Michael Brown II is Co-Chair of the Black Student Union, former Director of Special Fees in 2004 for the ASSU Elections Commission, and an ASSU Senator in 2002-2003. He wrote this guest op-ed in response to The Review’s front page investigative report about the BSU’s connection to the ASSU and their exorbitant requests for Special Fees. Mr. Brown is not affiliated with The Stanford Review.

The Stanford Review this year has done something that should be done each year, in evaluating the special fee process. Unfortunately, misunderstanding and a need for publications to uncover controversy has produced in my eyes a shortsightedness that could be resolved by simple communication between different parties. Instead of talking about the problem, I am trying to step out on a limb and be a part of the solution. I do not affiliate with The Stanford Review and only choose to write in this issue because it appears that information is needed on the subject of Special Fees & ASSU, which I know a good deal about as former Director of Special Fees in 2004 for the ASSU Elections Commission and Senator in the 2002-2003 school year.

Regarding Special Fees, the Black Student Union (BSU) and many other cultural groups need money for food as opposed to other expenses which some students may look at unkindly such as travel expenses to foreign destinations and highly expensive equipment. These are all expenses that go up for a vote, as special fee groups have to prove to the student body why they need funding. As co-chair of the BSU this year, I have seen program coordinators struggle with Stanford catering and search to find the best prices for food. I can also attest that all of our events this year ran out of food. The Stanford Review quotes a general figure of $19K, but as anyone who plans events knows, it is hard to determine beforehand how many people will show up to the event and what the true cost will be.

The estimates do not do justice to the nature of the event nor the work that goes in to keep the cost down. I challenge anyone to find less expensive food of comparable quality for the events we put on that serve the Stanford community. I would gladly mandate next year’s BSU leadership core to utilize this catering that can make soul food (real soul food) at a cost effective price. I encourage readers to remember that Stanford charges about $9 per meal and still many of us find something lacking in the dining hall system despite this price. Quality food and catering cost money, point blank, and if readers of The Stanford Review determine that the BSU is not worthy to celebrate Black History Month and Kwanzaa, then they must make that choice on April 6th, 7th to my and many others dismay.Regarding the BSU relationship to the ASSU, there also needs to be some clarity.

As a former SOCC [Students of Color Coalition] affiliated senator, I find The Stanford Review’s rhetoric to be interesting. Why does it consider corrupt those senators affiliated with the BSU who voted on issues relating to the black community? If students affiliated with the BSU do not vote in favor of issues important to students of color, including funding decisions, who will? It may appear that senators affiliated with the BSU who vote in favor of issues important to the BSU are corrupt, but this is simply not true. Similarly, it may appear that senators not affiliated with the BSU who vote against issues important to the BSU are racist, but I do not believe that is true either.

Last year when the BSU made a mistake because of an oversight of an ASSU policy related to the Husbands/Shwartz campaign, the former BSU core rectified it, took a collection and gave the money back to the ASSU after publicizing across campus their mistake and apology through the posting of flyers. I encourage more organizations, including this publication, to be so bold in admitting when wrong.