AusChron: UT urged to consider “Win” for Cactus; González terse in interview

Juan Gonzalez stated publicly on April 21 that the Texas Union is "run by students."

That is a noble proposition. But given these factors, how can he maintain that stance?

1. The decision to close the Cactus Cafe and shut down Informal Classes began on the desk of Andy Smith and was proposed to upper administration in a December 1, 2009 memorandum entitled "2% Merit Funding for FY 2010/11 and 2011/12." Historically, the Texas Union's merit-raise pool is of great importance to Mr. Smith, whose income has more than doubled to well over $138,000 since 1997; Mr. Smith has demonstrated a tendency to carve himself a generous slice of the merit-raise pie, such as his increase of 7.99925% from 2008 to 2009.

2. No mention of any benefit to students (or even lip service of involving students in this decision) occurred until David Ochsner began cooking up the press release, which first called killing the Cactus the result of a student "vote" (later changed to endorsement of Andy Smith's decision).

3. To date the Texas Union Board of Directors as a whole has never voted on *any* changes in either the Cactus Cafe or Informal Classes. The nearest the Board has come to doing so was an Executive Session which Andy Smith called in January (against the rules in the Handbook of Operating Procedures stipulating that such sessions should only occur during intervals like spring break or at holiday intersession). Also contrary to the HOP, the previous Board of Directors (most of whose terms expired on May 1, when the newly elected student and faculty Board members' terms began) never voted on the action proposed in Andy Smith's January Executive Session, for which no minutes have ever been released.

4. Although the new Board of Directors began its 2010-2011 term May 1, Dr. Gonzalez refers to the April 30 meeting as the "final" meeting of the Board. Despite the tragic circumstances which prevented Gonzalez's attendance at the 2009-2010 Board's last meeting on April 30, the new 2010-2011 Board of Directors is alive and well, perfectly capable of calling special meetings to consider matters of importance to the student body and the entire University community.

5. If the Texas Union is truly "run by students" as Juan Gonzalez maintains, then by right, instead of handing down an executive decision in willful ignorance of a proper body to consider that decision for what it is--merely a recommendation from an administrator to students--Dr. Gonzalez should allow the new Texas Union Board of Directors to take up this matter in accordance with the Handbook of Operating Procedures. If he or any other UT official chooses to deny seating the new Board members, they should provide compelling reasons for abrogating the democratic process.

6. Has the new Board of Directors received the annual report on all Texas Union activities due from the Texas Union Director (that's Andy Smith) on May 1 as stipulated in the HOP?

7. Since the Board of Directors is charged by the HOP with making its annual recommendation on the renewal of the appointment of the Texas Union Director, when will the Board meet to conduct that business?

8. If representative student input is truly the overarching goal for Dr. Gonzalez and President Powers, before killing the Cactus by ousting its present seasoned and well-established management, why not put the matter up for vote in a student-wide referendum? Instead of pretending that the Board's input is immaterial, or that all hatchet work must be finished by August 31 (which would make a fall student referendum moot), surely Dr. Gonzalez has the power to delay any final decision in the specific interest of involving as broad a cross-section of the student body as possible.

9. Finally, for Dr. Gonzalez or any other administrator to claim that their hands are tied by consideration for student wishes while accepting input from a very select few students--who are supposed to represent all students, not just those amenable to and easily wowed by the perks of upper administration--smacks of chicanery. It looks very much as if instead of abiding by the rules, UT administrators remain intent on making up the rules as they proceed toward executing an ill-conceived decision.