All NIU students should be embarrassed at the representation they received from the Student Association at Monday’s DeKalb City Council meeting. The issue we have is not in their stance on the minimum liquor price; it is the deplorable actions taken in working toward their goal.

A futile attempt to initiate change at the eleventh hour resulted in mockery — a comedy of errors, of sorts. Clapping, yelling out of turn and ignorant disrespect for city officials plagued one of the few times students actually attended a city meeting — and the cast of this comedy was some of your student representatives, who claim to represent every NIU student.

If the errors committed were a few honest mistakes, we might understand, but there were many blatant lapses in responsibility.

Traveling to the bars in an attempt to rile the masses garnered no support, but just imagine how much more ridiculous the behavior would have been if they were successful.

Before the formal council’s proceedings, city attorney Norma Guess had to silence the waiting students like kindergartners.

Credibility: Bad start.

Some who sat among the SA executives but did not ride the sponsored bus emanated the distinct smell of alcohol. Were they drinking before the meeting? We don’t know, but why plant the seed in council member’s minds?

The post-speech applause showed immaturity and certainly did not help gain the favor of the council. City officials make little money and certainly don’t appreciate fly-by-night students wasting the council’s time with clapping as members progress through their lengthy agenda.

Credibility: Weakened.

As the most disputed ordinance was about to open for discussion, SA members chose to split hairs about once-a-semester Reading Day rather than dispute an ordinance with a wider impact. Political science 101 lesson missed: pick your battles.

Guess was rudely interrupted when explaining the unique plight DeKalb has with liquor price wars. When she reacted with a stare, Mayor Van Buer stood up for her, only to be disrespected by several students as they stormed out.

Credibility: Destroyed.

Even though members of the SA did not walk out, there was no attempt from leadership to curtail the disruption.

One SA executive compared the liquor ordinance to “taxation without representation” — again, an embarrassment. The case at hand was an altering of a previous ordinance, not a tax.

Students are represented at the public liquor commission meetings. If there was involvement at an earlier stage, this issue may have had a different outcome. Van Buer has demonstrated many times that amending the liquor code is a top priority.

Students’ lack of involvement in city politics to this date allowed the council to easily dismiss their cries. Let’s face it: in general, NIU students don’t vote, so why should council members be reactive if there is no consequence?

Van Buer and Guess both have stated these are just the beginnings of many changes to the liquor code. We feel that only by student involvement in the liquor commission earlier in the legislative process will change be made.

James Barr said it best when he ended the meeting with: “We encourage positive public participation, but we expect a certain decorum.”

Unfortunately, no students or SA members stuck around after their issue was voted on to hear his comments.