We supported Kevin Washo, Jr because we were impressed with his platform regarding the role of a president. He understands that a president cannot make all these promises just to get elected when the role of the president is to manage the board and shepherd the board. He wants to manage it well and work with all governance groups inviting their presidents to the SGB retreat so that they can feel their needs are being addressed. He also wants to be a voice for smaller groups on campus. He is Greek but has never come of as Greeks alone are his constituency. We believe he really cares for the entire student body as evidenced by what he has already accomplished on board. One of the issues he ran last year was to create a scholarship database for all students. He ran for board because he cared for the student body and we are pleased that the scholarship database will be available by summer. He has kept his promise and did not ignore it after being elected. We believe as a president, he can take the new board in the right direction and put respect back in SGB making it well known on campus.

 Express Your View

We supported George Ayub because we liked his idea of wanting to implement online registration for students so they need not always come to campus or wait in long lines at Thackery Hall to register. We believe this service will benefit you as a student on this campus. Also, Ayub has been involved in putting the scholarship database online that was Washo’s platform the year before.. With Washo as SGB president, and Ayub as board member, we believe they can work together well. We also believe he has the skills to be a good board member as he currently serves as the president of the governance group: Asian Student Alliance!

We supported Andy Hutelmyer of the ‘Action 2003: Taking Action, Getting Results’ Slate because they want to improve communication between governance groups and other organizations. The way they wants to do this is trying to get together all presidents of governance groups, varsity groups, service groups, and so on together and divide them into their subgroups twice each month so they can discuss and collaborate on what each other is doing during a roundtable discussion. We believe this is one way to bridge the gap between so many student organizations on campus and it is an attainable goal.

We also love their idea of working to make teacher evaluations public. Currently, this cannot be done and they intend to change that by having a student group be involved in doing the evaluations modeled after current evaluations. We also believe Hutelmyer will be a good asset for presidential candidate Washo and board candidate Ayub who have already worked on academic oriented issues.

These issues especially the teacher evaluations being made public will benefit you to know what instructor to take and what instructor not to take.

We supported Jason Somma of ‘Action 2003: Taking Action, Getting Results’ slate because they want to make changes to the allocations process. Currently, we do not know what activities our student activity fee funds. They want to have a online database created where every student can see where their money is going to and which organizations are getting what. We think this is a great idea to ensure that no student organization is monopolizing the activities fee. We believe without the online database informing how much money each organization gets, there is no accountability and allocations can frivolously give a lot to one organization and others maybe excluded. It is only fair that you as a student get to see what your fee is paying for. We believe it is an attainable goal.

With Ayub’s experience in creating a scholarship database, he will be a valuable asset to work with Somma and his slate.

We also believe their desire to make the SORC center more known will benefit every student or governance group because they can know exactly what SORC can do for them. Just like there is an allocations manual, they want to work on a SORC manual for the student organizations. We think this is a great idea for students too.

Finally, they want to work on lobbying Harrisburg and the University on issues that matter to you especially regarding tuition. We believe all the issues they are running on will benefit you.

We supported John Martin of ‘Action 2003: Taking Action, Getting Results’ Slate because they want to let the student body know that candidates in the past make a lot of promises to you all about a lot of things but have been unable to deliver because they have been beyond the scope of SGB.

What Action 2003 believes is that SGB can make small incremental changes that are within the scope of SGB that make an immediate impact on students’ lives. We believe this is a noble cause and attainable. We also believe their desire to have a shuttle to go to the Strip District more often is a good idea. We also believe their desire to work with the Athletic Department to ensure more tickets are available to students than corporate people and making the Petersen Event Center more student oriented are issues that will benefit the student body.

We believe with Washo’s experience in working with the Athletic Department, Martin will make a good asset to the board having Washo as their president.

We support Jesse Horstmann of ‘The Voice for the Student Slate’ because they want to make students aware of what is out there for them especially through different organizations. There are programs and activities that many students do not know about such as you can get a lawyer for $20.00 through SGB, etc that they want to make more aware to the student body. They also want to promote as many organizations on campus and what they offer to the students. We believe with their desire to make organizations’ activities more public, it is an asset to the board and they can work well with Ayub, and the Action 2003 slate.

We also believe their desire to create a 24/hr place for students to study and especially a 24-hour hotline for students in trouble is very beneficial. We love this idea about a 24/hr hotline if any student is in trouble.

We support Robert Sully of ‘The Voice of the Student’ Slate because they really want to be the voice for the student. They believe when candidates are elected they represent the entire student body. They realize not all students are involved in groups and they wanted to think about what matters the most for the common student.

With this in mind, they wanted to work on making the Petersen Event Center more student-oriented and making more tickets available for students. With that desire, their slate can work well with ‘Action 2003: Take Action, Get Results’ Slate if elected and they can get a lot of help from Washo, if he is elected as their board president.

We also believe their desire to develop a center to help students curb their credit card debts is a noble cause and that you should make your vote count and if you vote for them, they will make sure they represent every student on campus.

We would not have supported Liz Culliton of ‘Breaking the Mold’ Slate if she just ran on the issue of changing the under-aged drinking policy because it would be similar to Stephen Flemming’s desire but we believe she has another issue she is running on that will be very helpful to you as a student.

She wants to implement a ‘Pick a Prof Service’ that is already available on 40 campuses. It is a compilation of information from students ranging from what kind of grades they are getting in the class to what they think about the professor. She believes SGB has tried it before but it did not go as planned but they are aware of the problems and she wants to make it happen. We believe this will definitely benefit the student body to know what each professor is like before they register for that professor’s class.

We believe Culliton will make a huge asset to the board especially working with the ‘Action 2003: Taking Action, Getting Results’ board candidates if elected because they want to work on a teacher evaluation process too. She can also work well with Ayub who is currently involved as the Academic Chair, if he is elected to board. Finally, she can work well with her slate mate Washo, as he serves as board president if she and him are elected.

We supported Igor Voloshen because of his involvement with Pennsylvania Governor’s School of International Studies two years ago. We believe he has a lot of experience handling different conflict situations and can work well with a board because he was involved in a lot of group decisions when he was with PGSIS 2000.

More importantly, we believe his desire to get reform into the residential halls is attainable and can be done. Finally, he wants to work in making the Petersen Event Center more students’ accessible and see more student involvement. If elected he wants to be your voice on student government board and voice your concerns on student activities. We believe he will make an asset to the board working well with ‘Action 2003’ and ‘Voice of the Student’ slates if all of them are elected because one of their focuses is the Petersen Event Center. We believe he can work well with Washo, if he is elected president.

In writing about those we supported, we want to remind you that you could be reading this after the elections are over. If that is the case, this will serve to remind you those we thought would have served you well on board. We also want you to know that we supported 8 candidates for board but you can only vote for 5. Please decide which 5 candidates deserve your vote. It is also possible that the candidates we did not support get elected. Whoever gets elected, the Pittsburgh Standard intends to give fair courage and work with the president and board.

 Express Your View