Julia Garrison
News Editor
Scot Council held their weekly general assembly on Nov. 18 in Lowry 202 at 7 p.m. These meetings are open to the general student body. In the meeting, Scot Council members discussed updates regarding the committee on committees and the student demonstration and protest guidelines.
During the opening discussion, Scot Council president Andre Yazhbin ’25 recapped the conduct committee meeting on Thursday Nov. 14 — explaining that students present at the meeting unanimously agreed to recommend a rejection of the document drafted by the Dean of Students detailing guidelines for student demonstrations and protests. The assembly then moved to committee and constituency updates.
The budget committee received a funds request from Black Student Association for Aux Cord Wars. Scot Council voted unanimously to approve the funds request in executive session with one abstention.
The conduct committee discussed last Thursday’s meeting. Abhinav Randive ’27 and Gabrielle Risley ’27 will now serve as the elected chairs for the committee.
The constitution committee completed their review of Echo Choom’s constitution and is working on Queer Student Union’s constitution next.
The social justice and equity committee is planning to host another Cookies and Concerns event where they will hear concerns from students across campus and share these concerns with respective departments.
The liaison committee discussed the opportunity for two students to attend faculty meetings and observe the committee on committees, which is a faculty committee that oversees placement of other faculty on committees.
The executive board discussed the review of the vacancy procedure following the departure of a constituent from the board.
Lin Hillis, one of Scot Council’s advisors and vice president of human resources, was present but had no updates to add on behalf of the advisors.
During closing discussion, four students expressed their thoughts about the importance of rejecting the guidelines and urged Scot Council to do so. Of these students was Pras Subedi ’27, a former member of Scot Council.
“Why are we treating the Scot’s Key like it is a fixed document that cannot be changed?” said Subedi. “This is not just a freedom of expression thing at this point, it is essentially a shared governance thing.”
Hillis refuted that it fell under the definition of shared governance.
Sam Kang ’28 asked Hillis if the guidelines were based on any other institution’s policies or guidelines. Hillis was unsure but said that she had discussed policies in her biweekly meeting with administrators from the other Ohio 5 institutions: Denison, Kenyon, Ohio Wesleyan and Oberlin.
TyLynn Gault ’27 asked why guidelines were being created if most of the document was pulled from pieces of the Scot’s Key — which Hillis had mentioned earlier in the meeting. Hillis said she was unsure.
Jack Freer ’26 spoke and asked Scot Council to stand with him and other students who opposed the document, including Oli Villa ’25 and Noor Mushtaq ’28.
“Just because other schools in the Ohio 5 have implemented policies already, it is not a justification for us to go along and follow suit. Let this be an opportunity for us to think for ourselves and pave our own path for the school,” said Villa.
Hillis responded, claiming that there was “probably a reason why so many colleges have these policies.” Although Dean of Students Ashley Reid and other administrators were quick to define the guidelines being discussed at the meeting as guidelines only, Hillis discussed other college’s specific policies and referred to the document in question as a “policy” only.
In executive session, Scot Council voted to approve the recommendation of rejecting the guidelines in their current state.
