My interviews with students, administration, and faculty have been paraphrased for greater clarity.
On July 31, 2022, the third event of the LIV Golf Invitational Series was held at Trump National Golf Club in Bedminster, New Jersey. For the event, RVCC provided the usage of its’ car park facilities, as they have had a previously standing contract with Trump National Golf Club in Bedminster and hosted the U.S Women’s Open’s Open as part of the LPGA Tour. The Saudi Arabian government is one of the world’s most controversial, due to their treatment of women as second-class citizens, persecution of Christians, Jews, atheists, and many other religious groups, making homosexuality punishable by death, having beheadings and executions open to the public, their alleged role in funding Al-Qaeda and murdering journalist Jamal Khashoggi, and their controversial military intervention in Yemen. To add to the controversy, the event was held on the property of Donald Trump Sr., who is running for President again in 2024, potentially creating a conflict of interest because he has profited from an event funded by a foreign government.
RVCC rejected about $200,000 for this event according to the unconfirmed testimonies of Vice President of Finance and Facilities John Trojan, Student Government Association President Christian Rodriguez, and Student Government Association Executive Vice President and the Record’s Vice President of Info and Media Nick Gallo. Trojan, whose name appears on a document confirming the college accepted $3,020 for use of the facility and to pay their security guards for the event, defended the decision to help with the event but not to take the purported larger offer by saying “The amount of money was significant and momentarily interesting but we said we couldn’t take the money from because of all of the other issues that they would put on the perception of our community and the greater community as to the source of the money, as a donation and you said the board, the board doesn’t approve things like that on a regular basis. That’s a regular operating decision, the reason why we did the parking is because we have a long-standing relationship with Trump National Golf Club. Over the years, they have donated a fore some that we use to auction off at our golf outing and from time to time they have accessed our career services department to see if there were any students available for part-time work.”
However, some student political activists have a different view on this issue than Trojan’s. In particular, the President of our campus chapter of the Young Democratic Socialists of America Viriyiah Hodges told me, “I don’t think we should be working with golf courses in the way that we [RVCC] have been doing in the first place. It doesn’t change the fact that even if the school didn’t take as much money that they could’ve, they still did contribute materially to the Saudi Propaganda event, even if that was because of a pre-existing relations with the golf course. Quite frankly, the school shouldn’t have worked with them in the first place. Even outside the context of that specific Saudi propaganda event, why are our public tax dollars and institutions being used to support private ventures in the first place? I think that is questionable. Quite frankly, as is it is, we’re not in the loop with anything. The students aren’t deciding what get approved and what isn’t. It’s not just our tax dollars but our tuition money that is used to finance this place.”
Similarly, the President of our campus chapter of the Young Americans for Freedom Josue Peñaloza told me, “I think it’s wrong that RV did that, that RV worked with an organization linked with Saudi Arabia.”
When I pressed Trojan about the fact that some students felt concerned by the controversial nature of Trump’s presidency and the Saudi regime, Trojan added, “It’s an interesting question at the forum meeting on Oct. 4, they were going to suggest the creation of a committee to look at that issue that should political or cultural concerns be somehow crafted into a policy as to what we might or might not do.” Wanting to know more details about what Trojan was talking to me about, I contacted Forum chair and English professor Dr. Alexa Offenhauer.
Offenhauer mentioned that the proposed ad-hoc committee would be called the Ad-hoc Committee for Use of Campus by External Organizations. When talking about what this committee would do, she said, “We realize there isn’t currently a written policy [On the issue of who can use the RVCC campus]. That was where the idea came from to consider writing one, developing an ad hoc committee that would work on writing a policy which would then go through an approval process, including voting. There are really quite a few steps between where we are right now and ultimately having a policy.”
Due to the fact that this would be an ad-hoc committee, it will only be temporary in nature and disband once the committee comes to a consensus and crafts a policy on this issue. At a more recent forum meeting on Nov. 14, this ad-hoc committee was voted into existence. Whether or not there will be new policies implemented regarding how political and religious concerns are factored into our college’s divisions, what those policies would look like, and what the lasting impacts that this controversy will have on our college all remain to be seen. Offenhauer cautioned, “The policy [The committee decides on] could simply say it’s possible that a policy could say every organization is welcome. That could be the policy. Therefore, the outcome of what the policy actually says would totally depend on what people wanted it to say and worked on together.” The committee has found officers and is currently trying to find a meeting time.
Update: President Michael McDonough rejected the committee’s proposals and made the following statement…
“Dear Alexa [Offenhauer]:
Good morning. Happy summer.
I’m responding to your email from May 10th, a message documenting Forum’s approval of a policy for the use of campus facilities by external organizations.
I recognize both the complexity and the nuance of this issue and I’m grateful to you and to the Forum community for tackling this, at times, sensitive issue.
I am not going to accept this recommendation.
However, I am going to adopt the essential or core values of the Forum’s proposal as “operational guidelines.” In other words, we will clarify the College’s requirements and expectations of all renters, asking all such organizations to acknowledge RVCC’s unique mission, statement, values, and polices. In addition, rentals may not disrupt academic or operational functions of the institution.
We will provide copies of those College mission statements, values, and policies so that organizations may demonstrate their support and alignment.
We will continue to assess each rental request from the perspective of those institutional values.
If we were to adopt your proposal, we would have to devote substantial institutional resources to verifying compliance – and even then, I’m not certain that we have a better policy than our current method.
Best,
Mike [McDonough]”
