|Save page Remove page||Previous||1 of 16||Next|
small (250x250 max)
medium (500x500 max)
large ( > 500x500)
Loading content ...
The MAROON Vol. 63, No. 21 Loyola University, New Orleans, Louisiana 70118 March 29,1985 Election upheld despite violations By Rene Sanchez News Editor Results of last week's referendum election have been upheld by the SGA Court of Review despite campaign rate violations that took place as students voted. The amendment was approved by 72 percent of the vote, with 561 students voting in the election. But the Court of Review was forced to decide the validity of the results after formal protests were submitted by students who claimed that voting was unjustly influenced by poll commissioners and supporters of Sheila Earthman. Earthman is an SGA presidential candidate whose petition forced the election. The election was called to decide a constitutional change in the requirements necessary to declare candidacy for Student Government Association president. Students were voting on an amendment that said a presidential candidate must have completed 12 hours of course work at Loyola, no more than one year before elections. Earthman attended Loyola of Chicago's Rome Center last fall. After the court's decision Monday, the amendment becomes effective and allows Earthman to run. The court issued a statement Monday afternoon after reviewing oral and written testimonies from protesters, poll commissioners and other students involved in the controversy."The Court of Review has determined that there were violations of the required. ID to vote, the direct campaigning of poll commissioners, and the violation of the 50-feet campaigning limit," the statement said. But these violations did not invalidate the election, the court ruled. That decision was made because of the strong support the amendment received, and because "the isolation of the incidents suggests that the outcome of the election was not adversely affected," the court said. In its decision, the court also said that it was appalled by the process and procedure used to conduct the election, and that the violations "severely discredits the SGA, the Election Board, and the Court of Review." SGA President Clark Kelly agreed. "I'm appalled too," Kelly said Tuesday. "I was shocked to hear people were influencing students to vote. It does discredit the SGA, especially when we're already having trouble. The last thing we need is that." Referring to the extent of the violations, Kelly said there was only a 12-vote discrepancy between the total number of votes cast and the number of names recorded by poll commissioners.In addition, there was no blatant bias being shown by poll commissioners, Kelly said. Kelly said that the Election Board was somewhat remiss in informing poll commissioners how to act, but added that he "honestly thought it was understood." "/'m appalled too. ... It does discredit the SGA, especially when we 're already having trouble. The last thing we need is that.'' —Kelly Those who protested, however, said it wasn't. Pamela LoCoco, communications senior, said in her written protest, "The student working behind the table told me that I should not vote no. I was told that 'Sheila only went to Rome, and should have a shot. She has experience.' " Nicholas Sciarrino, second-year law student, said in his written protest that he perceived a large degree of prejudice on the part of those running the election. "This was evidenced by a pollster looking at my ballot, although 1 made no attempt to cover it. 1 received a very negative reaction in response to my vote," he said. At the Court of Review hearing, David Kramer, communications/political science sophomore, testified that when he voted he was not asked to present his student ID. He said poll commissioners were The clutter of campaigning This election season saw the usual flow of papers, posters and propaganda. —Photos by David Aguillard and Nancee l.e»i\ Students defend teachers' contracts By Keith Magill Assistant News Editor Four tenured biology teachers are reconsidering their recommendation not to renew the contracts of two nontenured professors after meeting with about 35 students who opposed the measure March 20, according to Dr. Robert A. Preston, vice president for Academic Affairs. Preston said the recommendation proposed that the contracts of Dr. Kenneth W. Gobalet, assistant professor of biological sciences, and Dr. David White, assistant professor of biological sciences, not be renewed after the 1985-86 academic year. But Preston would not say why the tenured teachers suggested that the contracts should not be renewed, and added that the university has not taken any official action on their recommendation.Preston said the governance structure of the university allows tenured teachers to evaluate junior faculty being considered for promotion or tenure, and then submit recommendations to him. The biology professors who proposed the recommendation, Dr. Kamel T. Khalaf, Dr. Elizabeth Beard, the Rev. Roland J. Lesseps, S.J., and Dr. Jagdish M. Upadhyay, department chairman, would not comment on the measure. White also declined to comment on the recommendation. Gobalet said Upadhyay told him Feb. 26 that his contract would not be renewed. Gobalet said he had not received notification before the meeting that such an action might be taken. He said he was not given any specific reasons for the teachers' decision not to renew his contract. Gobalet said he met with Preston about two weeks later and again did not get any specifics. He said he received a memo early this month which stated that the biology faculty was changing directions for the betterment of the department, and that he and White's contracts should not be renewed. "We have no knowledge of what those directions are," Gobalet said, adding that he would be surprised if any drastic changes are made. Gobalet said he had experienced a lack of communication with tenured teachers in the biology department. He said he was not sure of his role as a non-tenured faculty member, adding See Election /page 3 See Contracts/page 3 'The Maroon* will not publish April 5 because of the Easter holidays. Publication will resume April 12.
|Masthead||The Maroon Vol. 63 No. 21|
|Publisher||Loyola University (New Orleans, La.)|
|Coverage||United States; Louisiana; New Orleans;|
|Source||Loyola University New Orleans Special Collections & Archives (http://library.loyno.edu/research/speccoll/) New Orleans, LA|
|Subject||Loyola University (New Orleans, La.)|
|Rights||Digital rights are held by Loyola University New Orleans. Copyright is retained in accordance with U.S. copyright law.|
|Creator||Loyola University (New Orleans, La.)|
|Relation-Is Part Of||http://www.louisianadigitallibrary.org/cdm/search/collection/LOYOLA_UMN|
|Contact Information||For information or permission to use/publish, contact: mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org|