Spring Break
WSG President Tim Scully defends record following recent Royal Purple staff opinion
Tim Scully
Issue date: 11/4/09 Section: Opinion
I decided to run to be Whitewater Student Government president in October of 2008. At the time I was a member of WSG, serving as the public relations director. It's also important to note that this is only my second year involved with WSG.
I knew the position required a great amount of energy, work, enthusiasm and responsibility, all of which I was ready and willing to commit. Not for my own personal gain you may note, but because of my tremendous love and respect for this great university and its students, faculty and staff.
Recently, there have been allegations, by some within and some outside of WSG, that I might not be doing the best work on behalf of the organization or acting in the best interests of the University. While I hear these concerns loud and clear, not only through rumor, but also through print in the Royal Purple, there are a few things that I need to set straight.
Unfortunately, not one of the concerns addressed in the Royal Purple have been addressed to me through action or comment at a senate meeting or through contact by e-mail, telephone or my office hours (all of which are available to any student who may work in or visit the WSG office).
Upon taking office, then vice president Sara Campeau and I began the process of selecting our executive board. In the past, we were witness to past administrations that did not hold interviews for these positions, nor were applications readily available in a number of different ways. So what did we do? We changed it. We sent a public e-mail, made the applications available on our Web site at WhitewaterSG.org, and had signs made for outside the office.
The result? Over 22 individuals applied for six positions. This was higher than in the past several years.
The accusation that we made decisions based on personal friendships is false. Every single selection was backed up with credentials and experiences to make them the best possible fit for the organization and the senate. While you may not agree, the senate confirmed each one of these individuals at the first meeting of the fall semester.
I knew the position required a great amount of energy, work, enthusiasm and responsibility, all of which I was ready and willing to commit. Not for my own personal gain you may note, but because of my tremendous love and respect for this great university and its students, faculty and staff.
Recently, there have been allegations, by some within and some outside of WSG, that I might not be doing the best work on behalf of the organization or acting in the best interests of the University. While I hear these concerns loud and clear, not only through rumor, but also through print in the Royal Purple, there are a few things that I need to set straight.
Unfortunately, not one of the concerns addressed in the Royal Purple have been addressed to me through action or comment at a senate meeting or through contact by e-mail, telephone or my office hours (all of which are available to any student who may work in or visit the WSG office).
Upon taking office, then vice president Sara Campeau and I began the process of selecting our executive board. In the past, we were witness to past administrations that did not hold interviews for these positions, nor were applications readily available in a number of different ways. So what did we do? We changed it. We sent a public e-mail, made the applications available on our Web site at WhitewaterSG.org, and had signs made for outside the office.
The result? Over 22 individuals applied for six positions. This was higher than in the past several years.
The accusation that we made decisions based on personal friendships is false. Every single selection was backed up with credentials and experiences to make them the best possible fit for the organization and the senate. While you may not agree, the senate confirmed each one of these individuals at the first meeting of the fall semester.
Viewing Comments 1 - 1 of 1
Lexington Steele
posted 11/04/09 @ 5:13 PM CST
Why say "over 22" individuals applied? I can see "over 20," but over 22? Was it 23? 25? 32? Unless 22 and one-half person applied, saying over 22 makes no sense. (Continued…)
Post a Comment