CSU East Bay’s Associated Students Incorporated (ASI) currently has an empty board of directors position, as last spring’s election had a graduating student running for a position he would not hold this academic year.
The contentious issue is what will be done on ASI’s part to fill that position, as many students question whether it was an ethical decision made by current ASI directors to place Joe Tafoya as Director of Environmental Affairs.
Many students question if placing outgoing Tafoya in this position was purposefully done so ASI can then place someone of their choosing and not someone who was democratically elected for that position after he left.
Tafoya declined to comment on the matter.
ASI President Christopher Prado said Tafoya was not placed as filler, and if anything he was under the assumption Tafoya might continue as a student the following year.
“I know in the past that definitely has been done,” said Prado regarding past ASI elections. “But no, that was not my initial reason for having Joe Tafoya in the position.”
Heather Harbeck, who was initially running with Prado’s “Your V.O.I.C.E.” slate for the Director of Environmental Affairs, simply calls the affair a “cop-out.”
Harbeck, who firmly stated she believes Tafoya was placed as filler on purpose because it was “widely” known throughout ASI that Tafoya was graduating, said it was a “poor decision” by ASI and in the end will only hurt students and a supposed democratic process on campus.
“I think students should pay attention to this because there is a lot more politics than they think there is,” she said. “They should open their eyes and actually look at what’s going on, and when they actually look at the facts and the details and everything like that, it’s kind of messed up what’s happening.”
Prado said the position will not be filled behind closed doors, rather, he hopes to get that position filled as soon as possible by students who want to be a part of their student government on campus by submitting their applications to ASI.
Stating that everybody will have the opportunity to apply, the decision as to who will be hired will be finalized through “the already elected representatives of the student body,” and not through an election.
Yet amongst the scandal and gossip surrounding the controversy underlies the main issue regarding campus student government and how active students are in the process.
While students are able to vote through Blackboard at the end of Spring Quarter for next year’s executive team, the fact that an issue such as Tafoya and the Environmental position occurred without much notice, many say, proves students are not keeping their elected representatives in check or simply even under a much needed radar.
ASI student elected board of directors are responsible for a great deal of issues concerning student tuition fees and how they are being used to “supplement and support their college experience,” and thus many say more should be done to make sure ASI is properly doing their jobs.
According to Samantha Calderon, a former ASI Director of Legislative Affairs, students should care more about what goes on with their tuition fees and especially how ASI deals with them.
In her experience, she said, students either do not seem to care about the process or look upon student government without much attention which allows ASI to take many shortcuts where they shouldn’t.
“ASI likes to keep their wheels turning about without any glitches, they have a controlled way of doing things that many students might not be aware of,” said Calderon. “That’s how they keep it kosher.”
Calderon said this issue should alert students to keep a watchful eye on ASI as it benefits their experiences at CSUEB and to feel they have made an impact on campus to keep the politicians in line.
Only with an active participation and focus, many like Calderon say, will ASI be streamlined to perform more efficiently and truly for students.
Early into the 2011-2012 academic year, Harbeck and Calderon agree, there is no better time for CSUEB students to let ASI know they are being watched vigilantly and ardently.
“Situations like this, it simply ruins the integrity of the whole point of an election and the nature of what it should be,” said Calderon. “It’s not exactly a huge problem, but it doesn’t introduce anything properly as to what a democracy on campus ought to be.”