Our View: SuperFrog statue debacle points out lack of transparency

    255
    print

    It’s not really about the $50,000 bronze SuperFrog.

    The crux of the issue is so much more. The real question is: How and why did this decision happen?

    It brought up many other questions: Who approved the statue? Why did the SGA Cabinet think this was a worthy investment? How can they use student funds without consulting us? Why was this a “surprise” project? The lack of transparency surrounding SuperFrog’s commission, funding and approval is disconcerting and unethical on numerous levels.

    Officers claim time and time again that SGA seeks to represent the student body to the best of their ability and is eager to hear the student body’s opinions. Yet when a handful of students can sit behind closed doors and arbitrarily allocate your $45/semester student fee on whatever they want, the power structure is clearly lacking a series of checks and balances.

    Closed meetings–whether they are conducted by SGA or Intercom–are completely contradictory to a key portion of TCU’s mission statement: to be ethical leaders.

    We applaud the SGA House of Representatives for passing the new bill to require majority approval on all financial decisions more than $15,000. But we believe the regulations should be stricter. Even $5,000 is a lot for a few students to spend without the entire student government on board.

    Folan honestly thought students would be thrilled by the SuperFrog statue. We recognize that the statue will be a landmark on campus for years to come. But surprises have no place in SGA when students’ money is at stake.

    That kind of nonchalance regarding such a large sum of money is concerning. As an editorial board, we contend there are countless better uses for that kind of money, such as the new student memorial.

    It could have revitalized the defunct Purple Bike Program. It could have bought new resources for the library. It could have funded another, smaller concert. But instead, a small group of students made the decision for you. We’ve got a $50,000 hunk of metal that serves no purpose but to inflate our “go frogs” ego.

    So, surprise.

    The editorial board is composed of the top editors at TCU 360 who represent a variety of experiences and viewpoints on campus. One of their responsibilities is to write TCU 360’s “Our View” column, which is operated separately from news coverage and seeks to reflect their invested, comprehensive opinions regarding the issues at hand.

    EDITORIAL BOARD:
    Lexy Cruz, executive editor
    Emily Atteberry, news director
    Liliana Lamas, news director
    Taylor Prater, visuals director