Student Life Committee Woes
By Kevin Cyrulnik
The Student Life Committee eagerly began the spring
semester by convening just one week after intersession.
Determined to undermine negative student sentiment on campus regarding
the inability of the committee to resolve various pressing issues, Yeshiva
College Student Council President Lou Shapp vowed to enforce strict guidelines
for frequent meetings. To this
point, however, the student life committee has not convened since that first
meeting.
The second meeting of the semester was, indeed, scheduled
to occur on February 14th. However,
Shapp issued a memorandum to the constituents of the committee, conveying to
them that the meeting had to be postponed due to the transportation subcommittee
meeting that had already been arranged for that day as well. Shapp ordered the members of the regular committee to instead
attend the subcommittee.
Shapp maintained that he had a plethora of reasons for
canceling the regularly scheduled committee, including his insistence on
resolving the heated debate regarding the transportation issue.
Therefore, he decided to focus solely on that urgent issue, before moving
on to less important matters.
Many of the issues that had been on the day’s agenda,
however, were ignored. One member
of the Student Life Committee iterated, “There were a number of issues that
needed to be discussed at some point that have still not been resolved.”
President of the Student Organization of Yeshiva and
committee member Ilan Rosenrauch expressed his concern for the decline in issues
raised by the general student body. He
admitted that the Student Life Committee was certainly not meeting as frequently
as he would like; however, he attributes blame, at least in part, to the
students on campus. “I would like
to appeal to my fellow students to approach any student leaders with issues that
they feel are relevant to student life on campus,” Rosenrauch stressed.
Assuming that students comply with his request, Rosenrauch speculates
that the Student Life Committee will return to the vital role that it should
play.
Shapp also blamed recent problems on a lack of issues that
need to be dealt with. “I only
schedule a meeting when a clear and defined agenda is set,” explained Shapp.
“If the meetings would occur too often, they would be ineffective.”
Shapp revealed that the moment Student Life Committee
members or other students propose topics of concern for discussion, he compiles
a list and subsequently sends it out to the members of the committee.
“There are only so many issues that come up, and if nothing is there, I
don’t waste people’s time with scheduling a meeting,” commented Shapp.
Nevertheless, Shapp has conceded that he wishes to revert
back to upholding his guarantee that he will personally arrange meetings as
often as needed. He hopes to hold
one more meeting before the upcoming Pesach break, and he has already drawn up a
preliminary list of possible issues to be discussed. Among the most pressing issues, Shapp raised the option of
giving out-of-town students the opportunity to dorm on campus in the summer
months.
As far as the success of the past committees in resolving
the general matters, Shapp enthusiastically conveyed that he felt the meetings
have certainly had success – specifying two of the most recent issues in
particular. “With respect to the
transportation issue, at least one additional van was added to travel to Stern,
and it seems that the number of student complaints are down,” declared Shapp.
“Also,” he continued, “I have personally witnessed a beef up of
security around campus, especially around the IHP buildings.”
While reflecting on the past three months of the semester, Shapp attributed the infrequency of meetings to a “general happiness” on campus. He explained that he perceives the student body to be generally happy, and thus, no serious issues are currently affecting campus life. “If I don’t hear about a problem, I assume that there is not one to address,” concluded Shapp.