By Jason Glynn, Danni Olsen, and Dan Modifica
The Faculty Senate met on January 26th to bring about the Maine Community College System fossil fuel divestment proposal. The meeting was attended by us: the Student Senate President, Daniel Modifica; the Student Senate Vice President, Danni Olsen; and Honor Society President, Jason Glynn. The Faculty Senate was recently resurrected after lying dormant for some time, one of their newly stated objectives is “To make recommendations to the Governance System and Administration with regard to academic affairs, the academic environment, and institutional development.” It’s a shame that they don’t follow it.
SMCC’s first referendum in a decade was held last fall, and 85% were in favor of divestment, and naturally we sought the support of our Faculty Senate – to no avail. The UMaine System has just voted to divest from coal, and we have even partnered with the group that has led the charge there: Divest UMaine.
We attended the meeting because they were due to address the Student Senate’s resolution calling for the Maine Community College System to divest from fossil fuels. We have the chance to become the first community college system in the nation to divest from fossil fuels. Obviously, this is an important issue to us, and the student body. We have the support of hundreds of individuals and numerous organizations. Students, professors (staff and adjunct), administrators, and community members all see this as a noble issue that should be addressed.
We sought them out because we wanted a chance to work with them and build a better future for students that inherit this beautiful campus. According to a recent report published by the Casco Bay Estuary Partnership, SMCC lies in the “danger zone,” and our coastline is particularly vulnerable to erosion caused by rising sea levels, which itself is caused by climate change.
Climate change is real and exacerbated by burning fossil fuels. Hell, the US Senate just passed a resolution that was an amendment to the Keystone Pipeline bill, by a 98-1 vote, stating “climate change is real and not a hoax.” There is little that garners a 98-1 vote in our US Senate today. If they didn’t like our proposal, it could’ve been discussed, not ignored. If you are on a governing body in our school, and we are asking you to look at an issue that involves institutional development – as stated in your body’s mission statement – then this is an issue that deserves your attention, and at least a discussion.
This is not the first time our divestment issue was discussed by the Faculty Senate. It was very briefly brought up by them last fall, and we, the students, were essentially ridiculed. So, naturally, we decided to attend this meeting, and hopefully be allowed to speak our part and gain support from our faculty. Unfortunately, that is not at all what happened. Upon entering, it was clear that students weren’t welcome. The Faculty President announced that it was in their bylaws that students weren’t even allowed – unless invited.
After a vote allowing our presence, the mood was soured for us as it was clear we were not wanted there. Paradoxically, we heard them rant about how the administration should be more open during the budgetary process, yet their clubhouse is closed to others. Our Student Senate is open to students, faculty, administration, and even the community. This is not the administration’s college, or faculty’s, or student’s, it is all of ours. Our governing bodies should be as inclusive and work together. There should be crossover, maybe even a standing Student Senate rep to the Faculty Senate and vice versa. And they should address matters that are important to the student body and institutional development.
They rushed a vote – to discuss whether or not they should discuss – our referendum, resolution, and proposal. It was clear that there was a core group of Senator’s that wanted to rush this to a close. Despite not wanting to hear from us, Jason Glynn briefly spoke as to why they should at least discuss the issue. They asked no questions of the students, and seconds after he spoke it was voted down.
Unfortunately, many of our faculty supporters couldn’t attend this meeting, whether that was by design is unknown. Those present claimed they “didn’t think it was in our best interest to discuss something so political,” and any further discussion was killed by a 7-4 vote. If they are worried about political cover, they can merely use the students; after all, it is our initiative.
The most insulting part came immediately after the vote, with five minutes left to the meeting, a lady senator asked “can we excuse the students, now?” Why? So you can talk us down again when we walk away for caring about our future and thinking that you should, too? Ironically, after our issue they were to discuss the President Fitzimmons resignation – a clearly more politically divisive issue, and one that clearly matters little in the long run. We will get a new President, we won’t get another planet.
Needless to say, this experience has caused us to lose faith in our Faculty Senate. Danni Olsen is even thinking of resigning now due to how we were treated there. This will not slow down our momentum, we will keep marching forward; it just would have been nice to add our Faculty Senate to our long list of collaborators. We sincerely hope this will cause the Faculty Senate to revisit its mission and bylaws, and force them to evaluate the image they want to send to students, the one we saw has surely soured our SMCC experience.