Like many of my fellow students I was discouraged to find this email in my inbox on the day of an election. This email has left me with many questions and I would like to present some of those questions here.  

I am curious as to how these endorsements were made, why they were made, and why myself and my fellow students were not invited to this endorsement process. Did each of these candidates come and speak to CHASS council or did the council just make endorsements based on personal connections? Was Dean Braden involved in this process? Why was there not an invitation to CHASS students to be involved in this process sent out in the CHASS listserve two weeks prior? How many people voted in these endorsements? On what basis were these endorsements made? How will CHASS benefit from the election of these specific candidates?

I am confused as to why the CHASS council felt it needed to endorse candidates but more disappointed by the lack of openness in this endorsement process.  To be clear, I do not feel CHASS council should be in the business of endorsing candidates however, If there are going to be endorsements, the process in which we endorse candidates needs to be public, engaging, and competitive.  

Dean Braden, please help us to ensure such an egregious mistake does not happen again in the future.  

We have all seen the results of when the University tries to conduct business behind closed doors, let us make sure we do not make the same mistakes.

Timur Ender

senior, criminology