Skip to content


My feedback

1 result found

  1. 370 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)


    First of all, USG would like to apologize for all of the confusion and our error over the elections. It was determined after elections closed that the ticket that held David and Stephanie’s name was actually ineligible. USG made the mistake by putting them on the ballot; we knew the election packet was turned in late, but we did not realize it was a blatant violation of our bylaws. If we would have known this prior, their names would not have appeared on the ballot. Due to this mistake, and the fact that the ineligible candidates won the election, we are reopening the elections for the Student Body President and Vice President positions.

    This election is open to any students who are interested in the positions of Student Body President and Vice President. A new timeline has been created, and is as follows.

    April 16th: Election packets available for…

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Anonymous commented  · 

    Bylaws broken by Dave Gabrielson and Stephanie To:
    Article IX.A.3.b: failure to turn in packet on time (due to extenuating circumstances and faculty advisement)

    Bylaws broken by USG:
    Article IX.A.3.b: allowing Gabrielson and To onto the ballot
    Article IX.A.2: having only 2 members on the Elections Committee, as well as having the election committee strip elected from office, as it states the election committee only has the power during the election
    Article IV.A.7: removing Gabrielson and To without 3/4 vote of the entire voting membership after official announcement was made (notice needs to be made 1 week before)
    Article II.3: Not creating and maintaining self-governance by the students.

    We could get lost all day in technicalities, but the bigger picture is that USG is failing to represent the student body's wishes. And the person who made this complaint is supposedly going to be the (un-elected) president? I don't what that in a leader, especially when they ran under "Your voice, your choice." You have taken away both our choice and our voice.

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Anonymous commented  · 

    From my understanding, the election committee ignored the broken by-laws by letting Gabrielson and To run on the ballot (I feel confident saying they knew about the 1 day late signatures, because myself, a student not involved at all in USG, knew about it). Now that the results are out and it seems that the losers are unhappy with the decision, USG is attempting to un-ignore that by-law and in doing so ignoring a possible bigger by-law (that is removing the rightfully elected winners)?
    In doing so, USG is negating the voice of the student body- those they are supposed to be serving. To most, government=corruption, but I had more confidence in the students I elected not to sink so low.

    Anonymous supported this idea  · 

Feedback and Knowledge Base