The state of program houses has long been a contentious issue at Cornell. With student enrollment in them far from what it once was and financial constraints limiting resources across the University, the future of program houses is unclear and is an issue that will be at the forefront on campus in the coming months.

On Thursday we saw a preview of the campus activism that will take center stage in the coming weeks, as student groups eulogized what they see as the impending death of program houses at Cornell. Targeting the “inaction” of the administration, the protesters sought to ignite the flame and shine light on an issue, which until now, has been modest and unpronounced.

The current existence and future of program houses are both conversations that stem from a number of complex and controversial issues. From minority recruitment to financial aid to racism in campus communities, Cornell will face questions that lack simple answers.

We are confident that students will be able to tackle these matters in a way that does not allow the flame to grow out of control. But without administrative oversight and authority on such decisions, we fear that the complexity of the situation may let a civil discussion get out of hand.

Until now, the administration has been vocal about letting students determine the fate of the program houses. When pressed about the issue a few weeks ago, President Skorton was optimistic about letting the students decide.

“I think we should let things play out and see and act in terms of [student] preferences,” Skorton told The Sun. We appreciate letting student preference sway the administration when it comes to such a heated issue, but we feel Day Hall is taking the easy way out, steering clear of some of the more controversial themes we may see transpire during our time at Cornell.

With all of the administrative decisions being made today with regards to departmental budget cuts, layoffs and facility closures, why is the weight of one of the most consequential and divisive issues being tossed upon the shoulders of students? Sure, the student voice will be critical in moving forward, but without administrative guidance, we fear that the real underlying problems will never be addressed.

If there are communities at Cornell that feel marginalized based on who they are and their representation among the student body, will student housing really solve the problem? We doubt it. And if student minority groups are pushing so hard for “safe spaces” at Cornell, are there more serious issues that campus safety officials are ignoring?

We hope in the coming months the administration takes a close look at each and every one of the concerns that will arise with the over-arching question of the future of program houses. By putting the decision in the hands of the students, the administration is overlooking the most critical issues to hit this campus.