for President Umhoefer and anyone else in Senate to say the students should've known about it and acted sooner, if that is indeed what they are implying.
Student Senate President Michael Umhoefer mentioned a disconnect between the student body and the tree and the fact that many students didn't even know of the tree up until this controversy began to surface. However, if there are any students who should have known about the tree and the problems it might have caused, it's our elected student leaders who have been planning this project.
No one in Student Senate can make an excuse to claim ignorance, or to completely disregard the tree, just because the majority of the student body didn't know of the tree until now. And from reading the responses to the other articles relating to this issue, some have said that people had the opportunity to express their concerns all along, while others have said they had no way of knowing of the threat to the tree's existence until recently. What I want to know is what Student Senate knew about the tree, if anything, and its potential obstacles during the planning process and what considerations Senate made in regards to it, if any.
It's unfair for President Umhoefer and anyone else in Senate to say the students should've known about it and acted sooner, if that is indeed what they are implying.
Be the first to comment on this story