4-30-09: Stanford: Community centers deserve support amidst budget cuts

The $3 million in budget cuts to the student affairs division have drawn criticism for a lack of transparency and student input in the process, especially with regard to Stanford’s six community centers. This is quickly becoming a familiar refrain, as economic pressures force tough decisions and those affected push back.

While acknowledging that this is a difficult and complex process, the editorial board commends Stanford students for taking constructive action to make their opinions known to the administration, and urging the office of the Vice Provost of Student Affairs to continue consideration of student concerns when dealing with budget cuts.

Despite the unpleasantness of all this, the outpour of student activism has been impressive and welcome. Last Friday’s rally by the Concerned Students for Community Centers (CSCC), an op-ed in the Daily and a recent email petition all showcase the passion students have for the campus community centers and serve as a reminder of their value. For some students, they are resources of encouragement to stay in school, and for others they provide a sense of community beyond their dorms and other affiliations. There are those who further feel the centers strengthen their happiness and mental health.

Whatever the reasons, much of the Stanford community agrees that community centers provide an important service to the campus. Yet, as the CSCC email campaign notes, the staff of the six community centers comprises only six percent of the VPSA budget<\p>–<\p>but is 25 percent of the staff impacted by the budget cuts. This lopsided number appears to illustrate that the administration does not see community centers as vital as students do, and for this reason it is important that student voices are a part of the decision-making process.

It has been a welcome sight to see students joining together to make their voices heard. This activism underscores that students have not been full partners in the budget cut process. Rallying and petitions are what we resort to when a seat at the table is not forthcoming.

To his credit, Vice Provost Greg Boardman has met with the CSCC and there are representatives of the community centers who feel happy with the manner in which the process was conducted. It is unfair to unilaterally condemn the administration, especially when they have made efforts to address student concerns in a number of these cases.

Nonetheless, the CSCC is still hoping for greater transparency. As well as calling for the restoration of community center staff to full-time positions, the CSCC’s email also asks that detailed information on VPSA budget cuts be made available to the student body. Without knowing the details of what that would entail, the editorial board feels that such a step would go a long way toward mitigating some of the tension and disappointment of these difficult cuts.

Mother Teresa once said, “Honesty and transparency make you vulnerable. Be honest and transparent anyway.” Increasing the transparency of the budget process would likely open up the administration to further criticism. Even so, it is the right thing to do. In the meantime, the editorial board encourages students to continue voicing their opinions through productive channels.

http://www.stanforddaily.com/cgi-bin/?p=1030082