The Daily Orange Editorial Board received a draft of a list of grievances from THE General Body on Friday. Though it should be commended that members of different groups are coming together to share their concerns with the university, some of the claims made were unfounded and seemed to lack adequate research and hard data. THE General Body needs to better understand the limits of what the university — and Chancellor Kent Syverud — can change in a short time and should offer specific solutions to the problems they are presenting.

Students have every right to be upset about these issues. But in order for their complaints to be effective, they need to research and present hard data to exemplify these problems instead of letting personal emotion dictate grievances. In one section of the document, THE General Body claims that students are often mistreated by Health Services staff members. As proof of this claim, they offered only one student’s anecdote, instead of statistics or facts. Students might also find that their time is better spent going directly to the cause of their complaints — in this case, the director of health services — instead of burying it in a list of grievances presented to administration.

The list of grievances also makes broad connections between the university’s role in marginalized identities and the behavior of SU’s student body. The list says that Syverud has only visited the LGBT Resource Center for five minutes, and that the university did not properly address incidents of the vandalism of the Trans* Day of Remembrance and the theft of the #iTooamSU signs. However, diversity issues have been prominent at SU for many years prior to Syverud’s arrival. It’s incorrect to imply that the chancellor is responsible for marginalizing identities on campus when the broader SU community has consistently struggled under several administrations.

The university administration and members of THE General Body should meet halfway. THE General Body needs to present complaints that are grounded in fact rather than emotion, and needs to present specific solutions instead of broad claims. At the same time, the issue of transparency — which was included in the grievances — is something the university should improve on. SU needs to do a much better job of making clear its decisions are made, when they are being made and who is making the decisions.
If both sides can work to improve their role in the conversation, the university as a whole can move forward in making positive changes.