The Community Rep. debate took a sharp turn today in what constitutes a watershed moment in TCU Senate history. For the first time in a very long time, the student body has decided to allow community representatives to assume the powers of full senators, undermining the power of traditionally elected senators. The outcome of the vote was extremely close and was accompanied by a record number of abstentions for a 2-proposition ballot (12.63% of the electorate abstained). The results are displayed as ECOM published them:

Referendum 3
Votes: 516
Percentage: 43.73%

Referendum 4
Votes: 515
Percentage: 43.64%

Abstain
Votes: 149
Percentage: 12.63%

The language in referendum 3 is contentious and will likely take several months to implement. Nonetheless, the closeness of the vote hints at a major rift in the student body and in Senate. The sense is that many advocates of prop-4 chose their stance as a “lesser of two evils” rather than a long term solution. Regardless of the outcome, the new rules will be challenged during presidential campaigns in the Spring. 

Commentary: This writer is an opponent of special representation in general. The best student governments are those in which members derive the same legitimacy from the democratic system. Today’s vote undermines the democratic system and blatantly disregards principles of “one man, one vote.” Enfranchising marginalized communities through parallel structures is neither necessary or proper for the Tufts community. This writer has different ideological views from those that support the new rules. It is understandable that marginalized communities deserve a greater voice, but in this case the legitimacy of the TCU Senate is at stake. In democratic systems, legitimacy is derived from electoral process. If a marginalized community wants its voice heard, it should encourage its members to run for office. If a community member has a specific concern, it can meet with senators, appear at public forum or simply send a letter.

I’ve found a solution to the problem. Everyone join one of the four groups represented so everyone can vote twice!

Breaking News

All Freshman elections are postponed to Wednesday at midnight. Webcenter failed to post the ballot. The referendum question is still up and ECOM encourages everyone to vote!

 Click the link below:

https://webcenter.studentservices.tufts.edu/login.aspx

Today’s Daily editorial on the TCU Senate highlights two important things: First, the editorial page doesn’t understand student government, and second, next year’s Senate must change how it approaches student issues.

The editorial highlights a variety of projects linked in some way to one or more senators, but gets a number of things wrong:

• It is incorrect to say that campus center renovations were among the “least controversial” topics this year.  The only reason they moved forward was because there was no formal debate and decision within Senate — instead, advocates for the renovations largely bypassed Senate and worked with the trustees instead.  There were several viewpoints on renovations, and there would have been controversy if there was a Senate vote.
• Senate’s Veterans Day decision was much broader than a Columbus Day-for-Veterans Day swap.  Its primary recommendation was to start school before Labor Day when necessary.  If I recall correctly, it was a unanimous vote in favor, followed swiftly by forgetting about the Labor Day aspect entirely.  What gives?
• Senate did not “support initiatives to strengthen … minority communities’ voices.”  A Senate committee analyzed it for a while, and then a largely independent task force was set up to issue its own recommendations.  Senate never took a stance.
• Senate actually opposed moving directly into trayless dining (in a narrow vote), not supported it.  Aside from the part where various senators worked with Dining Services to move forward on implementing trayless dining.  The Carmichael trayless pilot wasn’t supported by Senate (despite what the editorial says), and there was a Senate debate on trayless dining attended by a couple dozen students with strong opinions on the issue.

There are two takeaways from this list.  The first is that people shouldn’t trust the Daily editorial page to know what’s going on with Senate.  This isn’t the first editorial to get things wrong, and it won’t be the last — not as long as editorial writers remain unfamiliar with Senate.

But it represents a larger problem, one that I’ve been talking about all year: The Daily editorial page — and the student body — does not know what Senate is doing because Senate carries out projects in the most haphazard way possible.  Rather than coming to a consensus on what is in the best interest of the student body, individual senators proceed ad hoc, which works most of the time (most things are uncontroversial) but not always.

With campus center renovations, there was almost a debate about the best way to spend university resources on capital improvement projects — there was some discussion at one Senate meeting.  But there was no follow-through because the campus center renovation advocates did not have to answer to Senate.  They could work with the administration and trustees and not care about what the rest of the student body’s elected representatives thought.  Would it have been better to invest more in dorms, or to save the money?  We’ll never know.

With Veterans Day, this is simply failed implementation.  I authored a resolution supporting starting school before Labor Day on occasion to take care of scheduling issues surrounding Veterans Day, and I was pleased that Senate wholeheartedly supported it in a vote.  But those who implemented the proposal focused only on Fall 2010.  Nobody bothered to mention to the Daily that Labor Day was a component of this.  It would have been difficult to convince the faculty to start before Labor Day, yes, and apparently, senators didn’t even bother to fight it.  (I had to write the secretary of the faculty myself to get my resolution put before the faculty in advance of the faculty’s decision on scheduling!)  Now, according to the faculty Education Policy Committee, any time the fall semester is squished for time, out goes Columbus Day.  That’s what the faculty eventually decided.  I shouldn’t have even bothered to write my resolution.

On minority communities and community representation: This is a simple case of “stop calling things Senate initiatives when they’re not.”  Because otherwise, people will think the task force is a Senate thing, and hold Senate accountable for any problems with the task force… even though Senate didn’t set up the task force.  People will think Senate supports the proposed changes to the system… even though there’s no quantitative evidence that that’s true.

Trayless dining should be a wake-up call to senators.  Here was a project that was closely linked with Senate for months because senators were involved with it and it was being reported out by the Services Committee as a Senate project.  But it never got the support of Senate — Jon Danzig and Cory Faragon had to introduce a resolution opposing trayless to force a debate on it.  Why wasn’t Senate debating a student life issue?  And why did Senate allow trayless to look like a Senate project?

I asked the latter question at the last Senate meeting of 2009-10 and was told “it’s a grey area.”  That’s a great comfort, Senate.  You don’t know whether you’re advocating for an issue or not?  That’s why the student body doesn’t know what you’re doing for it!  That’s why minority communities don’t know what Senate can do for them!  Because Senate itself doesn’t even know what it’s doing.

It’s time for the 28 senators and four community representatives of the 2010-11 Senate to make a decision.  Is Senate going to be renamed the “Activists Who Get Access to the Administration Club” or is Senate going to debate and come to a consensus on what is in the best interest of the student body?

Students elect their senators to do the latter.  Senate has to keep in mind that there are disagreements about the best way to move forward on certain issues, and if it follows its current trend, it won’t be able to handle disagreements.  From AP credit policy to campus center renovations to trayless dining, Senate has failed time and time again to present a coherent view on topics that aren’t clear-cut.

This is likely my last post for The Quad, as I will be studying in Washington, D.C. in the fall for my final semester at Tufts.  And I leave the Medford campus disappointed by Senate.  Senate should be more than a series of weekly check-ins and Student Activities Fee disbursement approvals.  The student body is looking for more.  The Quad’s readership is looking for more, as I’ve continually observed this year.

Senate, give them more.

Ed. note: Please welcome Ard Ardalan ’13 to The Quad as our new student government correspondent.  In his first post, he lists the people with power in next year’s TCU Senate, and provides some commentary.

The TCU Senate conducted in-house elections on Sunday to determine which of the elected senators would fill positions next year. The executive board, comprised of the President, Vice-President, Treasurer, Associate Treasurer and Historian was chosen as well as committee chairs and members of the Allocations Board (ALBO). Here are the results:

Exec Board- It acts as the cabinet of the President and allows for the Senate to function on time and purpose. The members chair meetings and oversee the many affairs of the TCU Senate.

• President Sam Wallis ’11
• Vice President Tomas Valdes ’11
• Treasurer Kate de Klerk ’12
• Historian Tomas Garcia ’12
• Parliamentarian Dan Pasternack ’11
• Associate Treasurer Matt Schuman ’12

General Board (Committee Chairs)- The Senate does most of its work through standing committees that are led by a chair. The chairs meet once a week with the Vice President to coordinate efforts in the General Board.

• Vice President Tomas Valdes ’11
• Administration and Policy Chair Yulia Korovikov ’13
• CECA Chair Tabias Wilson ’13
• Education Chair Chartise Clark ’11
• Outreach Chair Tomas Garcia ’12
• Services Chair Meredith Goldberg ’13

Allocations Board- ALBO meets once a week to consider the finances of the TCU and budgets all TCU-recognized groups. The recommendations of ALBO are then presented to the full Senate and voted on.

• Treasurer de Klerk
• Associate Treasurer Matt Schuman ’12
• Assistant Treasurer (freshman seat; selected in fall along with one other freshman for an ALBO seat)
• Wyatt Cadley ’13
• Logan Cotton ’13
• Yulia Korovikov ’13
• Dan Pasternack ’11
• Nadia Nibbs ’11
• Sam Wallis ’11 (ex officio as TCU president)

Commentary: The Senate’s leadership sets the tone of meetings and ultimately is responsible for the content discussed and the actions taken. The positions on the Exec Board have been filled with capable people that have exhibited competence in the past. Freshman Senator Faith Blake ’13 said that she “thinks the new executive members not only have the right experience but the respect from their fellow senators to do their jobs well.”

However, the majority of the Exec and Gen Boards were Sam Wallis supporters and this is both reassuring and a cause of concern.

• Reassuring Because: The majority of Senate leaders have faith in Sam’s ideas and often helped to formulate them. This ensures that the body will be productive and project-driven throughout the year.
• Cause of Concern Because: Senators that worked on the Levine campaign or are not familiar with Sam may feel alienated and their voices may be drowned out by an overbearing executive. This presents a clear challenge to the President. Before any of the Senate work is started, Wallis needs to gain the trust of the body as a whole and show that he is a leader that will listen to all ideas and all senators.

Referenda 3 and 4

As the Senate meeting went on, the Judiciary held a hearing to decide which referendum would be adopted as the new Constitutional amendment. Justice Adam Sax ’13 of the Judiciary reported that the Judiciary considers the student body’s response to the referenda a tie between the two conflicting referenda, and that a re-vote will happen in September during general elections.

Update 9:39pm: Boston’s ABC station has aerial footage from earlier today of the leak in Weston.

Update 9:29pm: Tufts announces that campus center will be open until 12 a.m. and Carmichael Dining Hall will be open until 1 a.m. for the purpose of distributing potable water.  And they remind you that it’s best to conserve water.

Excerpts from campus-wide e-mail:

Mayer Campus Center will remain open until midnight and Carmichael dining center will remain open until 1 AM. At Carmichael you must bring your own container, but make sure you do not rinse your water bottle with tap water.

Boiled and bottled water supplies are limited. If you have a kitchen in your apartment or house you are encouraged to boil water at your residence. Bring water to a rolling boil for 1 minute then allow it to cool.

Though the Mass Water Resources Authority continues to advise that water can be used for bathing, you are also asked to continue to conserve water, postpone laundry, and take short showers.

Update 6:45pm: As a side note, Interim Vice President of Operations Dick Reynolds is now Vice President of Operations Dick Reynolds, as of five days ago.  This has nothing to do with the water problems, but it’s related to facilities-type things in general.

Update 6:25pm: Want to see where your water comes from?  This PDF gives you an overview, spanning from Chicopee into Boston.  (The water leak causing all these problems is in Weston, well east of the Sudbury Reservoir.)

Update 5:56pm: Photos from the site of “Aquapocalypse” in Weston.

Update 5:49pm: The MWRA appears to have broken the earlier link; there is now a press release with the same info.  I’ve fixed the link in the original post.  Also, kudos to TuftsLife for the World’s Most Giant Boil Water Alert.

Update 5:36pm: A comprehensive e-mail has just been sent out by Tufts.  Among the notes: Water must be boiled for a full minute (a “rolling boil”), and teeth-brushing requires water that has been adequately boiled.  Additionally, coverage from the Globe, and guidelines from the Department of Environmental Protection on boiling water and such.

Original post:

The MWRA has alerted residents of many communities, including Medford and Somerville, to boil water before using it for food- and drink-related purposes, including drinking the water itself.

Due to a major leak in Weston that is affecting quite a bit of eastern Massachusetts, emergency water sources are being activated.  Bathing, flushing and fire protection are suitable uses for these emergency water sources, but drinking is not.

Also, this is a good time to do a plug for Universal Hub, which has already deemed this “Aquapocalypse.”

Update 5/1/10 5:52pm: This story’s gotten way bigger — and not just because TuftsLife used massive print to deliver the new message.  Y’all need to boil your water now.  Go to our new post for the latest info.

Original post:

Excerpt from a Tufts campus-wide e-mail:

The Massachusetts Water Resource Authority (MWRA) has notified Tufts University officials of a water leak on a major pipe that could potentially interrupt water service to several communities, including the Tufts University Medford/Somerville campus.

MWRA asks that people stop using water for the next few hours.

The MWRA’s website says the leak is in Weston — about 10 miles west of here.

Is it bad that my first thought was “I hope this isn’t a repeat of last semester’s water problem hoax“?  But at least this time, Tufts e-mailed us on the official Announcements thread, rather than an e-mail from RAs that got forwarded from Dining Services via ResLife.  So it’s probably legit.  Probably.

The pilot episode of The Quad’s new humor show, TCWho?, was the third-most-watched video of the TCU presidential election, according to viewing data from YouTube.

The top video was from the Wallis campaign, garnering 1,243 views (many, no doubt, coming because the video was embedded on the home page of SamWallisForTufts.com).  The Levine campaign’s flagship video, meanwhile, garnered 802 views.  Both were uploaded on April 18.

The TCWho? pilot didn’t get quite as many views, but we still beat out every other campaign video, with 350 views since the upload on April 19.  (Our second episode, on the debates, has 108 views so far, and was uploaded on April 26.)

The full video breakdown, by campaign. (Parentheses indicate date uploaded.  I’ve adjusted for time zone differences between here and YouTube/Google HQ when necessary.)

TCWho Episode 1: 350 (4/19)
TCWho Episode 2: 108 (4/26)

Levine for Pres: 802 (4/18)
Search for Better Tufts: 298 (4/18)
Room Raiders: 144 (4/19)

Welcome to SamWallisForTufts.com: 1243 (4/18)
WiFi: 329 (4/20)
Acropolis: 315 (4/21)
Sam Comes Back: 292 (4/22)
First Day Back: 212 (4/23)
Out and About: 302 (4/24)
Off-Campus Comm: 144 (4/25)
Course Eval; Boston: 148 (4/26)
Voting Begins: 6 (4/28)

And, for comparison, our April Fools’ Day contribution — Yulia For Tufts: 254 (4/1)

Just when you thought that two TCU presidential candidates plus four referenda equaled trouble…

“Signout” on an ECOM election ballot only signs you out of VoteNet.  It doesn’t log you out of WebCenter.

After you sign out of the ECOM ballot, go back to WebCenter.  (Clicking the link at the bottom of the page doesn’t work, btw, until you have to change “http” to “https” manually.)  You’ll still be logged in!

Granted, this doesn’t matter on most computers, because either you’re using a personal laptop or an Eaton computer you logged into.  But on shared computers, it’s definitely something to be concerned about.

In other news, yes, the referenda are on this ballot.  I cast my votes earlier tonight, and now it’s time for me to focus on academic work for the remainder of the semester.  Might be important.

In the second TCU presidential election installment of TCWho?, the candidates have their first debate, and TCWho juxtaposes video to the point of humor:

Well, when you put it that way…

TuftsLife announced just over an hour ago that it is endorsing Sam Wallis for TCU president.  It cited his experience in founding Tufts Roundtable and in campaigning for increased wireless Internet access as two key reasons for the website’s support.

It also said that Wallis supports TuftsLife’s endeavor to buy “a Tufts SMS ShortCode” to interact with TuftsLife events and student life information via text message.

TuftsLife, as a TCU-funded organization, needs to be able to stand up and campaign for its own interests.  But it also serves a role as a platform for user-generated content.  Should it have endorsed a candidate, especially considering that multiple TuftsLife members (including its chief operating officer, Mike Vastola ’11) are members of the Wallis campaign?  I’m a bit skeptical.