I was disturbed by the omission
of two important points in your
paper's coverage of the Tuesday,
February 18 Student Council meeting.
In the first place, no mention
was made of the fact that three
unexcused absences vacated a
Council position. Mr. Slater and Mr.
Angle both presented excuses for
two of their absences, which were
found acceptable by an overwhelming
majority of Council. By omitting
this fact, your newspaper
implies that the Council merely
decided to "overlook" these absences.
Such implication is unfair to
both Mr. Angle and Mr. Slater.
Secondly, your newspaper has
failed to even mention two constructive
proposals made and passed
at the Council meeting. The first
will have Council work with the
Faculty Senate Committee on
nominations to the Board of
Visitors in preparing its recommendations
to the Alumni Association.
The second will have the
Student Council president consult
with the Alumni Association in its
preparation of three nominations to
be sent to the Governor. Of course,
these two organizations must agree
to these steps, but I have already
received a favorable response from
the chairman of the committee and
the director of the association. The
significance of these proposals lies
in the fact that the Faculty Senate
Committee's recommendations are
always strongly considered by the
Alumni Association and the Alumni
Association's nominations to the
Board of Visitors have an excellent
"acceptance" record. In effect,
students would have a voice in
nominations before they are approved,
rather than fighting for the
removal of members of the Board
of Visitors "after the fact" of their
appointment.
I realize the difficulties your
reporter had in covering a long and
complicated meeting, but I feel
these facts require consideration.
Kevin Mannix
Student Council
