At the Student Government Association public meeting on March 17, several senators confronted the Elections Committee regarding decisions they made about campaign violation complaints filed against Chase Slenker in closed door meetings. 

All seats were filled at the public meeting, with over 2 dozen people in attendance some were left standing. Among those in attendance were many students and the Multicultural Student Association leadership Diane Jefferson and Kapri Brown.  

Jordan Newsome-Little, an SGA senator, addressed the senate on Thursday after new business was completed stating the elections committee had done the senate and student association a disservice. 

“This week, the elections committee made a grave injustice to the student body of Shippensburg,” Newsome-Little said referencing a March 15 meeting of the elections committee. 

The elections committee meeting on March 15 was the second of two meetings regarding campaign violation complaints about Slenker. 

Slenker, the current vice president of finance, ran for reelection for the 2022-2023 term and won, which was announced in the ELC results sent out on March 16. Slenker ran against one other candidate, Steven Matheson, a Multicultural Student Association Senator. 

According to the SGA election rules and regulations Section 9, “A declared candidate may file a complaint against another candidate running for the same position in the same election.” 

Section 9a states, “Any complaints of improper campaign practices during an election must be put in writing, signed, and submitted to the Elections Committee Chair within forty-eight hours of the closing of the polls before any action can be taken. This may also be done electronically through email, whereby the signature requirement can be fulfilled by submitting the filer’s library ID.” 

Initially, the B.R.O.T.H.E.R.S. organization filed a complaint against Slenker on March 3, Seth Edwards, the Student Trustee and the Chair of the Elections Committee, said. 

The Elections Committee informed the B.R.O.T.H.E.R.S. Organization that complaints could not be heard from a group but had to be filed by an individual to be heard, Edwards said. 

Matheson then filed a complaint against Slenker on March 3, the day the ELC election polls closed, stating that Slenker had violated Section 6b of the SGA Election Rules and Regulations document. 

“Chalk may only be placed on sidewalks and not on any other structure, and it must be removed within twenty-four (24) hours after the polls close,” Section 6b states. 

Matheson’s complaint stated that Slenker had violated the section by chalking on a vertical surface in the CUB amphitheater. 

The Elections Complaint Ad-hoc committee comprised of three of the five members of the Elections Committee, Seth Edwards, Ian Thompson and Jordan Newsome-Little, met in a closed-door session on Monday, March 14. Edwards, Thompson and Newsome-Little listened to Slenker, Matheson and witnesses accounts. The Elections Complaint Ad-hoc spent nearly five hours deliberating on whether or not Slenker had violated the election rules, Edwards said. 

During the public meeting on March 17, Rashaan Henry, an SGA senator, said he was not told about the date of the Elections Complaint Ad-hoc Committee meeting and felt that as the alternate, he should have been present. 

Henry, who is also a member of the Elections Committee, was designated as the alternate for the Elections Complaint Ad-hoc Committee, Thompson said. The alternate, is designated in case one of the three members of the Elections Complaint Ad-hoc Committee could not make the meeting, Thompson said. 

In section 9b of the election rules it states “An alternate member (who shall also be a member of the Elections Committee) shall be selected by the Elections Committee prior to the release of petitions for a respective election, and this alternate shall be used in a case where a pre-selected Elections Committee Member must resign from the Elections Complaint Ad-hoc Committee or if the pre-selected member cannot attend the Elections Complaint Ad-Hoc Committee meeting.”

During the Elections Complaint Ad-hoc Committee meeting on March 14, one of Matheson’s witnesses brought up a second campaign violation complaint against Slenker. This complaint stated Slenker had violated Section 9d of the election rules. 

As the witness’ complaint was submitted verbally and outside of the post-election 48-hour time period, it did not have to be heard. However, the Elections Complaint Ad-hoc committee decided to hear the complaint the with all five members of the Elections Committee present the next day March 15, in a closed-door meeting. 

At the time, the Elections Committee had five member’s total: Seth Edwards, Ian Thompson, Jordan Newsome-Little, Kevin DelaCruz, Abigail Birtchet, and Rashann Henry, Edwards said. 

During the March 15 meeting, the Elections Committee discussed whether or not Chase had violated the elections campaign rules regarding the placement of campaign flyers in residence halls, Edwards said. 

The witness’ complaint said that Chase had put up flyers for his campaign on the doors of other students in his residence hall, Edwards said.

Section 6d of the elections rules states “Moreover, in all residence halls, individuals may personally display campaign materials on their own residence hall doors. Flyers may be placed on residence hall bulletin boards only by the Residence Life Staff.”

The Election Committee decided in a 3-2 vote that Slenker did not violate Section 6d of the election rules. Edwards, as the student trustee, does not have voting rights according to the SGA constitution. 

The student trustee cannot vote on any matters, but Edwards did express his opinion on whether Chase had violated the rule to the rest of the elections committee as part of the discussion before they voted, Edwards said. 

Both the SGA constitution and the election rules had to be edited to take out the emergency COVID-19 procedures and with these changes has come vagueness, according to SGA officials.

Slenker did not think he could be allegedly violating section 6d until the verbal complaint was brought up on March 15, he said. 

“Flyers were hung up by residence life staff members in residence halls in respective buildings where permission was received from the resident director via email. It was my understanding that the election rules allowed for individuals to hang flyers on their residence hall door. Nothing in campaign rules specified that flyers could not be hung on doors. The rules did not comment on this at all. The rule is ambiguous regarding this and did not prohibit distribution of small flyers on resident doors,” Slenker said. 

As no formal complaint regarding the flyers was made because it was verbal and submitted outside of the post-election 48-hour period, the committee decided to review it without following the complaint procedure in the election rules, Slenker said. The March 15 meeting about the informal flyer complaint was closed-door and no justification was provided to candidates, he said. 

Cameron and Newsome-Little said they feel that Slenker did violate Section 6d of the election’s rules and that the Elections Committee did not make an ethical decision. It sends a message that students can break rules without being reprimanded, Newsome-Little said. 

There was no loop hole in terms of the flyer placement rules in the election guidelines, Cameron said.

 "You can always make an excuse for something but at the end of the days what's right is right and what's wrong is wrong." Cameron said. 

As seniors set to graduate this May, Cameron and Newsome-Little hope that future SGA members will continue to discuss these issues and work for change, they said. 

The Elections Compliant Ad-hoc committee meeting on March 14 and the Elections Committee meeting on March 15 were both closed door meetings, Edwards said. 

A confidentially agreement is signed by all SGA senators that prevents SGA senators from disclosing what happens in closed door meetings and committees to the public, Thompson said. Thompson brought this up at the March 17 public meeting and explained that the March 14 and March 15 meetings were supposed to be kept confidential. 

No senate members have tried to bring up disciplinary measures against the senators that spoke about these meetings during the public meeting as of Sunday, March 20, Newsome-Little said. 

Towards the end of the meeting, most of the student attendees left the room as well as SGA Senators Jordan Newsome-Little, Rashaan Henry and Imani Cameron. However, Cameron did return to make closing statements to her fellow senators. 

The next public SGA meeting will be held on March 31. 

Share