Elections
on track as AS Senate debates Handbook
approval
By
Joseph Serna
Online Forty-Niner
Assistant City Editor
The Associated Students Senate approved the Election Handbook Wednesday, lifting
the temporary injunction issued by the AS Judiciary last week that had halted
the ASI elections.
As scheduled, elections will take place March 27-29.
The Senate delayed discussions on plus-minus grading until next week, and devoted
the rest of the meeting to the handbook and the elections dates.
The main point of debate over the Handbook’s approval was if the issued
injunction legitimately affected candidates’ campaign efforts.
Approving the Handbook sanctioned next week’s elections, while making
changes to the book or voting it down would postpone the elections at least
one week.
Some senators said the injunction hindered many campaign efforts, but postponing
elections would not be fair, particularly for non-incumbent candidates.
“
I’ve been here forever, I know what elections look like,” said
ASI Executive Director Richard Haller, referring to the lack of posters, flyers
and other publicity for candidates. “And these do not look like elections.”
“
To hold these elections [next week] would be a travesty,” he said, stressing
it was his personal opinion and not representative of the university.
“
None of the students were told not to campaign,” argued Sen. Jessica
Vieira, College of Education — a point echoed by others, including a
university representative.
“
I have to urge [to] you the importance of having the elections,” said
Jeane Caveness, a university representative. “You made a mistake [in
not approving the Handbook earlier]. It’s done. Let’s move on.”
More than money would be wasted if the elections were delayed, she said.
“When
I’m talking about resources, I’m
also talking about human effort,” she
said.
She cited that Vice President of Student Services Douglas Robinson has spent
time and more than $10,000 on security and poll workers for the election.
Sen. Mike Emenhiser, College of Business, viewed an election next week as rewarding
candidates privy to the inner-workings of ASI and the elections. He informed
the Senate he would be making a motion to rescind its approval of the elections
calendar if the Handbook was approved.
Three components must be approved by the Senate for elections to take place — the
polling locations, the elections calendar and the Handbook.
“
I would not be doing this if I didn’t think that students rights were
not fully being upheld,” Emenhiser said. “I implore you not to
think of time or money. I implore you to think of values of democracy, electing
leadership and fair play.”
Almost putting the debate of the Elections Handbook to a dead stop, Sen. Shefali
Mistry, College of the Arts, reminded the senators the debate was about the
Handbook, not the election date.
Following the Handbook’s approval, Emenhiser made his motion to rescind
the elections calendar, citing a stipulation the California Education Code.
Haller said using a stipulation in the education code as means to delay the
election was questionable.
“
Going through a lot of procedural manipulation is almost worse than the wrong
you are trying to correct,” Haller told the senators. “That being
said, I’d have to say I can’t support you going through this
process in this manner.”
The motion reopened debate over the election deadline, with those in favor
of delaying saying students did not have a fair chance to campaign, and the
opposition pointing out no one was told not to stop campaigning.
“
I just think people weren’t on the ball and weren’t campaigning,
and that’s unfortunate,” said Sen.-at-large Guido D’Onofrio.
Although a majority of senators voted to rescind the election’s calendar,
8-7-4, it was not the two-thirds majority needed to be a successful motion.
One of the four abstaining senators, Shelena McClinton, College of Liberal
Arts, cited her candidacy as a conflict of interest and her reason for abstaining.
In the closing comments, D’Onofrio said senators yielding their time
to the public, which happened twice during the meeting, is getting out of hand.
When a senator yields his or her time to a member of the public, it is an opportunity
for that person to voice pertinent information on the subject of discussion,
perhaps a subject the public could have expertise on.
During the meeting, Sen. Elisa Herrera, College of Education, yielded her time
to former senator and presidential candidate Uduak-Joe Ntuk, but ASI Vice President
Hironao Okahana did not allow her to yield the time, saying he had nothing
valid to add to the discussion.
The Senate then voted down Okahana’s motion and allowed Ntuk to speak.
Herrera expressed concern about what she saw as the Senate censoring public
opinion, the public they are there to represent.
“
We are elected to be the voice of the students,” Okahana said.
He interprets the Senate’s role as being the students’ voice when
they have the floor, not as granting the time for the public to voice an opinion
they should already be representing.
“
Open meeting doesn’t mean open for everyone to jump into the discussion,” he
said. “Open meeting means that we let the public know what we say,
what we speak on behalf of them.”
He said the public comments portion of Senate meetings is the appropriate time
to hear and consider concerns of the public.
|
