Amidst a valley of accusations the SGA senate made one of its worst decisions October 1st when they decided to remove President Larry O. Rivers from office.
The unfavorable outcome of this sordid tale magnifies the many errors that were made in the process.
Why were the charges against President Rivers not made clear to the student body until the actual trial?
In any relationship, communication is key and as dysfunctional as it may be, the students and SGA are in a relationship. Perhaps SGA doesn’t respect the voters or maybe they don’t trust them, but don’t students deserve to speak on decisions of this magnitude?
Aside from the lack of communication and seemingly spontaneous decision-making, it’s clear that there were other measures that should have been taken to prevent the circus that was the trial. In all meanings of the word, this impeachment was unnecessary. SGA has chosen to remove President Rivers from office, what good will this do? How will the university benefit from a Larry-less SGA six weeks into the year?
No one holds any animosity towards the Senate but they must be held accountable for their own faults through this ordeal.
Was it really just to have a jury composed of the same people that voted for President Rivers’ impeachment? Is Rivers solely responsible for the logjam with the appointment process? The senate failed to confirm the majority of his appointments. Should a former SGA employee have been the prosecutor? These errors should not be taken lightly, nor should they be ignored.
Because of this foolishness, SGA is completely divided. Perhaps the senate should seriously examine its own actions. This is not a game or a show. Whatever decisions are made affect everyone. Let it be known, the SGA’s steps need to be taken cautiously.
Marie Frasier for The Famuan.