STUDENT GOVERNMENT REVOTE CALLED AT SEMO

Complaints from three Southeast Missouri State University students prompted a judicial committee to order another election for some student government candidates.

Loren Rullman, director of the University Center and faculty adviser to student government, said an election for only student senate positions will be held in Group Housing and Towers on May 7.

Student government off-campus senator Tom Shupe brought his list of complaints to an open judicial hearing Monday night. He told the five-member committee that he doesn't believe the April 2-3 election was intentionally tampered with, but the inefficient handling of polling centers, ballots and lack of rigid compliance with university bylaws made election results highly suspect.

Shupe, who was re-elected April 3, said he was bringing those complaints to the hearing because he wants elections done right.

Shupe's complaints included a list of candidates that was left off an information package at the voting center at Group Housing. The list was biographies of candidates to help in voter selection.

The mistake was not caught until after 3:15 p.m. April 3. At that time, election officials threw out all the votes from that center and attempted to contact those voters to have them return and cast new ballots.

Shupe said not all of the voters were able to return. He said the difference in the number of people who voted the first time and those who voted again could have changed the outcome of at least two elections.

Shupe also said some voters living in Towers were listed as off-campus voters by the computer. These people were not allowed to vote in the polling center where they lived and were told they had to go to a different center. Shupe said some of these people may not have made the trip off campus to cast their vote and that may have changed the outcome of some elections.

Bylaws were not followed in the collection of candidate biographies, Shupe said. Candidates were required to turn in their biographies seven days before the election instead of the five days required by school policy.

Shupe said the candidates who turned in the information were more successful in the election than those who didn't. He said it is possible that those candidates who did not turn in their information would have if they had been given the additional two days.

Shupe said it is not necessary to throw out the entire election but at least some races should be contested again.

Student adviser Jim Pelfry asked Shupe whether he felt any candidate was able to gain an advantage as a result.

"It could be argued that all of the candidates were playing on the same field," Pelfry said.

Complaints were also voiced by university students Wes Spradling and Marissa LeClaire.

Spradling, who lost his bid for student senate, questioned the number of votes he received in the election. He said the number of his fraternity members who had voted for him was higher by 12 votes than his total vote count.

LeClaire said the way the candidates were listed on ballots was confusing and may have led to students casting their votes inaccurately.

Doug Downs, student election chairperson, admitted to the committee that there were some problems with the election. But, he said, he did not believe the problems were enough to influence the outcome of the election nor did they merit having the results discarded.