One of the most important jobs we have as an Executive Board — one we take very seriously — is endorsing candidates for the Student Association E-Board every year. This is arguably one of the most important elections in which any student will vote. These people are the conduits between the students and the administration. They decide how our Student Activity Fee is spent, who comes for Spring Fling and advocate on our behalf in academic and conduct affairs. These are our choices for each position, and while we hope that you agree with our reasons and vote for the best candidates, it is important that everyone cast a vote on Friday.
Vice President for Academic Affairs — Robert Pim
Vote for Robert Pim if you liked Don Greenberg as VPAA. Pim is the clear choice. As an assistant to the current VPAA, he’s worked on a number of successful projects such as the Program for Undergraduate Guidance and a GenEd appeal process. But Pim’s new ideas set him apart from other experienced candidates. He seeks to implement an individualized minor program and a Bill of Rights for the Student Code of Conduct. Unlike many prospective SA candidates, Pim’s ideas are feasible and, well, good. We’re confident he’ll be able to meet his goals based on his prior experience and relationships with administrators. Greenberg has been a solid VPAA and Pim will be a solid sequel.
Steven Lazickas is a quality contender, but he failed to propose any innovative projects. He’d like to continue the good work done by Don Greenberg and improve on existing Advocacy and Mentoring Programs. As the current Chairman of the Student Life and Academics Committee, Lazickas possesses the experience to deliver on his platform. He just might not bring any fresh ideas to the position.
Amanda Baker lacks the same level of experience as her opponents. Her proposals to improve services for students with disabilities and the ESL program make sense, but these are plans she has already started, and continues to work on without the VPAA title. Her plans to increase the number of undergraduate teaching assistants and end the option for students to test out of courses seem out of touch.
Vice President for Multicultural Affairs — None
Epiphany Munoz is running unopposed. It would seem that our endorsement would be a no-brainer. It is. We the E-Board cannot, in good conscience, endorse Munoz for this position. She came into her meeting with Pipe Dream staff with no speech prepared and no solid platform to run on. Frankly, it seems like she doesn’t even know what the job entails. She’s been to “a couple” of Intercultural Awareness Committee meetings, ever. If she can’t be bothered to take the position seriously during the campaigning period, we shudder to think what she’ll do if she gets it. It is for this reason that we encourage you, the voter, to write in a name — any name at all — when voting for VPMA. If she receives less than 40 percent of the vote, the Planning, Research, and Election committee will have to revisit the election for this position. The VPMA position is more important now than it has been in years — especially considering recent racial and cultural tensions that BU has experienced — and it needs somebody who can do the job. Nearly every other candidate walked into our office this year with a plan to increase cultural competency on this campus, and the VPMA candidate’s plan essentially boiled down to, “I’ll talk to students of color one-on-one.” This could be such an important position; it would be a shame to see an under-qualified and unprepared candidate put this role to waste next year.
Vice President for Programming — Bernadette Machuca
Bernadette Machuca is by a considerable margin the most experienced candidate running for this position, and the only viable one. She’s been a part of every committee within the SA Programming Board; her opponent James Kuo has been a part of SAPB for only one semester, years ago. Machuca isn’t as good of a communicator or speaker as Kuo, sure, but she has considerably more mastery of the relevant issues: She’s Concerts Chair, arguably the most important chair within the SAPB, so she knows how to book a concert, and she understands how to deal with the SAPB’s budget deficit. However, we find her plan to attend all the general body meetings on campus to be an impractical way of gauging what kind of programming students want. For a School of Management student, Kuo’s ideas for managing the deficit are bizarre. He’s merely hoping that big companies will pay to sponsor Spring Fling. Another part of his plan is to have more photographers at events, and then ask the Binghamton University administration to give the SAPB more money because the photographed students will have more memories of Binghamton and will therefore donate more to the University in the future. We’re all for more photographers, but let’s not pretend that’s an actual economic policy. Machuca, on the other hand, has been working closely with current VPP Stephanie Zagreda all year to manage the budget. One request, Machuca: Don’t be too stingy with money! Let’s get some great concerts.
Executive Vice President — Zach Vigliani
If any of the positions this year end in a runoff, it will be this one. There is a large field of candidates with no clear front runner. We’re picking Zach Vigliani, but there are a few good candidates here, and we won’t be surprised if it requires another round of voting.
Jared Skwiersky wants to move more functionality to B-Engaged, which should automatically disqualify him. Nicholas Ferrara wants to clarify the reasons why specific charters are denied, which seems like a good idea, but he just doesn’t have much experience. He’s a transfer sophomore, and while he spends a lot of time with Student Congress, he doesn’t seem to spend a lot of time with actual student groups. He obviously has a lot of passion for this campus, but we want to see him try again next year. James Sereno is plenty experienced, having been on several councils (he was also, until recently, a writer for Pipe Dream). Part of his plan is to create an app that would track where OCCT buses are by GPS, as well as synchronize B-Line and B-Calendar. That sounds cool, but we’re not exactly sure what it has to do with the EVP office, or if he can even pull it off. Furthermore, his plan to help every student become a member of any student group doesn’t sound great — there’s already language required in each group’s constitution to allow anyone to join, and otherwise, groups should be able to have control over their own membership. It isn’t something SA groups actually seem to want.
And then there’s Zachary Vigliani, another experienced candidate. As a current assistant to the SA president, he knows the SA inside and out. He wants to make it easier for students to track the progress of their intent to charter form by putting the process online, which sounds great. The only bone to pick with him is that he wants to formalize the hiring process for student groups — there’s no real evidence that the status quo doesn’t already work. Otherwise, godspeed, Zach.
Vice President for Finance — Kate Tashman
This is by far the easiest and clearest choice in this election. Her opponent Mike Sabony isn’t a bad candidate. We like his idea to put the Treasurers’ exam online in the summer to let student organizations hit the ground running when classes start for fall semester. In another election, we might be endorsing him here. But this year, Tashman blows him out of the water.
Only a sophomore, Tashman has already made her mark on campus. She chaired the PRE committee, which was in charge of dealing with last year’s contentious and complicated runoff elections, as a freshman. Her experience as an assistant under the current VPF, Tom Sheehan, has given her experience we find invaluable. Tashman is also currently the only on-campus member of the OCCT board of directors, which will prove useful as the CFO of OCCT next year. Overall, it is clear that Tashman knows the position inside and out, and she is familiar with the innerworkings of the SA like no other candidate. She has even rewritten parts of the student handbook. If any position requires experience, it is the VPF.
President — Dillon Schade
Though both candidates are qualified and have strong ideas, the E-Board is endorsing Dillon Schade for SA President. Yes, Max Bartell is a pretty good orator and certainly acts the part, but we can’t shake the feeling that he’s running for president simply for the sake of being president — a big part of his platform was that everyone know who he is and what his position is. His austerity measures seem a bit much, though we do really like his idea to create an e-petition system for students to voice grievances within the University. Ultimately, it seemed like his vision of an SA president is someone who simply stays out of students’ way. His small government message seemed inappropriate for the Student Association. Schade, on the other hand, has relevant experience in the SA as a current assistant to the EVP. His eagerness to help OCCT and Harpur’s Ferry expand is also welcome. However, if elected, we would like to see him focus more on improving life for current students rather than currying favor with alumni. Neither of these candidates would make a bad president, but Schade already has many connections and relationships with administrators, which will make the transition smoother and enable him to get to work for the students faster.