Oracle Online

In his authorship speech, Winiecki, addressing the body from the podium, detailed what a HUSC president should do while simultaneously contrasting it with his allegations of Elliott’s unprofessional conduct.

In general, the resolution charged Elliott with unprofessional conduct in his interactions with vice president-elect Ed Elfmann, university administrators and current HUSC members.

“It’s time to demand accountability,” Winiecki said during his introduction of the resolution.

Winiecki also charged Elliott with a lack of knowledge and an unwillingness to learn about HUSC, its procedures and its committees.

“I don’t like that it had to come to that,” Elfmann said in an interview on May 3. “The message had to get across somehow.”

Referring to Elliott’s lack of HUSC knowledge, sophomore representative Deanna Borth said in an interview after the meeting,

“He talks about respect when he has no respect for the system.” Borth applied for Elliott and Elfmann’s executive board as Student Organization Committee chair and Public Relations Committee chair. She has not been selected to serve in either position.

Winiecki, during his authorship speech, also detailed a long list of what he saw as personal attacks by Elliott toward HUSC members.

Junior representative Carley Luse felt she was attacked indirectly by Elliott. She said she got into a verbal fight with Elliott over the Economic Affairs Committee (EAC) in a phone conversation.

According to Luse, Elliott allegedly said that “EAC was for show; that everything EAC planned they did in advance, and their job is a joke, and they are power hungry.” Elliot has repeatedly denied saying those words.

Luse said she defended her committee.

“We consider each budget individually,” Luse said she replied to Elliott’s allegations. “We don’t have personal iniatives. We look at budgets based on past spending and the leadership of past years. I defended the committee.”

During his rebuttal, Elliot appeared unprepared. “You can’t prepare for that,” Elliot said in an interview on May 3. During his speech, Elliott addressed some allegations of unprofessional conduct relative to his interactions with Student Organization chair Tina VanSteenbergen and Winiecki. However, he ran out of time and was cut off by HUSC faculty member Prof. George Gaetano, who Maxfield assigned to enforce the speaking time limits.

In addition to Winiecki, 27 others were listed as authors on the resolution. Including Winiecki, 12 were HUSC representatives.

Elfmann’s name was mentioned only once in the resolution, when it alleged that Elliott’s communications and interactions with his vice president has been “ignored, ineffective and entirely inappropriate.”

Vote doesn’t exist in Robert’s Rules

A vote of no confidence is not present in Robert’s Rules of Parliamentary Procedure, the set of rules that governs HUSC general assembly meeting, HUSC vice president Addie Maxfield said.

“It doesn’t exist formally in Robert’s Rules, but people who have knowledge of Robert’s Rules keep it in the back of their minds, because it has happened before,” Maxfield said.

Although the vote may not exist as a formal vote, it nonetheless was allowed to continue. Also, because Robert’s Rules do not specify a vote of no confidence, it is a main motion and thus the entire gathered assembly, including non-HUSC members, can vote pursuant to HUSC’s by-laws.

Congress questions relentlessly

The atmosphere in GLC 100E was not forgiving to Elliott and Elfmann. Nearly every commentator directed a question at one or both of the elected leadership pair.

Because of the expected length of the debate, Maxfield declared that each person could only speak twice on each main motion, and limited speaking time to 45 seconds. She limited Winiecki’s authorship speech, where the author of a resolution is given an opportunity to explain the motion in front of the congress, to four minutes. Because of the seriousness of the allegations, she granted Elliott four minutes of rebuttal immediately following Winiecki’s introduction.

Maxfield also warned the assembly that she would immediately stop a person who she deemed was verbally attacking another. Senior representative Tim McDonald warned the committee that they should not vote for no confidence merely because Elliott was contemplating not appealing a line item in his executive board budget.

Those warnings were hardly necessary, as Maxfield only halted one speaker, Elliott, for what she construed as a personal attack. Except for calling time, the debate went on uninterrupted for nearly 70 minutes.

Winiecki and the resolution’s co-author, VanSteenbergen, said they will bring another resolution calling for Elliott’s resignation at HUSC's final meeting on May 8. Winiecki and VanSteenbergen were prepared to bring that resolution after the congress determined its confidence in the president-elect. That resolution was drafted before the meeting and sent to Maxfield in preparation for its presentation.

Petition used to gather interest

Many of the names on the resolution were listed a petition calling for the vote of no confidence. Luse gathered the petition, which contained 48 names, 31 of which were non-HUSC members.

Of those names, Luse said all but approximately 20 signed the resolution.

Luse said this was because some of the signatures were gathered after Winiecki submitted the resolution to Maxfield. Luse said six people signed the petition after the HUSC general assembly meeting last week.

Pair plans to continue as Pres and VP

Despite HUSC’s lack of confidence in Elliott, Elliott and Elfmann each said that they still plan to take over leadership of HUSC next year.

“I fully intend on working with each of you next year,” Elliott said.

“I plan to finish out the term,” Elfmann said.

Elliot reaffirmed on May 3 that he was not planning to resign.

“Not a chance,” Elliot said.

However, Elfmann admitted that it was going to take some work.

“It’s going to take a lot of work to communication down,” Elfmann said in general assembly.

Elliott has been criticized for what HUSC members see as ignoring the congress. At the meeting he was directly asked by Tara Stephanson about his intent to continue on despite the congress’ lack of confidence.

Elliott responded that he felt that the basis for the allegations were personal in nature and thus did not warrant the vote of no confidence.

“Personal feelings are behind this,” Elliott said.

Others rebutted this characterization.

VanSteenbergen reiterated that the motion was solely about Elliott’s alleged unprofessional conduct and not a byproduct of personal feelings.

“It is not personal,” VanSteenbergen said in an interview after the meeting. Previously, VanSteenbergen worked with Elliott on his honors project, called First Hand, where college students mentored high school students who were mentoring middle school students.

“He gave direction well,” VanSteenbergen said.

The resolution itself, in its second-to-last paragraph, states that the call for a vote of no confidence is “based solely on the overall and obvious lack of professionalism demonstrated by president-elect, Michael Elliott.”

However, almost immediately after Elliott characterized the allegations as personal in nature, the congress displayed its lack of confidence for him by a vote of 54-16.

Executive board worries many

As the Oracle reported last week, Elliott and Elfmann were expected to present their executive board. However, the executive board was still incomplete. As of press time, Elliott was waiting for confirmation from four nominees. Despite that, Elliott, responding to a question posed by HUSC president Kristen Falde, declared that he would present an executive board at the congress’ next meeting, its last scheduled meeting of the general assembly for the year.

Of Elliot’s proposed executive board, only one person, Matrika Bailey-Turner, (Coalition for Social Change chair) has prior HUSC experience. Bailey-Turner was previously a member of CSC. The general lack of experience worries some.

Junior Representative Paul Sawyer said he believes Bailey-Turner is perfect for the position as Coalition for Social Change chair. However, he has reservations about the other proposed executive board members.

“Everyone else, nothing against them personally, but they don’t have the experience to hold those positions,” Sawyer said on May 3.

VanSteenbergen said Elliot cannot put together a board the congress will approve.

“I don’t think it will pass regardless of who he brings forth,” VanSteenbergen said on May 3.

In the assembly meeting, Elliott declined to answer a question posed by the Oracle about who is on his proposed executive board, their positions and who has resigned from what positions, instead deferring to a later interview. However, he did mention that a second person had resigned from a selected position but declined to name the person. Sophomore Dahmon Romness said he was the other person to resign. Romness was to serve as HUSC secretary next year.

“I did not ethically believe I could stand before the body and say that this is good for the students,” Romness said.

However, Romness said he would still serve on Elliott and Elfmann’s executive board. In order for that to happen, Romness said, Elliott would need to reconsider his decisions as of late.

“He’s a fully capable and smart person, but he’s been pissing off so many people, and the wrong people,” Romness said in an interview on May 2. “He’s a smart person who’s making lots of stupid decisions and I’m not sure why.”

Despite the congress’s lack of confidence in Elliot, people are still applying to be on Elliot and Elfmann’s executive board.

While James Yin did not specify if he has confidence in Elliot, he said he was nonetheless applying to be chair of HUSC’s Poltical Affairs Committee because he was doing a service to the congress.

“I’ve got parlimentary procedure experience,” Yin said. “HUSC is in need; it's a call to help HUSC,” Yin said.

Can Elliott restore confidence?

Despite the allegations, many say Elliott does have some hope of restoring the congress’ confidence by improving his communication skills and proposing an executive board the congress will approve.

“He needs to start talking to his VP, start talking and listening to the administration and current HUSC members and propose an exec board that is worthy,” Luse said.

“He needs to propose a group of people that is functional and competent enough to [be executive board members],” Romness said.

“If Michael doesn’t make changes in how he is acting, a resolution for the resignation of the president elect will probaly be proposed,” Luse said.

Sawyer said he believes Elliot cannot regain the congress’s confidence.

“I think he should resign,” Sawyer said in an interview on May 3. “When the voice of the students speak, he needs to listen.” Sawyer is signed on as a co-author of the anticipated resolution calling for Elliot’s resignation.

“Everyone who does not support them now I can’t see them changing their minds over the summer,” Sawyer said.

If Elliot wants to regain the congress’s confidence, Elfmann said, he needs to put together a good executive board.

Luse said she would rather Elliott adapt to the criticisms because of the chaos a resignation would create.

“I would be more happy if he changes what he’s doing, but if (Elliot) resigned that’s fine,” Luse said.

Elliot himself believes that the congress has never had confidence in him.

“I never had it,” Elliot said.

Senior Martin Staehnke said he thinks Elliot should resign.

“Most definitely, at this point he hasn’t given me a reason or another student to think otherwise, especially those who have been involved this year.”

Yin said believed the congress will again have confidence in Elliot’s leadership.

“Eventually, as long as he follows the rules and regulations of HUSC and procedures, then he’ll end up getting along with the members,” Yin said.

CORRECTION: In the May 1 issue of the Oracle in the story "HUSC pres and VP-elect embattled," Caitlin Rose Polivoda's name was misspelled.