NYU President John Sexton took part in the last Town Hall of his presidency yesterday, fielding questions on divestment, financial aid and the “Abolish the Box” movement. For a little over an hour, we saw Sexton answer questions with his typical charm, but genuine answers were few and far between. This is not what student engagement should look like. If NYU is committed to becoming a more democratic university, then incoming president Andrew Hamilton must provide students with better than Sexton’s approach of idle pleasantries and folksy non-answers.

Sexton’s characteristic manner of speech, peppered with charming anecdotes and winding tangents, was on full display on Wednesday. He dodged a student’s question about what he might have done differently during his tenure with a long-winded anecdote about being in the Giants’ owner’s box. This is a common Sexton strategy — for instance, he spent most of his 2013 interview with The New York Times making vague platitudes on education and failing to answer relevant questions about his policy decisions. Wednesday, he demonstrated that he is prepared to end his tenure as noncommittally as he served it.

When he wasn’t spinning yarns, Sexton went on the offensive. Asked about divestment, Sexton began by criticizing advocates who “get caught up in their belief” at the expense of the bigger picture. He then lambasted NYU Divest’s tactics, which included coming up to him after class, violating his “sacred time” with students. After all that, Sexton declined to make a statement in favor of divesting, saying that it wasn’t a university’s place to make a unilateral move that may not be supported by the entire student body. But by fixating on Divest’s tactics rather than the substance of the issue at hand, it is clear he does not care much about the student body’s opinion anyway. There was no university-wide debate on whether NYU should invest in fossil fuels in the first place.

Another entry in Sexton’s rhetorical playbook is to turn the question back on students. A student asked Sexton about “Abolish the Box,” a campaign which aims to remove the question about existing criminal records from the Common Application. The university’s current approach is to first consider applications without looking at criminal records, then to evaluate accepted applications to see if their criminal records will make the applicants threats to the student community. Sexton tried to paint the student as against the university’s existing policy — ignoring the fact that the student’s concern was that the university policy had not gone far enough. If anything, this particular response was indicative of the administration’s overall approach to issues like these — rather than allowing students a meaningful seat at the table, it put on airs of listening to their input before turning around and making a decision without them.

Ultimately, Sexton’s legacy will be tarnished by his inconsistency and his inability to communicate with the students, faculty and staff of his university. Sexton’s attitude, often bordering on egotism, sent a clear message that he does not see himself as an accessible figure. Instead, he chose to breeze past issues important to members of the NYU community and to either downplay or ignore serious criticisms of his leadership. As Andrew Hamilton prepares to take over, it would be wise for him to keep Sexton’s mistakes in mind. In the coming months, he is sure to face the same scrutiny. It is up to him to seek greater engagement with this malcontent community through action, not false promises and word games.

Email the WSN Editorial Board at [email protected].