A Student Government Senate Impeachment Committee voted 2-1 to not move forward with an investigation after a student submitted an impeachment proceedings memo about SG Senate Pro-Tempore April Parsons.
T.J. Ewin submitted the memo to SG during the August 31 senate meeting. Ewin submitted the memo as a student, though he also currently serves as SG attorney general.
The memo alleged that Parsons had failed to complete some of her duties as pro-tempore, including not updating changes to the SG constitution, statutes and rules of procedure, missing a senate meeting at the beginning of the semester, and not properly maintaining legislation records.
Ewin submitted the memo because “the job had not been done for an extended period of time,” he said. “The pro-tempore job is vital to the functionality of [SG].”
SG officers may be removed from their positions for nonfeasance, defined as “failure to perform an act that is either an official duty or a legal requirement,” according to the SG statutes.
The senate voted to form the senate impeachment committee during the August 31 senate meeting. Senators James Scott, Lauren Reilly, and Charlie Shelmet were approved to serve on the committee, along with Matt Morrin, director of student life and engagement, as an adviser for the committee.
Scott felt that the complaints against Parsons were not severe enough to warrant an impeachment, citing a situation from 2008 in which the SG president at the time used A&S fee money for unauthorized purchases.
Scott called impeachment a “political knife” that should not be used lightly.
“Impeachment is not a political tool to be used in an organization,” Scott said. “Does this have enough gravity, is this powerful enough to do serious harm to the morale of peers?”
Senate President Cory Hebert was present at the beginning of the summer, but was then out of town until the beginning of the fall semester for an internship. While Hebert was absent, Parsons had to complete his duties. (Part of the pro-tempore’s job is to complete the duties of the senate president when he or she is unable to do so.)
Scott served as pro-tempore over the summer while Parsons filled Hebert’s role. “All the duties listed were my responsibility as acting pro-tempore,” Scott said during the senate impeachment committee meeting.
Scott and Reilly voted not to move forward on impeachment proceedings.
Some at the meeting were displeased with the fact that they were not recognized to speak during the meeting. Scott, as chair of the committee, allowed one SG member to voice an opinion during the meeting, but then did not recognize any one else not on the committee to speak.
Student Matt Earl attended the meeting, which he felt was rushed and not treated as seriously as it could have been.
The way the meeting was handled and the lack of investigation into the points addressed in the memo damage the “credibility” of SG and “provides precedence for future student politicians to bend the rules,” Earl said.
Scott said the meeting had a “limited focus,” and that he felt he should not have recognized anyone to speak during the meeting because the purpose was just to address the memo, and not outside issues.
The senate held a vote of confidence before the semester started, giving the senate the opportunity to vote on whether to keep Herbert and Parsons in their roles. The senate voted unanimously for Hebert, and all senators except one, who abstained, voted in favor of Parsons.
Parsons said she was shocked when she met with Hebert on August 27 and he outlined the ways in which Parsons had failed to complete some of her assigned duties.
Parsons said she considered resigning, and missed the Monday, Aug. 29 senate executive meeting because she had planned to submit a resignation letter. However, after thinking about it more, she decided to stay in her position. She planned on apologizing to the senate during the August 31 meeting. But the impeachment proceedings memo was submitted during the meeting.
Parsons said she does not feel she completed some of her duties to the best of her ability, but that it did not warrant impeachment.
“At the end of the day, even though my work wasn’t up to par, and I would be the first to acknowledge that and admit that, I don’t think it warranted impeachment,” Parsons said. “I have put a lot of hard work into Student Government in general in the past four years.”
Hebert said that he thinks the complaints about Parsons job performance detailed in the memo were factual, and that the senate impeachment committee meeting was handled poorly, but that he does not have an opinion about the outcome of the meeting itself.
“As long as the person that holds that position, or holds any position in Student Government, does the job, but most importantly puts an effort forth to do it, we can function as an organization and we can make an impact on our campus,” Hebert said.
Ewin said that he and the others directly involved with the situation have moved on from it, and are ready to accomplish a lot for the school and students this year.
“[Parsons] and myself are looking forward to a good year,” he said.
“I think we can be a good organization,” Parsons said. “We’ve tried so hard and we’ve really grown in the past few years.”
