Officials expect clean end to contest

After weeks of campaigning, dozens of stump speeches and countless handshakes, student body president candidates Seke Ballard and Seth Dearmin are ready for the election to come to a close tonight.

Today, students will determine which of the two candidates will represent their interests next year.

Ballard seeks to revitalize academics on campus by introducing an endowed distinguished speaker series, reopening many campus computer labs and allowing students to access their professors’ evaluations.

Dearmin promises to add convenience to students’ lives by providing a farmers’ market on campus, distributing condoms in every residence hall and expanding wireless Internet connections to Franklin Street.

Both candidates are ready to hear the students’ decision. “It’s been an exciting experience,” Ballard said. “I’m ready to see what the student body thinks.”

And elections officials are confident that a winner will emerge tonight — unlike on the night of last year’s runoff, when a two-week-long scandal emerged and delayed results.

Until the 11th hour of the 2004 runoff election, student leaders also had anticipated a smooth process. But last-minute allegations of campaign violations delayed the announcement of the new student body president.

The allegations became even more contentious after the announcement that candidate Lily West led Matt Calabria by a mere seven votes out of the total 6,120 cast in the race.

After several days of uncertainty, the Board of Elections held a hearing on the charges against both candidates. They ruled that the allegations against Calabria were not substantiated but found West guilty of using of an illegal campaign worker to solicit votes.

Board members opted to hold a second runoff election in early March and levied a financial punishment against West, severely inhibiting her campaign.

Election officials charged West even though they said they did not believe she was aware of the actions of her campaign worker.

In addition to extending the campaign, the ruling sent a message to every subsequent candidate for student office: Pleading ignorance of campaign violations is not an acceptable defense.

Candidates this year have increased dialogue with their staff and the elections board to prevent a mishap that could similarly cripple a campaign, said Heather Sidden, chairwoman of the Board of Elections.

“We’ve had lots of conversations with the candidates — not about this particular incident — just about being preventive and looking out for their campaign workers,” she said.

In discussions with candidates, the board has underscored the importance of watching out for workers who, despite the best of intentions, could break an elections rule, Sidden said. “Every candidate knows the rules, but sometimes their friends, who want to help, mess things up,” she said.

Dearmin and Ballard both said they are confident that their staffs are educated about campaign violations. Dearmin said he has worked to ensure that everyone affiliated with his campaign stays within the boundaries of election laws.

“Making sure that everyone is in the know and is on the same page has been the big thing,” he said.

Student leaders also have taken steps to ensure that, in the event of a scandal, elections officials will be better equipped to react.

During last year’s scandal, the elections board faced vague passages in the Student Code that impeded action.

In response student leaders have worked to clarify some of the Code’s more ambiguous passages this year.

Student Solicitor General Matt Liles, who was a student body president candidate during the 2004 general election, led a group that drafted amendments to the Code during the summer.

Liles said the group spent about two weeks analyzing Title VI, the section of the Code that deals with student elections.

“There were a lot of people, including Board of Elections people and student leaders, who knew about areas that rubbed, knew about loopholes, knew about areas that were inconsistent — until we closed them,” he said.

Student Congress approved several of the group’s proposed amendments in the fall.

Sidden said that the changes are ultimately worth the increased workload they’ve created for elections officials and candidates.

“I think it’s definitely improved the process,” she said. “It makes it more laborious, but I think it’s worth it. We don’t want anything like last year to happen this year.”

Contact the University Editor at udesk@unc.edu.