Ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls. Welcome to the Greatest – err, most embarrassing – Show… Ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls. Welcome to the Greatest – err, most embarrassing – Show on campus: Student Government Board.

SGB has long been considered a three-ring circus. Wednesday, that circus went on tour – making a stop on the 11th floor of Benedum Hall for its weekly meeting.

Approximately 80 students attended SGB’s marathon traveling circus, which lasted three hours, until almost 12:30 a.m.

And what a show they got.

Ring One featured La’Tasha Mayes disregarding parliamentary procedure and meeting decorum by wading through the audience, accusing fellow board members and SGB president Kevin Washo Jr. of being disrespectful and cowardly. Ring Two exhibited disputes about the fairness of allocations, and Ring Three showcased Washo’s attempt to defend himself and the board against charges of discrimination.

The spectacle lived up to SGB’s reputation and clearly demonstrated why SGB is never taken seriously. SGB demonstrated an inability to work together, to be productive and to be representative of the student body.

Mayes’ display highlighted one of SGB’s biggest problems. The board appears to forget that its members were elected to work together despite the fact that some were guaranteed not to like each other.

Students expect their elected leaders to put these things aside and work together to improve campus on their behalf. Meandering around the audience and verbally flogging one’s fellow board members did nothing to accomplish this goal.

Mayes raised some serious issues for the board. She’s right to question SGB’s decisions and decisionmaking processes. She may also feel that the board lacks respect. There is, however, a time and a place and an appropriate manner for such discussions. Publicly insulting her colleagues is unlikely to result in improvements.

The allocations debate also featured some valid questions about SGB and its functions. It may be time for SGB to consider the fairness of its allocations process. Allocating $600 for a group which its president calls “basically a cigars and scotch club” to attend a conference at the same meeting the allocations chair warned that SGB was “short on money” seemed frivolous and questionable at best.

Regardless, the meeting’s lengthy debate served no purpose. These fundamental questions are ones unlikely to be properly addressed at a weekly meeting. Rather, if SGB is to address the potential problems, it must properly undertake a study of the issue and charge an ad hoc committee to find solutions.

SGB must adopt an appropriate decorum for its meetings, abiding by Robert’s Rules of Order. It must also put aside the petty squabbling of its members and focus on its purpose – representing students. Until each member considers his or her role in these events, it will continue to be SGB’s traveling circus.