A rumor doesn’t have to be false for it to be a rumor. Remember that as you read this.
The ASUO has never had a shortage of rumors — from who’s going to be running for positions in April to who might be leaving in December. It’s a body of students that is too busy to be able to commit themselves beyond the current term by the very nature of their being students. The ASUO is also one full of aspiring politicians — so there’s that swell jumble of characteristics.
It’s an absolute hotbed for controversy, and it has to stop.
A rumor came out this week about a possible series of grievances to be filed to Constitution Court, the ASUO’s judicial branch, because of some senators’ supposed non-fulfillment of duties. I am absolutely not condoning senators’ absences from their duties — Do your dang jobs! — I just think that the way student government officials respond to those shirking duties needs to change to create a normal work environment.
The punitive measures can even remain the same; I understand handing out warnings and/or potential removal from office are good punishments for missing meetings. But the time leading up to that point can be used much more wisely, creating a more positive image of the ASUO from within and without. To the ASUO Senate — as a group most students come to see as the face of their campus government — I would recommend more internal communications to deal with issues stemming from the ASUO Constitution, more positive reinforcement when students are doing their jobs well and constructive criticism when they need correction.
After all, the Senate’s mission statement gives to itself the “duty to represent the interests of the ASUO before the staff, faculty, administration and State Board of Higher Education,” requesting this Senate to represent the students in the following ways:

1. Professionally — Although it makes my job easier to have more stories to write — and mess-ups, grievances and people being brought to task represent some of the best — I recognize that it can’t possibly be the best way to professionally run an office. Internal conflicts are often kept from the public eye to protect those mentioned, for the sake of allowing them to continue to work normally while the paperwork goes through and the necessary meetings take place. Although it takes more time and effort than filling out a few forms of complaint, going to the person themselves and talking out the issue is a more professional way to mirror the students you represent.
2. Ethically — We all screw up. Especially as students, it’s important to note that many student representatives will face an issue of their own, sooner rather than later. The ethical way to face such an issue is to treat the issue in the way you would want your issues treated. Filling out paperwork and going public with the issue creates (usually) unnecessary controversy over what is typically handled better face to face.
3. (The ever-so-descriptive) “Deserving of the respect of the ASUO” — Look, it just doesn’t look good. The best situation for the office of our student government is one where students are not afraid to talk to each other to resolve conflicts. That’s what we voted in students to do: talk to each other and negotiate the best results for all students.@@good point@@ @@How would you style this? Should the hyphens be m-dashes?@@

Rumors shut down positive communication while dialogue opens it back up. And if changing the ASUO’s bylaws is what it takes to get senators talking, then so be it. Take the grievance structure out of the constitution, change it to make grievances the last option and do something so that paperwork and media coverage is not the be-all and end-all for taking elected officials to task.
Otherwise, the problem with the current process is that it creates a hostile workplace where students are not at ease.
The final investigation from Emerald reporter Rockne Andrew Roll revealed that the recent grievance rumors were just that — rumors. But this almost proves my point all the more: The current climate breeds stories that develop way too early and doesn’t allow for a good stage upon which student leaders can grow.@@Should this stay now Rockne’s story got spiked? Or does not running the story make this paragraph stronger?@@