Letter to Advisory Board re: Arizona SB 1070

This e-mail was sent to the NASPA Regional Advisory Board on 6/23/10

Advisory Board Members,

Yesterday you received an e-mail from NASPA confirming the decision to remain in Arizona for the 2012 National Conference.  I hope you had the time to read the entire document, particularly the open letter from Dr. Telles-Irvin, which was read to us by Dr. Telles-Irvin immediately before the issue was called to a vote. 

As the National Board we received numerous emails, letter and phone calls from our NASPA members outlining moral, legal and financial perspectives.   Much like our conversations in Omaha, there was a wide range of perspectives on this issue.

After our conversation at the summer board meeting in Omaha, it was clear that many of us wanted to protest Arizona SB 1070 by not hosting the conference in AZ.  Therefore, I spoke with the perspective of leaving Arizona to the national board.  I explained the safety concerns that were brought forward, as well as impact that I believe this will have on many of our NUFP students as well as their mentors.  I also expressed concern that Arizona is likely the first of many states that are pursing significant local/statewide immigration laws that are pushing constitutional boundaries – most recently in our region in Freemont, NE.

One of the concerns raised about leaving Arizona was that it only provided a one-time statement, meaning that once we announced a boycott, would we be able to sustain a conversation in Arizona. That statement would be powerful, but would not necessarily allow for a consistent forum for discussion of such a critical topic.  The choice to stay in Arizona could allow NASPA to continue to express its concerns with the legislation and its impact on students as well as their families. 

Despite my initial stance, I was very moved by Dr. Telles-Irvin heartfelt and emotional (for me) statement that asked NASPA to take a stand in Arizona to allow a forum to address this issue publicly. Specifically, it was this part from that statement that rang true in my ears.

 So, as an educational organization that stands for justice, inclusion, and access to education, as well as analyzing and solving the great challenges of our times, we must make a statement by going together and being very purposely present in Arizona with programs that will educate, enhance the dialogue, and reach a greater understanding on issues of immigration, justice, and human dignity.

I am fully aware of the disappointment that some dear and respected colleagues have shared with the decision to stay in Arizona, but the vote for me to stay in Arizona was not financial, it was a decision to take on Dr. Telles-Irvin’s challenge and work to make a statement.  

This clearly will not be the end of this topic for us as a board or as an organization.  It is my hope that we can continue these conversations at the Omaha conference, appropriately themed New Frontiers: Thinking Beyond our Borders.




Thank you all for the feedback you provided in Omaha and since.  Please let me know if you have any questions or thoughts on how we can put this statement into action in Omaha.




Eric

With his permission, I am also including the text of an e-mail sent to me by Dr. Tim Alvarez, Assistant Vice Chancellor for Student Affairs at the University of Nebraska Lincoln who also serves as the Region IV-West Regional Membership Coordinator.

Eric,

Thanks for the thoughtful letter and your strong support and conviction on this issue.  Nonetheless, I was disheartened to hear the news.  Based on our conversation and those at the board, where do we draw the line?  What is it that we are willing to take a stand?  According the letter from the National VP, we did that last year :  

"Last year, in response to the decision about health benefits for domestic partners, NASPA chose not to hold its assessment and retention conference in Arizona."

So we have already drawn a line in the sand and taken a moral stand on an issue that is unjust.  So why is this different?  I am supportive of domestic partner benefits and applaud the decision last year.  So, I am conflicted.  I heard from members that we need to be careful in expressing political views but it appears we already have.  This was all precipitated on the death of a well know Arizonan.  I have heard illegal immigrant figures in the US to be estimated at 15 to 30 million.  I have no issue dealing with criminals but to place every illegal immigrant in a pot and assume they are dangerous and taking jobs away from legal citizens is narrow minded.  I read an article the other day that was very apt:  "The US has two signs as you enter the country, one states 'Help Wanted' and the other 'No Trespassing'".  What a conundrum!  We want cheap prices for goods and we want cheap labor.  We would rather have the same old "Don't ask, don't tell" mentality.

I am sorry for the soapbox but I am very saddened and I not sure I will attend the conference in Phoenix.  So what if I boycott, what difference will that make?  Will my measly $1K in expenses make a dent in Arizona's economy?  Not hardly,   Are we a necessary evil, the price of doing business?  If you prick us do we not bleed?

I apologize in advance if I have offended anyone.

Have a great day,
Tim


Again, I ask for your involvement.  I know that we have colleagues all across the continuum of this topic - but we must talk and act together to make a difference for our students.  It is my hope that we can begin addressing this topic at our Regional Conference in Omaha, but that work needs to start now.  If you are interested, or have ideas, please comment!