We understand that the financial outlook is grim. And we know that as students, we certainly do not have the critical answers. But as the University reshuffles amidst this economic storm, students and faculty are being left out in the rain to peer through a window blurred by a lack of transparency.

In the last two weeks, two incidents have made us question the University’s supposed commitment to soliciting input from the community at large. First, on March 9, President Skorton took time to field questions from over 400 faculty members about the current financial state of the University. Unfortunately, the meeting was conducted behind closed doors as the student body was not informed that the meeting would be taking place. A week later, Skorton scheduled a presidential forum that was intended to bring the campus up to date on the economic state of things. Yet, the forum was scheduled over Spring Break when the majority of students were off campus.

One-third of the University’s revenue relies on the dollars contributed by students and their families in the form of tuition — the most stable stream of funding for Cornell. A $215 million budget deficit means layoffs, construction pauses, department mergers and facility closures, all of which will directly be affecting the lives of students. But as it stands now, decisions determining how this money — the students’ money — is to be spent lies within the fortressed walls of Day Hall.

Aside from failed attempts by the University to provide all-inclusive open forums, students and faculty alike are left out when it comes to calling the shots on the most important of budgetary issues with minimal representation on the Board of Trustees. Following the student-led takeover of Willard Straight Hall in 1969, students advocated for legislative change that allowed four students to serve as voting members of the Board of Trustees. One of them was also appointed to the Board’s Executive Committee of its highest ranking trustees, to represent the student body when critical decisions were made.

Today, there are only two student-elected trustees and no students or faculty members serve on the Executive Committee. So while open forums may give those who care a chance to sound off, it is clear that when the Executive Committee makes the tough calls, those voices can easily be left under the table.

However, it is not exclusively the administration that is to blame for a lack of full disclosure and open dialogue. Now is a more crucial time than ever for the student-elected trustees themselves to up their commitment as representatives of the student body by demanding a louder voice.

We are lucky that Cornell welcomes students to partake in governance as voting members of the Board of Trustees. Just last month, students at NYU took over a cafeteria, demanding in part that elected students serve as voting members of the university’s board of trustees.

But without a seat on the Executive Committee, the power of Cornell’s trustees is limited and the scope of their influence is at the discretion of the Board’s executive members.

The past has shown that tumultuous times can pave the way for innovative reform. The University should see these tough times as an opportunity to retrace its steps and ensure that the future provides a more inclusive community voice.