On May 6, 2016, Indiana University South Bend (IUSB) students and faculty were told in the "Daily Titan Digest" the final results of the Student Government Association's (SGA) election. Not only did the results seem to come out later than normal, but a note was added.
"There were some candidates who were ruled ineligible because of campaign violations. The manner in which the situation was resolved was taken with great care and seriousness."
This was the first time in IU South Bend's history that this happened, and as a result, it was a very serious matter. It took a matter of days and a lot of thought for the SGA to decide what would happen, especially seeing as the voter turnout was higher than it had been in the past few years at 882 voters.
The committee book that can be found in the SGA office states, "Rather than simply invalidate the candidacies of all individuals who commit even minor infractions, this committee decided to review all violations on a case-by-case basis in the interest of fairness and also to evaluate each action's severity and implications/consequences within the bounds of the election."
During the review process, the election committee first met to discuss complaints on April 21st, then the next day, April 22nd, they met to interview candidates with noted infractions. Then, on April 24th, an online meeting was conducted to discuss the committee plans for the following week and on April 26th, there was another interview with an accused individual. Finally, later on April 26th, there was a meeting with the candidates to explain the committee's decisions. The final meeting of the election committee was to review appeals and discuss things.
A full copy of the rules for campaigning can be found here.
A majority of the complaints issued had to deal with loose fliers around campus (flyers that were not pinned down everywhere and were left for people to pick up), flyers put under doors in housing, use of the school's easel's, some sidewalk chalk drawings and promotional material that were not properly approved, flyers by some candidates that were not approved at all, and housing policy violations like door-to-door campaigning.
The housing policy featured in the committee book states, "solicitors performing door-to-door marketing or selling disrupts the community."
Upon further investigation, it was revealed that five of the campaigning students were found to be in violation. As a result, four were found to be ineligible and one was left off with a warning. While their names cannot be revealed due to confidentiality rules, the committee book can be reviewed in the SGA office with the stipulation that it cannot leave the SGA office, and students are encouraged to visit the SGA office to review the document in detail.
