BY ED VEILLEUX
After spending two-and-a-half hours outside the boardroom waiting, and then forty minutes answering the SGA board’s questions, SGA President Charlie Andrews watched the board pass a motion, 20 to five, calling for his resignation on Feb. 8.
“I’ve expected this to happen before I even started as President of the SGA; I knew that specific members of the SGA board had intentions of planning such actions,” Andrews said.
The Feb. 8 SGA board meeting lasted from 5 p.m. until just after 10 p.m. (a typical SGA board meeting lasts roughly two hours), and after all was said and done Andrews was on the receiving end of the board’s criticism.
“It was time for sincere action to be taken to protect the organization, and I believe that’s what the board did,” SGA Senator Zach Courtemanche said.
A question by Courtemanche during question period, about tension within the SGA executive, sparked Michael Martino, SGA vice-president of issues, to table a motion for the board to go in-camera without the executive present. In-camera means that non-voting members of the board (including media) weren’t allowed to be inside of the room.
Martino explained outside the meeting, during the in-camera period, that having the executive out of the room would allow the board to openly air concerns about all members of the executive.
The SGA executive includes President Charlie Andrews, VP of Services Iain Park , SGA executive administrator Charles Wilson and Martino.
The tension in the office, according to Courtemanche, couldn’t be ignored any longer.
“Those who work closely with the executive, or in the office, become quickly aware that there are tensions that exist, and that came to a head on Wednesday (at the meeting), when it was decided by the board and by the executive, that it was time to have a discussion about those tensions.”
The board spent a little over three hours calling the executive into the room individually to ask them questions and allow them to express their own concerns.
The meeting was in-camera from 6 p.m. until roughly 9:45 p.m., and within that time the board developed two motions, which were presented when the meeting opened back up to the public.
The first motion defined a set of directives for the executive to follow, which includes having to report more frequently to the board and in more detail, holding weekly executive meetings and, more specifically, that President Charlie Andrews “collaborate productively with the Vice Presidents and relevant interest groups in all tasks undertaken, acting as a facilitator rather than taking unilateral action or micromanaging.”
Andrews said he has always kept students in mind, while leading the SGA.
“The board should not be concerned over my leadership,” Andrews said. “I have always put the students first in accordance to the SGA mission statement, which is the sole purpose of a student union.”
The first motion passed with a vote of 26 for, and one against.
The second motion asked for Andrews’ resignation.
The motion passed with a vote of 20 for, and five against.
SGA Senator Mark Mancini said the next step, if Andrews doesn’t resign, will come after the board considers how closely the president follows the directives asked of him by the board, as well as the report that is to be presented on the subject at the next board meeting on Feb. 29.
Mancini said the decision and the vote showed that the board is working well together, and that the direction of the association is clear.
“The board did its job and presented a very united front,” Mancini said. “It’s very important that we look at the fact that the board made it very clear what the next step should be for the SGA.”
The in-camera meeting doesn’t sit well with Andrews.
“Despite all of the false and slanderous information discussed in the ‘confidential’ meeting, which was exposed; I am remaining focused and dedicated to the students.”
Senator Courtemanche said how Andrews handles the board’s decision will show how the SGA president feels about the SGA board.
“If President Andrews decides not to follow the request from the board to resign, it will be very clear that he is disagreeing with a board decision that was supported 20 to five. Excluding abstentions, that is an 80 per cent mandate by the board. Mister Andrews would be explicitly stating that he does not have an interest in following the wishes of an 80 per cent united board.”
The SGA president said his attention is focused on helping his constituents.
“I am focused on caring for the students of the SGA, protecting their student rights, and striving to ensure they have a meaningful experience at Laurentian University. I am accountable to the students of the SGA, and I will always support them to the best of my abilities.”
11 comments
These recent decisions by the excecutive are out of line and without basis. Not to mention the slanderous and malicious comments against the Best president I’ve seen over my 4 years here. Its time the SGa. Membership stands up and defends Charlie and ensures a democratic and fair process prevails. Nobody deserves to (treated the way he has after doing so much duuring his tenure!
For someone who is all for the students better interest, he sure acts selfishly on many accounts and makes certain students feel uncomfortable. He can be a very likable individual but I think he uses that knowledge to his advantage (and to somes students unadvantage). I know from personal experience that I came to trust him through his ability to be overly friendly and it only taught me to use better discretion in the future. The way a president conducts himself during social relationships, I believe should also be considered in his ability to lead the SGA, especially when this conduct is contradictory to his mission statement to the student body. People should not have to feel uncomfortable, and student body presidents should not be allowed to abuse their power.
If the issue is simply tensions between the president and two vice presidents, why is the student body not brought in to consider which/who they feel is more important. I know that in three years here I’ve had many, many difficulties with the services/faculty at Laurentian, and this year has been hands-down the easiest for dealing with them as I could message Charlie and receive a reply within, usually, 10 minutes. It’s frustrating knowing that one of the only things us students have control over, is so easily taken away.
2 words. Witch Hunt.
Lol.
I appreciate that Lambda is able to report on topics without taking sides. Thank you for the article.
Personally, Charlie has been extremely helpful and I’m not even an SGA student! I considered switching over to the SGA but this huge debate and mess made me think twice.
As for your comment Amber, could you please provide support to your argument? You say he acts selfishly on many accounts and he makes certains students feel uncomfortable. Any examples?
a fucking dubstep concert are you kidding me
Charlie always irritated me. Him and his gaggle of teenage girls in a frenzy over his ridiculously egotEstical (seewhatIdidthere) flamboyancy. The novelty of having a President who is a professional delegator is retarded. This dude has got to gtfo.
I think that there are 2 months left in school, let him finish his term and vote accordingly in the next election. No use of kicking him out when school is almost finished.
The comments about Charlie making people feel uncomfortable isn’t a reason he should be removed from the SGA. He was elected regardless of social status, sexual orientation, gender etc… I find it disheartning that people have taken their own personal strifes with CHarlie and use this very public forum to critique him as a leader. He may not be your best friend, but that doesn’t mean he isn’t qualified to be a leader. In fact while he has led the SGA he has been the quickest to respond to student queries in e-mails in all the time I’ve spent here, he’s successfully used social media to raise attendance at SGA events… he has undertaken projects to remodel the pub and generally made several attempts to make student life at Laurentian better.
You may not agree with his methods but the intentions were there. He may have his faults but “gaggle of teenage girls in a frenzy over his ridiculously egotistical flamboyancy” or “People should not have to feel uncomfortable” aren’t reasons to be asked to resign. Any leader will not get along with everyone, there will always be some MINORITY which will be dissatisfied in some way. The truth is people aren’t uncomfortable they voted him in! Everyone is entitled to their opinion but personally I’d like to know that he was asked to resign due to misconduct not a different personality type that irritated the wrong people.
I am sure Charlie could be a challenge to work with, but I’ve also had the opportunity to meet people such as Mark Maccini, Zach Courtemanche, to name a few who haven’t wanted Charlie in control of the SGA since he was elected. It seems to me like the un-elected SGA has spoken for the students. Charlie I’m sure has seen a lot of opposition within that office and I can understand why the communication would be poor and the tensions high in that office. If the administration of the SGA has failed, it’s not only the president, a good VP … works with the president not against. There are far more issues going on within the SGA that the students deserve to have a say about. His term is almost over exams are in a couple weeks are we really asking him to resign now? Is this an exercise in futility or an opportunity to embarrass Charlie, who’s being put through the ringer by a hostile board. This is bullying to a whole new level, all this accomplished is slanderous and ugly remarks about candidates and SGA board members/ elected members, and portray the SGA in such a negative light. If CHarlie resigns who will replace him for the few weeks that remain? How’s the learning curve on that job? Someone could learn it and do a better job than Charlie in a few short weeks? Congradulations SGA you’ve made the biggest student organization on campus look like a group of mismanaged hot heads who can’t work together to accomplish your goal MAKE LIFE BETTER FOR ALL STUDENTS! REPRESENT WHO ELECTED YOU!