LETTER: On SG coverage

To the Editor:

The two articles published on Oct. 16 about the changes made to our Student Government’s election calendar wrongfully accused the Executive Board of changing the calendar in order to remain in office for another semester and incorrectly accused the Senate of voting to overturn last year’s amendment. These charges are harsh and are not factually based. I want to take a moment to explain what really happened.

At the end of the 2011–12 school year, Senate voted on an amendment to change the election calendar from a school-year cycle to a calendar cycle.  Elections would be held at the end of fall semester rather than the end of spring. There was contentious debate, and the vote was deadlocked until Howard Male, the sitting president, broke the tie and called for the passing of this amendment. While the president does not typically possess voting powers, Howard was serving as an approved proxy for the 10 Buick St. Residence Hall Association.

Elections were held at the end of the spring for the new executive board, which would serve for only one semester, until the end of fall 2012.

Fast forward to Tuesday, Oct. 9. At an emergency Senate meeting held to discuss the involvement of the Student Election Commission, I stood up to propose that the election calendar be reverted to a school-year cycle. I stood up — not the president, not the executive board, not a senator.

I explained that from the perspective of a student leader, having a calendar cycle was detrimental. I explained to the senators that by holding elections in the middle of academic year, seniors were excluded from running. I explained that only two categories of individuals could seek office  — those willing to abandon their leadership positions and those who do not hold leadership positions. I explained that we must seek leaders who are dedicated and loyal, rather than leaders who are willing to leave their organizations halfway through the year. I explained that we want experienced individuals, rather than students who are new to leadership on campus.

The senators overwhelmingly voted that evening to have the Judicial Commission review the Amendment and present a suggestion for further action at the following meeting.

At the following meeting this past Monday, the Judicial Commission explained that at the contentious meeting last semester, Howard Male’s vote was unconstitutional. The 10 Buick RHA had lost their vote because they violated the constitution due to the use of proxies on more than four occasions. The amendment, therefore, was nullified. This was done according to the Student Government Constitution. This was done fairly.

Upon the Judicial Commission’s presentation, the senate held a vote. One senator put forward a motion to uphold the controversial amendment. No other senators voted in favor. This is a clear indication that the senators were overwhelmingly against last semester’s election calendar change.

It is also clear that the current executive board is not attempting to extend its term in office. This was not a power play. The team was only voted in for one semester, and the election that was promised to the student body will be held. I suspect that this upcoming election will also be for a one-semester term, so that in the spring of 2013 we can resume a normal election cycle.

Dexter McCoy and his executive team have done a fantastic job in this short amount of time. It is unfair to accuse them of making a power play. The student voice is the strongest it has been in recent history.

Thank you,

Zach Herbert

ENG 2014

President of RHA

Overarching Executive Council

zherbert@bu.edu