Opinion: The Life and Death of Student Governance at CU Boulder

By Jake Carias & Kayli Plotner, CUSG Graduate School Senators and Guest Writers

Shared governance is a hallmark of the modern university; a collective duty between faculty, staff, students, and administrators to uphold the democratic principles of self-determination and provide a forum for dissent and community advocacy. Today though, student governance can be declared dead at CU Boulder. 

CU Student Government has become a rubber stamp for decisions made by CU Boulder administrators. The Chancellor has rebuffed recent attempts by the elected legislature to establish systems of accountability and transparency. Without a significant cultural shift in both CUSG and the CU Boulder administration, the worst authoritarian tendencies of both groups will continue to grow unfettered by protest or dissent.

CUSG used to be the central hub of student advocacy. Formally established in 1974, the then-named University of Colorado Student Union was a democratic experiment that gave power to the student body to make budget decisions, run programs, and even participate in hiring professional staff across campus. They formed a government of three branches based on the principles of the separation of powers and checks and balances. UCSU founders replicated core American values at a more intimate level. After some brush-ups with the administration, the newly formed government tried to become truly independent by becoming a 501c3 (a tax-exempt non-profit), but ultimately, it was found that the Colorado Constitution prevented this. In 1978, the Bein Resolution put UCSU under the Chancellor of CU Boulder, limiting its power but maintaining its core mission. 

After years of work, in 1985, the Chancellor legitimized the radical idea of true student-led university governance by signing an agreement with student leaders that recognized their authority and granted them the right to self-govern. Even the CU Regents were on board as long as they retained the final decision over student fees; this was truly a different approach to shared governance. The Chancellor finally moved CU students from the kiddie table to join the adults. 

For nearly three decades, this system has allowed students to set policies and budgets for over half the student fee budget, currently at $31 million. 1985-2012 was the golden era of student government. USCU led protests like the “Bookcott” against athletic fees and South African apartheid laws. In the 90s, student leaders advocated for LGBTQ equality and environmental initiatives and established the Women’s Resource Center. When Colorado’s TABOR requirements got in the way of building new facilities in the 2000s, student leaders, including Colorado Congressional Representative Joe Neguse, led the effort to raise student fees by referendum to pay for maintenance and new construction. Riding on the success, UCSU rebranded in 2010 to what is recognized today as CUSG and, again, got a referendum passed by the student body to pay for a $64 million renovation of the Rec Center in 2011. But this was the beginning of the end for student government. 

Since the 2008 recession, the CU Boulder administration has taken a turn against the previous 30 years of student-run, student-led success and has become increasingly stringent with student leaders. In 2012, without consulting the Legislative Council, the administration pushed for changes to the Chancellor’s Agreement that severely limited the elected student representatives’ oversight and budgetary power. This update to the Chancellor’s Agreement would be partially overturned in 2013 after protests by legislators. 

The administration continued to strip CUSG of programmatic authority. After an audit of the Student Organization Finance Office in 2014, the administration would all but force a complete restructuring of CUSG programs to establish the Center for Student Involvement (CSI) and the Student Organization Allocations Committee (SOAC). To fund the newly required CUSG programs, the administration took over the Women’s Resource Center, Student Outreach and Retention Center for Equity, and LGBTQ Center in 2014 (which would later be recreated as the Center for Inclusion and Social Change (CISC)). Add these changes to the administration’s acquisition of UMC Dining Services and Wardenburg previously, CUSG oversight and autonomy have dropped to their lowest in decades. Within five years, CUSG had acquiesced or been forced to give up millions of dollars worth of student fees and significant program areas to the administration. 

Who represents the student voice for those student fee dollars? Not students.  

This rapid shift in power from students to administration took its full shape in 2018 when the Chancellor attempted to decimate the CUSG student fee budget and strip them of the authority over the CUSG Cost Centers, including the UMC and Rec Center. The students protested, and alumni came to their defense, ultimately saving CUSG from the Chancellor’s chopping block. Many in CUSG referred to this period as the “death by a thousand cuts”, as administrators were making decisions, and CUSG was expected to do as they were told. After the Chancellor’s failed takeover in 2018, the Regents passed a new policy in 2019 granting the chancellor the right to veto constitutional amendments proposed by the Legislative Council. Legislators didn’t learn about this new power until 2021 when the Chancellor/VCSA vetoed all of the amendments proposed by the Legislative Council. 

And now, in 2023, the Interim Vice Chancellor of Student Affairs has announced a veto of the most significant constitutional amendments to date, specifically the amendments to Articles 2, 6, 7, and 13 B. This time, the Chancellor’s veto was only applied to the proposed amendments that the Executive(s) of CUSG disagreed with. After five months of hearings, committee meetings, compromises, and conversations with the administration, the real decisionmaker has been the Chancellor and the VCSA. This policy (Regent Policy 7.D.1. (A). & (B). if you’re curious) is entirely antithetical to the ideas of self-governance, and the Chancellor has used it twice now to shut down any chance of reform in CUSG. 

Even worse, the VCSA’s justification for the vetoes of the constitutional amendments is factually incorrect and contrary to the values CUSG was founded upon. Instead of allowing for amendments that would make each branch accountable to the others, the VCSA has doubled down on the fractured version of CUSG that can’t accomplish any real progress. If the Legislature doesn’t have the power to suggest constitutional amendments to the student body because “it would establish a precedent that one branch could dictate the operations of another branch without their approval or consent, opening the door to a significant disruption of University business” then who is allowed to dictate the operations of CUSG? According to the VCSA’s logic, the CUSG Judicial Branch doesn’t have the right to dictate changes to the Legislative Council or Executive Branch, even if they violate the Constitution. If the Legislative Council passes a law, does the Executive Branch have to follow those laws, or do they just create their own? The VCSA’s decision to veto amendments that would have strengthened the system of checks and balances across the three branches of CUSG has, in fact, sowed further division and confirmed that the administration does not feel the elected legislature of the students deserve the same powers as its counterparts. 

Are you part of some advisory board, hiring committee, or commission? Is the final call really your decision? Probably not. For all of the talk about pluralism and democracy at the recent Chancellor’s Summit, the Chancellor appears to support the executive branch’s most authoritarian tendencies (See a full summary in 98LCR01 – A Resolution Denouncing the Chancellor’s Agreement Amendments of 2020 and 2021…). The students’ voice in decision-making is in rapid decline across campus. Student Government is the Chancellor’s puppet show. And in 2023, democracy, self-governance, and the right to dissent are dead at CU Boulder.

Please vote YES on all three constitutional amendment questions to re-establish the necessary checks and balances of government in CUSG. The CUSG Election closes on Friday, April 7th, at 8 pm. Find the link to your online election ballot on BuffPortal. 

Jake Carias is a Ph.D. candidate in the Department of Sociology. Kayli Plotner is a Ph.D. student in the Department of Journalism. 

Editor’s Note: The opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors. They do not intend to reflect the opinions or views of the Bold.