Editor’s Note: This letter is representative of a viewpoint of individuals no longer part of the Mountaineer community. Additionally, a previous version of this article included a link to a document that was not meant to be public information. That link has since been removed.

To the Student Body of Appalachian State University,

To the reader, I pose a deceptively simple question: What is the purpose of your Student Government Association? To advocate, perhaps; although, to assert that such a unique organization as the SGA is limited only to the advancement of advocacy would be to omit the true breadth of their province.

 Any organization can advocate; any organization can opine on situations affecting the student body — the very word implies an outside perspective looking in, to grant a secondary platform to those whom they owe no true allegiance. 

Advocacy is necessary, yes; however, the SGA can not merely advocate. What makes the SGA different? 

Unlike her sister organizations, representatives of the SGA are elected; they are charged with a unique and sincere mandate to not only advocate but truly represent the will and beliefs of their constituents. They should not be simple bystanders periodically granting statements, nor should they be tools for the administration to puppeteer. They owe their duty to those whom they represent. 

Unlike other advocacy organizations, representatives do not speak on issues as a third party; no, they speak on behalf of the students. The student body deserves to have an effective organization that can bridge the gap between the students and administration, not a neutral party at that, but one operating within the sole interest of the students. 

The SGA, then, should be dedicated to that end and ensure those representatives have the ability to serve their mandate faithfully. How can such a task be achieved when debate is stigmatized, contention is dramatized and conflicting opinions shunned? How can the task be achieved when representatives are destitute of proper rules of procedure to facilitate such debate? How can that task be achieved when representatives are barren of a system to resolve their own questions and conflicts; for when people break their own rules or act without due interest of the will of the Students, to whom do they seek relief? 

Committees within the organization are not chaired by representatives but rather by members of the President’s Leadership Team, who are not elected. That team possesses discretionary authority over nearly 50% of the SGA’s budget and spends it without the consent of elected representatives. 

The committees, who employ no rules regarding expenditures besides what the unelected directors dictate, possess nearly the other 50%. Authorities historically granted to those whom you elected have been dissolved. Representatives no longer have the right to create committees, resolve their own disputes, amend their governing documents — unless approved by university administration — review legislation for competency, disagree with leadership or engage in thoughtful debate. 

Without these necessary rights, the representatives are inept in their ability to direct the affairs of the organization, and thus, are inept in their ability to advocate for their constituents. Representatives are at the mercy of the directives of leadership, but the lack of transparency renders them unable to offer differing opinions. 

Meetings of the leadership are held in private sessions, without published notes or transcripts. Other than the student body president and vice president, no other member of this powerful and enigmatic body is directly elected by the students, yet they hold voting rights in the assembly. 

These unelected officials have a firm grasp on the affairs of the oligarchy they established. This pursuit of “advocacy,” has squandered the rights of the people you elected for that purpose. The stigma shunning debate has destroyed their ability to properly grant you a voice if the leadership’s initiates do not serve your interests.

I return, then, reader, to the initial question. To what purpose does your SGA serve? Why are we the only SGA in the UNC System to suffer under such an unfair system? You were led to believe that those whom you elected were armed with the capacity to represent you, but you were misinformed. 

In fact, those whom you elected were simply burdening themselves with a fruitless endeavour — a facade crafted to maintain the guise of representation. If bills only reach the floor with the support of unelected sycophants, debate is squandered and funds are already allocated, why then, have an Assembly at all? 

Would it not be faster to abolish the dysfunctional remnants of the democratic past and instead endow the remaining marginal authority to those who already refuse to hand the reins back to the representatives the student body selected? 

My answer to the question, reader, is simple, There is no longer a purpose to which they serve. 

I am constrained by the limitations of the medium. If you would like to read more about our thoughts on the SGA, attached is an unofficial and in-progress resolution addressing the issues.

Sincerely,

Thomas L. Todd

Former Sophomore Class Representative, The Student Government Association of Appalachian State University, Vice Chairman Emeritus, The Mountaineer Caucus