• printer friendly
• mail this article
• iPod format
• digg

The Graduate Student Association elections took an unexpected turn as several candidates from the Graduates Representing Educating Advocating Transforming slate filed complaints against the elections board on April 26.

Representatives of GREAT issued a statement Tuesday expressing dissatisfaction with several actions taken recently by the elections board.

Complaints were levied against the board’s decision to edit several candidate statements, the posting of a link on the official GSA elections Web site to incumbent presidential candidate Jared Fox’s personal Web site, changes in the endorsement process and a disparaging e-mail against GREAT presidential candidate Anita Garcia.

“I am disappointed in both GSA and Jared,” Garcia said. “Everything they have done has put us at a huge disadvantage. To call it a fair election is a misuse of the term ‘fair.’”

In the April 19 elections board meeting, the board, which is comprised of representatives from the 13 councils, edited three GREAT and two independent candidates’ statements for containing disparaging comments.

According to the GSA elections code, candidates can only include comments which are factual and non-defamatory or disparaging in their statements.

The changes were based on an earlier decision at the meeting to make the code apply to comments toward GSA in addition to the GSA candidates.

None of the GSA Experience candidates, the opposing slate, had their statements edited. Fox, running under GSA Experience, was present at the meeting when the decision was made.

Natalie Stites, a GREAT campaigning manager, said the edited statements were posted on the official Web site without notice, and an e-mail was sent to affected candidates only after the fact. Stites also questioned Fox’s presence at the elections board meeting.

“They are expressing clear preferences for this election by not editing GSA Experience candidates,” Stites said, emphasizing that GREAT candidates were not told they could attend the elections board meeting.

Fox said the elections board’s decision to censor the statements arose from the way the statements were worded, which portrayed the current GSA negatively and were thus classified as “disparaging.”

Stites said in a statement “no individual, candidate or organization was identified as being disparaged by the censored statements, nor any complaint filed.”

Though Stites and Garcia said they were unaware of the meeting, all election board meetings are open to the public, and the date for this particular meeting had been announced at the candidate orientation session.

Another complaint GREAT filed deals with an e-mail distributed to the School of Public Policy by one of Fox’s campaign supporters, Hasmik Badalian, criticizing Garcia’s past service.

“Jared should be disqualified because (Badalian) sent an e-mail disparaging Anita Garcia personally – what (Badalian) did is disparaging,” Stites said.

Fox was unaware that such an e-mail with content against Garcia had been distributed and said the e-mail had been sent before Badalian had begun campaigning for him.

“I will not say anything negative about anyone and I don’t tell people to say anything negative in this campaign,” Fox said.

Since learning of the e-mail, Fox has removed Badalian’s supporting statement from his Web site and has asked the elections board to remove her endorsement from the ballot, he said. Fox also said he does not agree with Badalian’s comments.

Appearing on the official GSA elections Web site is also a direct link to Fox and the GSA Experience slate’s Web site, but no other candidate has a direct link, Stites said.

“We were not informed that we could include the link in the statement,” Garcia said.

However, Golnaz Tabibnia, director of elections, said the elections board sent an e-mail on April 15 letting candidates know such an option was available.

The elections board has not reached a decision on any of the complaints.