- A Hamden ‘hero’
- SURVIVOR: Spring Break
- Column: Women’s basketball team could benefit from Cinderella effect
- School of Business to start microlending program
- University provides gender-neutral bathrooms across three campuses
- Student Government Association plans policy changes
- Baker Dunleavy named new men’s basketball coach
- QTHON raises record amount at annual fundraiser
- Quinnipiac introduces Baker Dunleavy as men’s basketball coach
- South Carolina ends Quinnipiac’s tournament run in Sweet 16
SGA motion re-defines VP of Programming
In a move which drastically changes Student Government Association election policy, a motion passed at last week’s SGA meeting that bars anyone outside of the Student Programming Board from running for Vice President of Programming.
Also, non-SGA members who have held an SGA committee position for three semesters can run for any executive position outside of VP of Programming. The only committee exempt from this rule is SPB.
Previously, all SGA and SPB members could run for any of the five executive board positions after fulfilling their tenure requirement.This comes after SGA’s Election Committee recommendation of the change at their Sept. 28 meeting.
The motion, brought up by Class of 2010 Representative Lindsey Burroughs, now allows members of SGA’s standing committees (with the exception of SPB) to run for the positions of SGA President, VP of Student Concerns, VP of Public Relations, and VP of Finance. Members presently on the Student Programming Board may now run for VP of Programming, even if they have not been an SGA representative. In both situations, students must be an elected official for two full semesters or serve as a member in a committee for three full semesters.
“Our hope is that by changing the election policy, it will add some protection for both organizations, so that someone who has experience in the appropriate field will get the position or will be qualified to get that position,” Burroughs said.
The motion was opposed by a small opposition during the meeting due to confusion and some concerns over the new policy. One concern raised was on the ability of non-SGA members to run for E-Board positions, citing the difference one’s task would be in the Student Awareness Committee without having experience as an SGA representative. However, the motion was able to meet the 75 percent approval rate needed to pass, as 30 of the 40 members supported the decision.