UT Student Government disbanded its executive agencies in an effort to increase ‘efficiency,’ SG President Hudson Thomas announced Tuesday at its first assembly meeting of the semester.
SG disbanded its 10 executive agencies, which are smaller organizations under the executive branch of SG that advocate for specific interest areas affecting student life. Across all the agencies, there were over 300 members, whose efforts included hosting volunteer opportunities, improving campus accessibility and boosting voter turnout, according to the Student Government website.
Agencies can continue their operations by transitioning to independent student organizations, Thomas told the Texan.
“In looking at the constitution (and) in looking at where agencies were, we felt it would be in the best mutual interest of both ourselves and the agencies if they did become independent organizations because I think they get a lot more lateral movement if they’re not underneath us,” Thomas said.
Thomas said his team consulted with an SG constitutional scholar and a small team of peers over the summer to better align the constitution with other student governments in the Southeastern Conference.
However, many agency leaders said SG’s executive branch did not consult them on this decision.
In an open letter published on Instagram on Tuesday, seven of the 10 agencies demanded to be immediately reinstated, expressing frustration with their abrupt dissolution and lack of communication from the executive board.
“None of the agencies received a timely notice or adequate explanation for the administration’s actions,” they wrote in the letter.
Kate Murphy, former co-director of the Disabilities Inclusion Agency, said she and others only found out their agencies were disbanding by directly asking Zachary Lacy, the SG chief of staff. Usually, the executive board appoints agency directors in the spring after taking office so they can plan over the summer, she said.
“We found out mid-August they never (appointed agency directors) and had absolutely no intention of doing that,” government and Plan II senior Murphy said. “At the same time, they were also disassociating us from Student Government.”
Murphy said she was not aware of the executive board contacting any agency leaders about the disbandments. She said her agency, which had been around for a decade, was asked to form a new student organization, but with no leaders appointed, it caused everyone to scramble. In the open letter, agency leaders said the late notice robbed them of the opportunity to “salvage” their work.
“By the time we discovered (the agencies were disbanded), it was too late to select leaders internally, request budgets, book rooms or plan events,” they wrote in the letter.
Thomas said the executive branch would work to help the groups transition into independent organizations. To do this, agencies would be required to write their own constitution and have 10 active members, which some agencies do not currently have. Former speaker of the assembly
Nidhi Chanchlani said in the open session that she worried the smaller agencies would “fall into obscurity,” resulting in important work being lost.
“If there’s enough motivation and desire to join an organization like that, I think you’re going to have enough members to do it,” Thomas told the Texan.
Many SG members, including Chanchlani, a government and psychology senior, expressed their disapproval at the meeting.
“The work that you do as (representatives) is empowered by and strengthened by the work that agencies did,” Chanchlani said at the meeting.
Chanchlani said the agencies had a key role in passing legislation in the spring that encouraged the University to reexamine its five-year plan to make restrooms across campus more accessible. She said agencies brought value to the executive branch.
“I don’t think that this narrative of redundancies and (that) we’re fixing problems is correct,” Chanchlani told the Texan. “I feel like it’s an oversimplification, and it’s reducing the value of teamwork.”
