Unfortunately we were little taken aback by the provost's approach of "this is normal" as this was not a case we had encountered the administration offering anywhere else. Seeing as we are students not suuuuuper familiar with what is normal process, it was hard for us to make any strong claims against it (and likely why she insisted that only students were to ask questions). Note here that what is normal, I have now been informed, is a three year review cycle.... Just short of most bachelor's degrees and therefore time most students will even be around the university to know this!
We were very well prepared to discuss the points presented to staff and leaked to us including claims of financial and logistical issues (clear downstream effects of poor management and planning), a claim that students were demanding less choice (wtf?), and claims that this was a response to staff complaints of too much workload (dishonestly presented as consultation).
All that is to say, what was presented was another completely different justification this time and we should have been prepared for it-but it definitely doesn't support their claims of transparency or that they intend to improve communications in future.
She slipped through on "this is normal" only because this was a student led forum, and I'm pretty sure they know it (they definitely do now).