USGD President Joseph Grossman wins re-election as first repeat Downtown president

Share

Joseph Grossman is the 2012-2013 USGD president. Winning 63 percent of the votes, he is the first USGD president to be elected twice. (Photo illustration by Evie Carpenter/DD)

USGD President Joseph Grossman successfully won re-election by a vote of 377-227, according to a USGD press release. Grossman is the first president of the Downtown student government to be elected twice.

Grossman dodged three violation complaints while voting was open, two submitted by Green supporters and the other by a student who ran for the College of Public Programs Senate seat.

All of these violations came after Grossman supporter Clare Irvine filed a violation that got Green disqualified on Monday.

“This is not how I wanted this election to go down,” Green said, whose disqualification was overturned by the judicial board early Thursday morning. “I don’t think the election code should be used as a weapon.”

The first violation, which the election committee discussed on Tuesday, claimed Grossman began campaigning early.

The complaint cited a Downtown Devil story that said Grossman had announced he was planning to run for re-election at a Senate meeting on Feb. 6.

At the time, and again during the election committee meeting, Grossman explained he wasn’t campaigning, but being transparent as to why he wasn’t going to be nominating any students to the judicial board, even though the president is asked to do that in the constitution.

The election committee turned down the complaint 5-0.

The other two complaints were filed Wednesday and addressed Wednesday night following the judicial board hearing.

The first complaint claimed Grossman had set up an unofficial polling station the day of election via a Facebook event where Grossman asked supporters to come to his house to have a “voting party.”

The evidence provided with this complaint was a screen shot of the Facebook event.

The election committee eventually decided the word “public” was important in this violation, and asking people to come to your house is not a public poling site.

They also decided they didn’t have sufficient evidence submitted with the complaint that the event actually took place or that the intent of the passage — which is to avoid coercion by candidates — was broken.

The election committee voted 4-0 to disgard the complaint.

Vice President of Services David Bakardjiev said this complaint was “the definition of a petty violation.”

The second complaint took only five minutes to unanimously shoot down, with the complaint seeming to be more of a question than an accusation of wrongdoing.

The complaint stated that Grossman and his vice president of services candidate Leighana Moldrem didn’t attend a mandatory meeting for all candidates and therefore weren’t eligible to run.

Director of Administration Rudy Rivas said both Grossman and Moldrem had contacted him before the meeting, saying they would be out of town and unable to make it.

Both did end up receiving the information they would have at the meeting.

“Please do not submit violations like this one,” Rivas said. “This is a simple question someone could have asked me.”

Contact the reporter at connor.radnovich@asu.edu

Comments

  1. Journalist says:

    Hey Connor,
    “The second complaint took only five minutes to unanimously shoot down, with the complaint seeming to be more of a question than an accusation of wrongdoing.”
    Just a small word choice advice for this graf. I’d sugget not using the word: “only.” It makes it seem to the reader that the complaint was unimportant. Just a suggestion for future writing so someone doesn’t accuse you of ever showing a bias.

  2. ^ says:

    “Only” in this case can have a couple different meanings.. “Only” in the sense that you speak of or “only” in the sense that it was very short – which it was. He was not using it to lessen the degree of importance – even though Rudy clearly said that “This is a simple question someone could have asked me” – but he was only stating that it did not take long to get shot down.

    What I inferred from this article was that it was also probably the general consensus of those present that this violation was, in fact, a complete waste of time.

    Keep up the great quality of work Connor!