SJU Senate has a structural and leadership crisis

In the hallowed halls of St. John’s University, a disquieting trend has emerged that threatens the very essence of its democratic decision-making body—the St. John’s Senate. This esteemed institution, designed to be the voice of the student body, now stands at a crossroads, marred by structural dysfunction, inadequate leadership, a wave of resignations and a growing sense of disillusionment among students.

**Structural Dysfunction**

One of the fundamental issues plaguing the St. John’s Senate is its structural dysfunction. The Senate, intended to be a representative body, has increasingly found itself out of touch with the diverse needs and concerns of the student population. They have yet to define positions that are representative of the student body; for example, they have not defined the role of presidency. During the spring 2023 semester, Trent Thompson (former Chair of the Activities and Allocations Board) presented a slew of constitutional amendments that would reform how the Senate would operate. One of the major amendments had to do with the election of senators and the Executive Council. Thompson proposed that the president and other members of the Executive Council should be elected by the student body. He received immediate pushback from other members of the Senate, including then-Vice President Evan Mattson, who currently serves as the Trustee Representative. Mattson suggested that the president is a parliamentarian and leads the Senate and its meetings but does not lead or represent the student body.

**Inadequate Leadership**

At the heart of the St. John’s Senate’s unraveling lies a leadership crisis. The current leadership, entrusted with steering the ship, has proven to be inadequate in navigating the turbulent waters of student governance. Leaders must inspire confidence, foster inclusivity and actively promote the welfare of the student body. Unfortunately, the Senate’s leadership has fallen short of these expectations. In the last two years, the Senate has had several opportunities to defend the students they “represent” against new policies presented by administration; one in particular is the Academic Program Prioritization (APP). The APP process was brought before the Senate during the last academic year, and to date, the Senate has yet to issue any statement regarding the entire process or how students might feel about it. This has since been voted on and approved by the Board of Trustees of both institutions.

Another example of inadequate leadership has to do with the food program and how the number of meal punches per student that were reduced this year. Upon returning to campus after the summer break, students were astonished to see that their meal punches (used for Sexton and McGlynn’s dining halls) were reduced, but ironically the price remained the same from the previous year. Two senators, Cormac O’Conner and Owen Haubenschild, immediately began working with Culinary Services to discuss a solution. Though the reduced number of punches will not be changed back, it is important to point out that the Senate has yet to take a stance or even address the issue as a body on behalf of the students they “represent.”

The lack of visionary leadership has contributed to a sense of apathy among senators and a growing disconnection between the Senate and the student body. Students need leaders who understand their concerns, communicate effectively and take decisive action. The current leadership, however, seems to be grappling with the demands of the role, leading to a pervasive sense of frustration among senators and students alike.

**Resignations and Lost Hope**

A telling sign of the Senate’s dysfunction is the increasing number of resignations from its members. The exodus of senators points to a system that is failing to retain dedicated individuals who may have once believed in the Senate’s potential to bring about positive change. The loss of these passionate voices further weakens the Senate’s ability to represent the diverse needs of the student body.

As resignations accumulate, a sense of hopelessness pervades within the Senate, with remaining members questioning the efficacy of their roles. One very concerning resignation we must take note of is that of Vice President Adrian Belisle. The first joint Senate meeting for the year was one to remember and surely sets the stage for what looks like a very dubious semester for the Senate. Near the end of the meeting, Belisle used his report to give a very unexpected and unravelling resignation. In his speech, he shed light on his experience as VP of the Senate and the struggles he faced from his fellow Executive Board members.

“What made the position difficult was never the retreats or working with senators on their initiatives. For months I felt as though I was lied to, ignored and disrespected by the Executive Board. My final straw came just over a week ago when a premature motion to eliminate the PR Position from the Senate was made without my approval and utter disregard for my opinion. That was an act of disrespect, among many others, that I will no longer stand for,” Belisle said during his speech.

The departure of committed senators like Belisle only exacerbates the structural issues and exacerbates the leadership vacuum, creating a vicious cycle that undermines the Senate’s credibility. Six Senators within the last month have resigned: the VP, two chairs, one club auditor, PR representative and the academic affairs representative, with more to possibly come.

**Out of Touch with Students**

Perhaps the most significant consequence of the Senate’s dysfunction and leadership crisis is its growing disconnect from the student body. Students, the very individuals the Senate is meant to represent, find themselves disenchanted and disengaged from a system that appears distant and unresponsive.

“Outside of the voting process, there is a lack of communication between the Senate and us, its constituents. The only time you hear from them is when it comes to election,” SJU sophomore, Michael O’Rourke said.

The failure to bridge this gap between the Senate and the student body has resulted in a lack of trust. Students feel unheard and undervalued, fostering an environment where the Senate’s decisions may not accurately reflect the genuine concerns of those it claims to “represent.”

**Conclusion**

The St. John’s Senate finds itself at a critical juncture, facing an existential crisis fueled by structural dysfunction, inadequate leadership, resignations and a growing alienation from the student body. To regain its purpose and effectiveness, the Senate must embark on a comprehensive reform journey, addressing its structural shortcomings, appointing capable and visionary leaders and actively working to rebuild the trust and engagement of the students it serves. Only through such concerted efforts can the Senate reclaim its role as a vibrant and influential institution within the St. John’s University community.