Skip to main content
Support The Pacer
ThePacer.net

Pacer challenges election results

Darla Young Elections Comissioner UTM Student Government Association 214 University Center Martin, TN 38238

April 8, 2003

Ms. Young,

On behalf of the students of the University of Tennessee at Martin, this newspaper does hereby file a formal challenge to the legitimacy of the general elections of the Student Government Association on April 7 and 8, 2003.

Reasoning:

  • Candidates were informed prior to campaigning that vacant senate seats in the College of Humanities and Fine Arts would be equal to that of the pool of candidates.
  • Most candidates for these seats did not campaign because of the well-founded notion that it would not be necessary to secure a position. In effect, they are held at a disadvantage because of the overall lack of communication to the individual campaigns and to the general student body.
  • We stand by our report that five (5) seats would be vacant in this college, as reported in the March 28, 2003 edition of The Pacer, as well as in the college-by-college breakdown on our Internet site. An interview with Eric Tolbert, President, yielded the information as it is presented.
  • Decisions that directly affect the outcome of the election were made without proper public proceedings.

    Enacting:

    Matthew B. Crouch Executive Editor

    4-8-03

    Office of the Attorney General of the University of Tennessee at Martin

    03-001

    April 8, 2003

    Question: Was the election of Monday, April 7 and Tuesday, April 08, 2003 for the Student Government Association of the University of Tennessee at Martin unconstitutional?

    Opinion

    Yes, the election for the Student Government Association of the University of Tennessee at Martin was unconstitutional as it violated Article VII, Sections (2)(D), (2)(F), (3)(A), (4)(A), and (4)(F).

    Analysis

    Article VII, Section (2)(D) states:

    “[The election commission shall] Provide adequate information concerning all elections to the Communications Committee for use in the school newspaper before and after the election; the information released before the election shall include a list of all poll locations.”

    The Pacer issue released April 4, 2003 (Volume 25, Issue 26) stated that there would be five (5) positions in the College of Humanities and Fine Arts delegation to the Student Government Association Senate to be filled in the election occurring on Monday, April 7, 2003 and on Tuesday, April 08, 2003.

    In a meeting held on April 2, 2003 at 11 o’clock a.m. where Dr. Katie High, Mr. David Belote, Mr. Steve Vantreese, among others were in attendance, the number of students in each school at UTM were discussed. As a result of this meeting, the number of students apportioned for the College of Humanities and Fine Arts was lowered to three (3).

    Article VII, Section (2)(F) directs the election commission to “obtain a current copy of all full-time enrolled UTM students from the office of Student Affairs to be utilized in the execution of SGA elections.” This obligation was apparently not done prior to the transmission by the election commission to the Communications Committee and through them, to The Pacer of the number of positions for Humanities and Fine Arts. This is a violation of the SGA Constitution by the election commission. Because of the incorrect printing of the number of positions to be filled, students in the College of Humanities and Fine Arts as well as candidates for that school’s seats were misled.

    Further violations of the SGA Constitution by the election commission included:

    Article VII, Section (3)(A), which states “[Duties of the Election Commissioner shall be to] Supervise and direct the arrangements of the Election Commission for the proper execution of election.” By improperly informing The Pacer of the number of seats to be filled in the College of Humanities and Fine Arts, the Election Commissioner failed to direct the arrangement of the Election Commission for a proper execution of the election.

    Article VII, Section (4)(A), which states “[Administrative duties of the Elections Commission shall be to] arrange for necessary polling area(s), ballots, and other items necessary for an efficient and legal execution of elections with the approval of the Procedures Committee.” The violation occurred when the election commission provided computerized ballots with a different number of options than what The Pacer stated on April 4, 2003, which interfered with the legal execution of the election.

    Article VII, Section (4)(F), which states “[Administrative duties of the Elections Commission shall be to] Set and announce all dates for all SGA referendums and elections at least four weeks prior to the date. When announcing date, shall announce those items to be voted on or those positions to be filled by election. Shall set and announce all due dates for petitions of potential candidates.” Since the information was not announced until April 4, 2003, this section was violated and the election of April 7 and April 8, 2003 was therefore illegal.

    It is the opinion of this office that the election held on Monday, April 7, 2003 and on Tuesday, April 08, 2003 for the Student Government Association was unconstitutional and therefore illegal. However, in the interest of expediency and fairness to candidates for the executive council and from schools other than Humanities and Fine Arts, it is the opinion of this office that only the election for the seats in Humanities and Fine Arts should be held invalid and be declared null and void.

    Michael B. Baggett Attorney General of the University of Tennessee at Martin Tuesday, April 08, 2003

    • Article Image
    Updated 4:45 p.m. on 3/8/2003
    The Pacer has been asked to attend a special session of the SGA Procedures Committee Tuesday at 7 p.m. in UC 214.
    Pacer challenge | Attorney Gen. Statement