Although SGA election results were announced yesterday, some candidates may still be facing controversies surrounding issues that arose during campaigning.
SKY Party presidential hopeful Andrew Steinberg, who lost to Your Party’s Steve Glickman, has called foul on one Your Party candidate who was sighted illegally eliciting votes from students — the same violation he was accused of during last year’s race. Steinberg was also tried by the Student Government Association Governance Board earlier this week over questions that arose about a specific piece of his platform that dealt with the finances of Student Entertainment Events.
According to documents obtained by The Diamondback, Steinberg accused Your Party’s Carrie Coxen — who lost the seat of Greek legislator to the SKY Party’s Daniel Ensign in an 18-24 vote — of accompanying another student with a laptop around dorms, asking students to vote in the election.
“My main concern is that the fundamental democratic process could have been undermined because of alleged violations to the rules,” Steinberg said.
SGA election rules prohibit any ballots being cast on a computer owned or “under the effective control of” any candidate.
The documents allege that Coxen seemed to be “directly controlling” the other student who was holding the laptop. Election rules dictate that if she is found responsible, she could face a fine, but it is unlikely she will have to pay it because she lost the election.
The SGA Elections Board would not disclose how they are handling the situation.
Steinberg also found himself with a Tuesday night date with the SGA Governance Board after SEE alleged he included confidential information in his platform, which was published online. Steinberg was defended in the litigation by Matt Verghese, a Diamondback columnist and former SGA legislator who authored the rule Steinberg was accused of violating.
Due to inconclusive evidence, however, the SGA’s judicial body found Steinberg was not in violation of any rules.
In an earlier version of his platform, Steinberg allegedly posted budgetary details he received from SEE in a closed meeting. Publicizing that information violated the confidentiality clause in the memorandum of understanding between the two organizations, SEE officials alleged.
“While we are disappointed with the outcome, we are greatful to the Governance Board for their time and consideration of the case,” SEE President Melissa Kallas said in an e-mail.
The board, composed of students not in the SGA legislature, cited uncertainty surrounding the timeline of events and insufficient proof the information was confidential.
SEE needed to prove the confidentiality clause was broken, said board chairman Rudi Sarna, “and in the case you could say the complainants didn’t mean the burden of proof.”
gulin at umdbk dot com
