It seems that every time we read an article about the SGA’s doings, some high-ranking member is releasing a statement opposing whatever Chancellor Lombardi is up to. In fact, if you knew of only students’ actions and statements, you’d think our Chancellor had some secret vendetta against them.
Believe it or not, he doesn’t.
As the man in charge here at UMass, the well-being and success of the students is actually among Lombardi’s top priorities. It is part of his job description. He has had the best interest of UMass students in mind whenever he has made a decision or recommendation or even, as he is most recently noted for, when he issued his Chancellor’s draft plan for diversity.
You may have recently been told that Lombardi has plans to take over the SGA, the Collegian, WMUA and every other RSO on campus. You’ve probably read or heard the comments of SGA leaders claiming that Lombardi is “tackling the SGA.” At the GEO rally last week, one ill-informed speaker proclaimed that the plan gave Vice Chancellor Gargano control of all the RSOs. This is a rumor which has no basis; it simply isn’t true. The source of this rumor is a misreading of Lombardi’s recent first draft action plan.
In the plan, he calls for these organizations to develop new diversity programs, and sets up a system to ensure their implementation, but he does not, by any means, request control of them. Though organizations would receive extra money from the administration to implement diversity protocols and would be formally given a new administrative office, the SGA would still keep all of its existing financial control. This is hardly “tackling the SGA.”
Ironically, it is the SGA that has been tackling Lombardi. They seem to be under the impression that Lombardi is not fighting for the students just as hard as they are, but instead, fighting against the students. The administration and the student government are both organizations charged with the task of helping students. The administration and the student government are both on the same team; there is no need for the high level of animosity that we have seen lately.
Unfortunately, some members of the SGA seem to think that they are fighting against Lombardi. They talk like they aren’t on the same team as him and they act like they aren’t fighting for the same things that he is. These students come up with all manner of ways to criticize him, and it is getting out of hand.
You’ve probably also heard that Lombardi and the administration are racist or discriminatory. I’ve read these comments several times and it seems to be the accepted opinion among some members of the SGA and campus at large that our good Chancellor just has it out for minorities. The example that is commonly brought up is the “International Student Fee” debacle of last year.
There was never anything wrong with the International Student Fee, we should get that straight. The administration didn’t care if you were black, white, gay or straight; if you were from outside the U.S., you paid an additional fee for your time here at UMass Amherst and that was that. It was analogous to the ongoing discrimination against non-Massachusetts residents that we give the euphemism “out-of-state tuition.”
I am from out of state, and just like every other out-of-state student, regardless of my ethnicity or sexual preference, I pay an additional fee for my time here at UMass Amherst because I am from outside of Massachusetts. It is not geographic “discrimination.” There is nothing wrong with charging higher fees for out-of-state students, and there was nothing wrong with charging higher fees for International students (who are by definition also from out-of-state, incidentally). The IS fee should not reflect poorly on Lombardi or the administration, but somehow it is brought up in the context of anti-Lombardi sentiments.
The result of the confrontational stance the SGA has taken with Lombardi is a significant reduction of the group’s overall power. You see, the SGA’s ability to doll out money to the RSOs isn’t all that significant in terms of campus politics. What is significant is their position as the student conduit to the administration, and the student voice to the outside world in general. When the SGA severs itself from the administration with wild claims of discrimination or hostile takeovers, they destroy their own credibility. Without credibility as an organization, the level of influence the group holds with the administration is significantly reduced.
The good news is that Lombardi, as someone who is trying his best to improve life for the students, sincerely wants to work with the SGA and the students in general. He has demonstrated this recently by showing extreme patience and openness with the moves he has made surrounding the diversity commission; extending deadlines and opening himself up to students. If group members start playing like they are on his team, I’m sure he’ll be more than willing to play their game. Without a doubt, that is the healthiest and most efficient way to really get things done for all of the students here at UMass.
