STAFF EDITORIAL: LUCC should have held referendum

In Jan., LUCC was granted permission by the board of trustees to consider a $36 hike in the activity fee. At the last meeting, they approved the increase. Before being passed, this proposal met with some controversy from Plantz Hall representative and new president elect Cole DeLaney. DeLaney suggested a referendum to decide on the increase. While we are perhaps not as suspicious of the benefits of this hike as DeLaney—the proposal by Paul Shrode and several members of LUCC has much to recommend it—we feel strongly that a referendum would have been in the best interests of LUCC and of the campus.All specific debates about the merits of the proposal aside, this is precisely the kind of legislation on which LUCC should hold a referendum. It will affect every student on campus, and it is not the kind of business LUCC ordinarily deals with, nor was it on the radar screen during the campaigns. All students should have had a say on it. Every LUCC administration, including the present one, has made promises about involving the campus with LUCC business. This was a time to make good on those promises.

We are sensitive to the fact that the time frame available to LUCC for deciding this issue was not ideal for a referendum, but we feel that it would have been worthwhile for LUCC to hold a proper vote, with proper publicity and accessible polls.

We also politely suggest that this might have been the perfect time for LUCC to try an online ballot.

Top