In the wake of elections marked by advertising missteps and the postponement of a vote for freshman senators, the body that oversees student voting at Tufts has come under fire from former candidates and current student government officials.
The Elections Commission (ECOM) has incurred criticism for its handling of several aspects of last week's election, from accusations of poor advertising on TuftsLife and in the Daily to charges that the commission failed to adequately inform freshman candidates of election procedures.
The entire student body cast ballots on Wednesday in a seamless election on two competing referenda on community representatives on the Tufts Community Union (TCU) Senate. A vote for freshman senator and Freshman Class Council positions was scheduled for the same day but was postponed for 24 hours due to an error by ECOM.
That vote progressed smoothly the following day, but candidates and student government officials in the last few days have charged ECOM with mishandling aspects of the electoral process.
While acknowledging certain mistakes, ECOM members generally defended the body's conduct, attributing some of its actions to inexperience and miscommunication with student groups.
ECOM is comprised of five student members and is responsible for organizing and presiding over student body−wide elections. Members receive a stipend of $500 at the end of each term.
In the days preceding any vote, ECOM is tasked with publicizing the vote to the student body. Language in its bylaws differs by type of election; for TCU candidate elections, ECOM must advertise through "several methods of advertising, both online and offline," according to its bylaws.
Candidates cite lack of communication
Candidates and non−candidates alike cited problems communicating with ECOM in the days preceding the election.
Freshman Noha Ahmed, who was elected Freshman Class Council secretary, said she had trouble getting information from ECOM members.
"I wasn't informed about one of the meetings that I was supposed to attend, and I know a lot of candidates weren't informed either," she said.
"I got one email at 10:30 [p.m.] saying I had to get a poster design in by 12 that night," Ahmed said. "When I came to drop it off, there was no one in the ECOM office.
"Other people ended up dropping it off in the info booth," Ahmed added, referring to the booth in the Mayer Campus Center lobby. "A lot of people handed them stuff, and they were pissed off because they're not part of ECOM," Ahmed said.
Freshman Sarah Tralins, a candidate for vice president of social programming, also had trouble gaining approvals for her fliers.
"I had to go to the ECOM office four times before I actually got my posters stamped because classes conflicted," Tralins said. "They weren't very helpful about informing us about when to meet them or where."
"It was very chaotic and the process was not fun," Ahmed said.
ECOM Chair Katherine McManus said information about poster deadlines "was made abundantly clear at the candidates meeting." ECOM's bylaws say that candidates must submit posters for review at a mandatory candidates general interest meeting.
Some candidates said they were not adequately informed about the general interest meetings themselves; ECOM held two meetings this year. "ECOM is responsible for coordinating this meeting and generating sufficient awareness thereof," the commission's bylaws state.
Freshman Simmone Seymour, who on Thursday was elected the vice president of academic affairs on the Freshman Class Council, said the publicity of the meeting times was unclear and that "no one knew them."
"The only reason I knew was from work of mouth," Seymour said. "The meeting turned out to be mandatory, but no one knew that."
Tralins and Ahmed said candidates who missed this meeting were denied chalk for advertising by ECOM.
Freshman Scott Owades, who ran unsuccessfully for class council president, agreed, saying he was "luckily walking by when it happened" and had not been told about them in advance.
McManus disagreed. "Those were well−advertised," she said, referring to the general interest meetings. McManus said meeting information was posted on the ECOM website in advance of the meetings.
"I can understand why some of the candidates might be frustrated, but ECOM has always tried to make ourselves available," sophomore Will Yu, ECOM's public relations director, said.
Misplaced blame and missing names
When ECOM decided to postpone the Class of 2014 elections on Wednesday, the body originally attributed the error to a problem with Votenet, the online system used in campus elections. Later that morning, though, the company behind Votenet complained that the error actually took place on ECOM's end, and ECOM retracted its original statement and assumed responsibility for the malfunction.
Another issue surrounded the commission's promotion of the freshman Programming Board candidates. While candidates design and post their own flyers advertising their candidacies, ECOM generally creates full−page advertisements featuring the full slate of candidates for both Senate and Programming Board positions.
This year's advertisement, which ran in last Thursday's Daily, featured names, photographs and brief pitches from the Senate candidates. The Programming Board ad, though, omitted the candidates' names and the positions for which they were running, unless the candidates mentioned those details in their self−submitted descriptions.
"It's disappointing that foreseeable, minor problems might have had a negative effect on certain candidates," Programming Board Co−chair Adam Fischer, a senior, said. "These are problems that could have easily been caught and fixed."
"It seems like there was not enough care put into making a clear ad," Fischer said.
Ahmed, the Freshman Class Council secretary, said she was originally "upset" when her name was omitted. "I thought people wouldn't know my name," she said.
Freshman Yihao Li, who was elected Freshman Class Council treasurer, called for improved publicity.
"Some people complained, saying they didn't know who the candidates were," Li said.
ECOM's Yu, who designed the advertisement, cited space constraints caused by a crowded field.
"We had 16 candidates," he said. "As a matter of formatting and spacing, it was really tough to try and cram that into a one−page document."
McManus called the design "last−minute" and took responsibility for not making the deadlines clear to Yu, who was forced to rush the job at the last minute.
And Ahmed questioned whether the omission had any impact, noting that freshman Emma Rosenbluth was elected president without including her name in her paragraph.
But freshman Tralins, who ran for freshman vice president of social programming, disagreed.
A formatting error cut off Tralins's description. She had submitted two different versions of her passage and said that ECOM accidentally ran the wrong one.
She said that the errors associated with the newspaper ad, coupled with a general lack of advertising, left many freshmen uninformed about the candidates through election day.
"A lot of people voted blindly … just out of not knowing who was who, not being able to identify the candidates — definitely because of the newspaper issue, but also because there wasn't so much advertisement about us other than campaign fliers that kept being taken down," she said.
TuftsLife−ECOM dispute
Yet TuftsLife, which in the past has provided a forum for the commission to run front−page banners promoting elections and to post events associated with the electoral season, had no communication with ECOM prior to the start of the referenda vote on Wednesday morning, according to TuftsLife Chief Executive Officer Mike Vastola, who is also the technical manager for the Daily.
No event advertising either last Monday's candidates forum or panel on community referenda appeared on TuftsLife as of Wednesday night. For a referendum vote, ECOM "is responsible for advertising the forum in the same manner that similar events for candidates are advertised," its bylaws state.
Both McManus and Yu said that ECOM submitted events to TuftsLife advertising the forums. Vastola said that on Tuesday night, ECOM submitted an event submission advertising Wednesday's election — but that the submission included the wrong date and time: Tuesday from 12 noon to 6 p.m.
"We approved the event 20 minutes later, but it never hit the front page" because the event had technically already ended, he said.
Event listings for the candidates forum and the community referenda panel retroactively appeared on the site's calendar, as of yesterday.
McManus acknowledged that ECOM had missed submission deadlines and credited TuftsLife for its speed in processing the commission's requests.
"We didn't really think twice about having it be a little late because we've sent many things late this semester, and they've all gone on time," McManus said.
TuftsLife did post a banner on its main page advertising the election on the day of the referenda vote. While it urged students to vote in the election and provided a link to the WebCenter voting portal, it also included a disclaimer.
"This post was made at TuftsLife's own initiative, without communiqué from ECOM, and, as such, should not be construed to signify compliance with" certain sections of the commission's bylaws, the disclaimer read.
McManus called the disclaimer "not true," saying that the body had made an effort to reach TuftsLife.
"We had contacted TuftsLife through all the channels that they allow us to," McManus said. She faulted a lack of clarity in the communication process.
"There's not really a function to submit for a banner," McManus said.
On the day of elections, ECOM historically sends out a student body−wide e−mail to inform students that voting has begun. "Attempts must be made to contact all students abroad regarding the election," its bylaws read, referring to TCU candidate elections, adding that "abroad students must be familiar with their own voting hours."
ECOM did send out an e−mail to the Class of 2014 about the freshman elections on Thursday, but the body did not send a message to the entire student body about the referenda vote.
McManus said that students studying abroad learned of the referenda vote through Facebook pages created by supporters of each proposal and from ECOM's website.
"We do make an effort to reach people abroad," McManus said. "But we are limited in what we can do regarding referenda."
‘A learning process'
This election is not the first campus−wide election marred by voting complications. For reasons both within and outside of ECOM's control, the voting process has been delayed multiple times in recent years.
"It's a student−run group," Yu said of ECOM. "I think people automatically liken us to groups like the [Office for Campus Life]. ECOM is a five−man operation, and we just don't have the same logistical capacity to run like the OCL does."
"The thing is that we are all students within the Tufts community, we all have other commitments," Yu continued. "This isn't an excuse, but it's a fact that we all have commitments beyond student government or whatever else people are involved with."
Programming Board Co−chair Sarah Habib said that running elections is a difficult job, and it is understandable that students become frustrated with the system.
"It is a very complicated and chaotic process at best," Habib, a senior, said. "My experience with ECOM has been that it's a learning process."
ECOM's members this semester are relatively inexperienced.
While four of its five members returned from last semester, the body's internal elections for officer positions were held on Sept. 16, less than a week before the referenda and freshman votes, according to McManus.
TCU President Sam Wallis said that the short timeframe for the referenda revote worked against ECOM.
"They sort of shot themselves in the foot by setting a very short timeline and [trying] to advertise in that timeline," Wallis, a senior, said.
He said that ECOM is looking into changing its bylaws. He called the time limits mandated by the existing rules "very cumbersome."
Confusion about ECOM bylaws, and how best to follow them, was widespread. "The rules were not all in one place. That was absolutely the problem," Wallis said.
Yu said he believes ECOM satisfied the requirement for advertising. "I do feel like we did try to go through the proper motions," he said.
Other factors aside, Wallis was direct about the need for smooth elections.
"At the end of the day," he said, "it is ECOM's job, and they receive a stipend for that purpose."
Alexandra Bogus contributed reporting to this article.
--
