Senate Public is Themed!

Student Body President Andee Gude ‘26 opened the Senate Public meeting on Monday, November 25 by reporting that they will be meeting with Associate Dean of Students Alice Harra to discuss how the Center for Life Beyond Reed (CLBR) can bridge resources to support AppComm.

Senator Lucy Knight-King ‘26 announced that she hopes Senate employees fill out the wage review form by Emma Benson ‘26 for information on how much they are working and whether or not they are receiving fair compensation.

Baby Money Yuri Garcia ‘27 announced that she and Senator Lina Eid ‘26 were reviewing how to start rewriting the Senate bylaws. This project is no doubt feeling the ramifications of former senator Andrew Sakahara ‘27’s resignation. 

Senator Alyssa Daggett ‘28 announced that the Committee on Academic Planning and Policy (CAPP) — the faculty and administrator-exclusive parallel to the Student Committee on Academic Planning and Policy (SCAPP) — is discussing further divorcing the expectation that academic advisors come from the advisee’s discipline to create a smoother distribution of labour.

Senators Lina Eid ‘26 and Leila Mye ‘27 announced that SCODE had its first meeting, and that AppComm completed review of its interview questions in preparation for next semester.

Senator Andrew Happy ‘27 announced that he met with Director of Academic Support Drew Gonrowski and Associate Dean for Academic Life Steve Abrahão to discuss the results of the newly mandated 4-Week Assessment, and would appreciate feedback (whether positive or negative). Senator Happy also called for feedback on the Junior Quals in preparation for broad discussions of how to better broadcast qual expectations, and unify them across departments.

Senator Catherine Hoyle ‘25 commended Senator Daggett for the Health and Counseling Center (HCC) promotional posters she made, and encouraged students to continue to take Vitamin D supplements. She additionally announced that the CARDS mural (which was planned to go in over the summer) has been re-approved, and that the CARDS committee has invited the DAR staff to help paint.

In continuation of comments from the previous week (a summary of which is that because the students authorized to swipe in to certain student spaces changes at a rapid rate, therefore swipe cards are less accessible than keypads), Senator Hoyle called for feedback to be directed to either her or the Senate war room email. Senator Hoyle also announced from the CARDS/DAR meeting that there is hope to ensure sensory-friendly spaces for Spring/Fall, and to establish a quarterly collaborative newsletter from CARDS and DAR. They also “really wanted to talk about how students with disabilities are underserved,” and a desire to go back into the archives of Reed’s psychology studies and projects to see if they provide useful insight into how to better support them. 

With that, President Gude opened the floor to a special discussion on student autonomy.

Audience member Milo Gardner-Stephens ‘25 began the discussion by expanding the ongoing discussion which centers the MCs and SB Info to include student spaces. Gardner-Stephens claimed that the hours during which the Student Union (SU) and Queer Student Union (QSU) are open (by swipe) have decreased since last year. “The big thing I noticed is an amalgamation of little things that paints a picture of campus yassification.” Gardner-Stephens cited the decline of Scrounging, the removal of Rupert, and the loss of the “ugly but comfy couch in the ETC.” Gardner-Stephens argued that the gradual cleanup of the college’s image comes at the cost of tradition and spirit. Senator Hoyle, Julia O'Beirne ‘25, and Gardner-Stephens then discussed and debated the actual closing time of various buildings on campus.

Gavin Leonard ‘25 expressed sympathy for the “amount of hoops” Senate has had to jump through. Leonard also reminisced about days when they would see club stuff, thesis stuff, and increased communication with freshmen in SB Info.

President Gude then clarified that they have not been barred from using SB Info, but have simply been required to submit each issue for admin review before sending it out. They then added that part of the reason admin’s decision to moderate SB Info has been concerning is the lack of communication between admin and Senate. Gude claimed that Senate have been turned away from Student Life office hours and have had their emails go unanswered for “weeks, maybe months.”

Leonard and Gude then concurred that Vice President Jefferson Ratliff ‘25 and President Gude could use the direct line they have to President Audrey Bilger through the Presidential Council on Campus Climate to advocate for a return to an unmoderated SB Info. Andee added that there was a time when Karnell was accepting of SB Info, and is confused as to what changed.

Alum Kenny ‘24 asked the extent to which Senate has proposed legislation to protect student autonomy, to which Presidente Gude replied that up until then, Senate’s process had mostly been one of information gathering and communication — reaching out to admin, as well as Computer User Services (CUS). Senator Bella Moore added that they were willing to work with the Computing Planning and Policy Committee chair, political science professor Alexander H. Montgomery, and didn’t know whether or not Karnell commanded power on the committee. Senator Lindsay Worrell added that Senate might pursue community legislation to protect SB Info going forward.

Senator Moore added that Senate has traditionally functioned under the assurances of the Honor Principle — hoping that if they communicated with a member of admin they would be responded to in good faith and in a timely manner, respecting community and tradition. Senator Moore stated, ‘“what administration is doing is against core values at Reed.” 

Yours Truly ‘28 questioned why Karnell had mentioned incidents of bias and racism in SB Info, to which Treasurer Knight-King explained that in 2016 SB Info subject line included an offensive comment comparing Orthodox Jews to ISIS. President Gude added that the admin’s concerns probably mostly concern potential litigation against the college based on comments in the MCs. Treasurer Knight-King added that the policies Senate had created to improve the MCs over the summer were ignored by Karnell. 

Connor Gilligan ‘25 argued that the problem might not be whether or not Karnell/admin could or couldn’t moderate student speech, but that they shouldn’t feel like they have to. “The fact that ‘trusting admin’ sounds like a joke is evidence that we need more mutual dialogue” Gilligan said. Gude responded that there have been attempts at dialogue, but administrators haven’t responded. Gilligan then expressed hopes that Reed Unions would return, to which Senator Moore responded that Unions are alive and well, and there was one scheduled for next semester.  

Kenny ‘24 asked if Karnell’s changes were constitutional, which was met with mixed responses. Alumni and gallery manager Gregory McNaughton ‘89 floated the possibility that multiple staff members have the authority to approve mass emails, and that Senate could ask one of them for approval instead of the admin Karnell picks. Alumni and Reactor Operations Manager Toria Ellis ‘19 expressed that while the MCs can be (in addition to beloved) idiosyncratic and strange, SB Info is also incredibly useful as a tool for their department. Ellis also mentioned that admin have also been difficult for staff to communicate with and have recently cracked down on inter-staff communication too, saying “There’s a trend of wanting to protect Reed’s image and legal reputation, but it comes at a cost.” Ellis finished by asking how alumni and staff can support students. 

President Gude responded that simply the knowledge of broad support and popularity for SB Info is encouraging and helpful. Title IX director Christy Martin then expressed the possibility that the recent change in admin’s position may be linked to national trends and governmental pressure. Martin argued that in the wake of Trump’s election and the runup to his taking office, there’s been a lot of pressure on schools to take responsibility for harm that happens on campus, additionally arguing that revisions to Section 6 of Title IX put a surprising amount of expectation on colleges to address discrimination and racism on campus. Martin expressed the possibility that those expectations will loosen with the future of the Department of Education and the associated Office of Civil Rights (OCR). 

Carson Ferreira ‘27 asked how much of admin’s concern is with SB Info, and how much is with the MCs, to which President Gude responded that Senate is uncertain, saying “I’m confused too,” and concluding that admin’s primary goal seems less motivated by a concrete instance of harm and more a broad desire for student censorship, using whatever justification necessary. Saying “It’s all encompassing… it’s about student censorship, really.” President Gude and Senator Worrell concurred that the recent changes alter a historic treatment of students as autonomous and introduce a hierarchy which places admin’s interests over those of students. Senator Bella Moore lamented that, though she loves the work of Senate, the fight to understand what exactly administrators want and to pivot to various alternate spins on SB Info has drained essential time and resources away from Senate’s other responsibilities. 

Julia O’Beirne ‘25 expressed support for SB Info, saying “Whether or not it’s approved by admin, I approve personally.” J-Board co-chair Kiana Fields shared concerns that admin might forcibly change the J-Board code, and especially asked Senate for more support getting new members for the board, which is currently critically understaffed. Senator Moore responded that Senate hopes to fully staff accountability groups by next semester, saying “you’ve not fallen on deaf ears.” 

Senator Moore added that limitations on student speech seem self-defeating for administration's other goals. “Retention rate is a big goal for admin, but talking to the first-years that I have, they don’t have a sense of connection to the wider Reed community.” Senator Moore argued that SB Info is essential to disseminating event information and thus maintaining a connected community. Fereirra then brought up the other way in which admin’s goals seem contradictory — the void left by the MCs which has been filled by Fizz. Ferreira said, “if admin is worried about bullying on the MCs, they should be incredibly scared of Fizz, which is owned by a corporation where students have no ability to make accountability. If the admin really wanted to prevent bullying, the MCs would be back tomorrow.” Senator Leila Mye ‘27 affirmed this, saying that one of the reasons they came to Reed was to be at a campus with more student autonomy then their last school, only to see it is falling away. They argued that if the reason administrators are targeting the MCs is to avoid litigation, then they would certainly have no reason to care about Fizz, “because if something goes wrong on Fizz, Fizz will get sued, not Reed.” President Gude then added that when Fizz first made overtures to the campus, Karnell assured them that if anyone was harassed there would be ramifications and support. President Gude then went on to describe how they had been the target of harmful comments on Fizz, which, when brought to Karnell’s attention, were ignored. “Admin knows that Fizz is alive and well, but are targeting the MCs instead,” they said.

After Senator Hoyle expressed gratitude for the enthusiastic support and solidarity, President Gude ended the meeting by calling on students who cared about this issue to run for Senate, and, if they wanted to contact admin directly, to CC the Senate email, warrom@reed.edu, so that they can ensure that the student gets a response.