AS elections show conflicts

Throughout the year, contentious debates plagued Associated Students government

Luke Garrett / Editor in Chief / The USD Vista

In a year marked by disagreement and conflict within Associated Students (AS), elections for next year’s student government followed suit. On Friday, April 26 speaker of the senate candidate, Charlie Young, made an appeal to the Elections Committee concerning purported campaign violations made concerning his opponent Carolina Morena Armenta. The violation cited by Young and later confirmed by the Elections Committee pointed to a Facebook post made on the USD Act Now to Stop War and End Racism (ANSWER) page promoting a number of candidates, including Armenta. She is also an executive board member of the student organization in question. This post was in violation of the Elections Bylaw that states, “No student organization may advertise for a candidate, nor may a candidate advertise their candidacy in coordination with another organization.”

The Elections Committee voted in favor of the appeal but unanimously voted against disqualifying any of the candidates promoted by ANSWER’s post. Young, in response to the latter decision, plans to appeal this decision against disqualifying involved candidates during the senate meeting on Thursday, May 2. Those on the Elections Committee stated that the final election decisions will be announced at Thursday’s meeting along with a statement from the Elections Committee. The USD Vista requested an interview from Armenta and received no response. 

This appeal process within AS elections follows disagreements within the Elections Committee itself, concerning the extension of candidate applications. According to fifth-year Chair of Communication, Jordan Rodriguez, who assumed the responsibilities of the then-vacant Director of Recruitment position, President Natasha Salgado extended the original deadline through the weekend without Rodriguez’s confirmation. Salgado made this decision via an email sent to students across campus.

“Technically it wasn’t (Salgado’s) call in the sense that the Director of Recruitment at the end of the day has the call, not necessarily the president,” Rodriguez said. “But in sending that email she did make that call.”

Earlier in the week, the AS Executive Team had spoken of extending the deadlines, stating that only a few people had applied by that time. Although, according to Rodriguez, on the day of the deadline, 20 students had applied–a number Rodriguez felt comfortable with. 

“When it was 20 I did not feel the need for it to be extended given that it would only be one extra day,” Rodriguez said. “How many more people would attend an information session on one extra day when they hadn’t for two weeks?”

According to Rodriguez, before the extension was made Young was the sole applicant for the speaker of the senate position. In an email response, Salgado clarified why she chose to extend the deadline. This is the first time Salgado has responded to an interview question since mid-October. 

“The extension was made due to the low number of senate candidates and an attempt to have more interested students apply,” Salgado said. “This extension was given to all members of the campus community with the hope of getting more candidates that were interested additional time to turn in their application (petition & Google Form). Moving the deadline to April 5 was discussed at my Exec Board’s weekly meeting, and in conversation with our Communications Chair, my advisor, and myself. This can be verified in our minutes for that meeting.”

Plummer, the current speaker of the senate, also clarified to The USD Vista that this extension decision was made because of the lack of turnout for senator positions. 

“I had been aware of the candidacy of both candidates for the positions of speaker of the senate well before the application deadline,” Plummer said in contradiction to Rodriguez. 

These and many other conflicts within the student government have become common occurrences over this past year in AS, as long-time divides between the president’s cabinet and senate have led to confusion over AS rules, infighting, and a priority of conversation over policy making. Salgado has sat at the center of this all, with well-defined supporters and dissenters within senate. These two sides faced off throughout the rest of the year causing some to vacate their positions as a result of this stark divide. What began in the fall as a senate of 29 senators dwindled to a staggering 12 of its original members. 

Some of those who have left point to this consistent political infighting as the main cause of their exodus. One of whom is Vayunamu Bawa, a current senior, then-senator of the College of Arts and Sciences and then-Chair of Inclusion and Diversity. 

“I left at the end of last semester (fall 2018) because I felt like the body wasn’t being as productive as it should have been which was largely due to how tense and hostile the environment had become,” Bawa said. “I would say that the relationship between the president and the speaker is very critical in the way the body operates and having those tensions this year had a negative effect. Having distinct camps and voting blocs within AS created a sort of deadlock that made it hard for things to move forward.”

Senators were not the only members of AS to leave their posts. Three positions within the executive structure of AS also opened up: the Athletics Chair, Finance Chair, and speaker of the senate. The then-speaker of the senate Robert T. Warren gave his own reason for of leaving the student body this past February. 

“This past year, honestly, the environment that senate became was something I didn’t feel comfortable with anymore,” Warren said. “Especially so, and I hate to be that person to throw someone under the bus, but Natasha definitely induced it… There has been nothing of the sort of kind of environment or unwillingness to compromise that Natasha has brought that all the other presidents before have not exhibited… It essentially comes down to, if you agree with Natasha you are fine, if you don’t you are not.”

With 16 senators leaving their seats, one ousted, and three executive members vacating their seats, a vacuum of empty seats was created within Solomon Hall throughout this year. The majority of these were appointed by Salgado and confirmed by a two-thirds senate vote throughout the year, as is the procedure stated in the AS bylaws. Jesse Magaña–the current senator of the UTA’s, Chair of Inclusion and Diversity, candidate for Vice President, and recent USD transfer – is one of the 14 appointed senators. He too spoke of the divides within AS.

“I came to AS at a heated time,” Magaña said. “There were already shifts that were happening that some members in senate weren’t the happiest about. The tensions were already present.”

As for Salgado’s role within this divide, Magaña differed greatly from Warren’s account.

“Natasha is a really incredible person and often her leadership gets overlooked, in the sense there is a lot she does behind the scene to make sure students are having the best experience they can at USD,” Magaña said. “I know it is a misconception that she only focuses on one group of students. In just the way I have watched Natasha interact with people, even if she doesn’t agree with them she always is mindful of there might be two different perspectives that we are not catching here that could lead to common ground.”

As has been reported by The USD Vista, a shift in perspective arose within senate as more newly-appointed senators recited their oaths to serve students. Many questions still linger as to how Salgado made her 14 appointments to senate. The president herself denied an interview with The USD Vista concerning the issue. Both Warren and Plummer, the past and current speakers of the senate, were unaware as to how senators made it to the senate floor for confirmation. 

Warren, commented on the absence of advertisements made for the open positions within senate.

“There were none whatsoever, I never received an email,” Warren said. “Even when I was in there, when there were resignations and people were getting appointed. There were no interviews, no applications, no email. They were just there and it was clear they were her friends.”

Warren also spoke of last year’s process of appointmentship with then-president Will Tate.

“Whenever there was an opening (last year) we would collect resumes and we did interviews together. He would take my input on which people should be appointed because they were going to be in my department. We had a process. That process was not followed.”

Looking to the future, candidates for next year’s student government stood behind their podiums at AS debates on April 23. The most frequently asked questions from the audience regarded transparency from their student government. With the trends of debate and division being prevalent throughout the year, some students might wonder whether the new student government will follow suit, or learn from the past missteps.