WLUSU board attendance dismal
Last Friday the Wilfrid Laurier University Students’ Union board of directors meeting was cancelled due to an inability to meet quorum.
In simple terms: it was cancelled because less than ten of the 15 elected directors were going to show up.
While this is the first time a meeting has been cancelled this year due to insufficient attendance, the ability for directors to make board meetings—the main responsibility of their elected position—has been an ongoing concern.
So far this year, there have been 63 regrets from directors. Last year, there were just 37.
This begs several critical questions, one being how elected individuals can accurately represent Laurier’s student population if they are too busy to attend a required meeting?
After all, these individuals were specifically elected under the assumption that they would strive to serve the students who chose them. Why bother running a campaign to be elected if you know you will be unable to fulfill the position’s requirements?
The answer seems obvious. Most WLUSU board members seem to desire the prestige of the position simply to add something to their resume.
It appears it is more about what this position can do for their future rather than how their actions impact students.
With the current financial situation that WLUSUs in, it is imperative that there be an evident level of commitment from members to problem solve and re-instate student confidence in the institution.
But apparently many of the people elected to make such critical decisions as approving budgets and financial audits can’t fit this responsibility into their schedules. Yes, the board of directors is made up of students; and between assignments, exams, and other extra-curricular activities, commitments can pile up fast. But these directors need to remember that they are elected to represent student needs, and if they cannot fulfill that duty they should not be on the board.
At Tuesday night’s meeting, members of the board further showed their lack of engagement as multiple directors showed little or no interest in even being in the board room. This certainly does not apply to every director, but between the lack of attendance and engagement, it is anything but unreasonable to expect more from these people we elected.