Both USG referenda pass; Panda retains 2010 presidency

The entire USG fall social budget of $60,000 and any remaining funds from the spring social budget, as well as $20,000 from the Senate Pilot Projects budget, will be donated to the Pace Center.

“We at Pace want to express our gratitude and compliment the students on the quality of their debate and thoughtfulness and willingness to make a statement about public service,” Pace Center Director Kiki Jamieson said in an e-mail. “The staff and student leaders hope this encourages even more students to be civically engaged.”

Two binding referenda introduced by Diemand-Yauman and supported by the USG Senate proposed reallocating some of the USG’s social and Senate projects budgets to the Pace Center as well as or instead of the Annual Giving fund.

“I think it’s fantastic that this money is going to give undergraduates more opportunities to help communities that are being hit severely by the economic downturn.,” Diemand-Yauman said in an e-mail.

On the question regarding the social budget, 1,008 students selected the option of donating the money to student-initiated service projects as their first choice, while 941 students voted not to donate the funds and 465 voted to donate the money to Annual Giving.

With the two funding referenda, the USG used the method of Single Transferable Voting, in which voters rank their preferences, to determine the final outcome of the vote. The option of donating the funds to Annual Giving received the fewest first-choice votes on the first ballot, while the other two options failed to garner majorities. So the second-choice votes of those students who chose to give funds to Annual Giving were considered instead of their first preferences. After this redistribution, the option of donating funds to student-initiated projects won a 1,387-vote majority, while the option of not donating the funds at all received 1,011 votes.

On the question about the Senate Pilot Projects budget, 1,262 students ranked the option of donating the money to student-initiated service projects as their first choice, while 659 students voted not to donate the funds and 430 voted to donate that money to Annual Giving.

Diemand-Yauman said he “plan[s] on working closely with student leaders in community house, [the Student Volunteers Council] and Pace to develop a detailed plan that will serve to enable undergraduates to participate in community service efforts.”

Diemand-Yauman explained that, as “the USG is steward of these funds, it’s important that there be complete transparency in how the funds are being used.” He said he will be asking for reports about how the money is used, which will be made available on the USG website.

He also acknowledged that the student body’s decision to pass the referendum has symbolic and pragmatic importance.

“Yes, this act is very symbolic and speaks to our university’s dedication to service,” Diemand-Yauman said. “However, beyond the symbolism, this donation is a pragmatic application of funds, as it will significantly impact students’ abilities to volunteer real time and energy, which one could argue is far more powerful than any sort of symbolism.”

Class elections

Get the best of the ‘Prince’ delivered straight to your inbox. Subscribe now »

Incumbent Class of 2010 president Aditya Panda won re-election, handily defeating current Class of 2010 secretary Phoebe Jin. Panda won 499 votes out of the 657 cast.

“I was cautiously optimistic [about the election],” Panda said, adding that he expected to win, but not by such a large margin.

“I’m very excited to be working with the board next year,” he said, but he declined to comment on any specific plans for the coming year.

In the only other contested race for a position in the Class of 2010 government, Jacob Kosior cruised to victory with 417 votes over Eric Finkelstein and his 186 votes.

Class of 2011 vice president Michael Perl won re-election over challenger Shannon Mercer by just 22 votes out of the 652 votes cast. Class of 2011 social chair EJ Chi was re-elected with 399 votes, defeating Nick Mora, who had only 236.

Class of 2012 president Lindy Li fended off a challenge from Damjan Korac, with Li getting 468 votes to Korac’s 236.

“I’m really humbled and honored and happy,” Li said of her win. “I’m glad that we were able to retain all the officers we could keep because we have wonderful chemistry.”

In the five-person race for 2012 vice president, John Monagle finished first with 183 votes out of the 682 cast, and Dominick Pugliese finished second with 168 votes. The two will compete in a runoff, which will be held on Monday beginning at noon.

“I was excited to see that I had done well in the first part of voting — excited to see my name there and happy to still be in the race,” Monagle said.

Pugliese said he was excited by the fact he and Monagle were within 20 votes of each other. “Because it’s such a close margin, the next round of the campaign will be a lot of fun,” he said.

Class of 2012 treasurer Austin Holliman won re-election with 502 votes, turning back a challenge from Grace Zhu, who took in 180 votes. Angela Groves was narrowly elected Class of 2012 secretary over Christine Blauvelt by a 19-vote margin out of the 645 tallies cast.

Other referenda

By a 1,884-414 vote, students passed a referendum submitted by Jacob Aronson ’11 requiring the USG to release vote totals in all of its elections. Aronson is also a senior copy editor for The Daily Princetonian.

By more than a two-to-one margin, students supported a provision of a referendum submitted by Eric Kang ’10 asking USG members to sign a pledge that they will not accept letters of recommendation from University administrators. Students also supported the provision of that referendum requiring candidates for USG offices to sign the pledge as an official part of formally declaring their candidacies.

That provision also requires the USG to disclose on the ballots which candidates had not signed the pledge. Kang is also a columnist for the ‘Prince.’

Responses to survey questions submitted by Kyle Smith ’09 showed support from students for top University administrators. Of the more than 2,300 students who responded, 68 percent said they approve or strongly approve of “the way top-level administrators ... have been running Princeton.”

These responses show a marked increase in student approval of the administration from last year, when Smith’s referendum also appeared on the spring elections ballot. In 2008, 43.6 percent of the nearly 1,900 students who participated said that they approved or strongly approved of the manner in which top administrators managed the University.

Fifty-one percent of students in this year’s election said they believe the “major decisions” those administrators have made in recent years have “led to an improvement in the overall quality of student life at Princeton,” though last year only 21 percent of student voters said they thought this was the case.

And a full 75 percent said they feel that top-level administrators “listen to student input while creating substantial campus policies.” Last year, just 18 percent of students said they thought the administration listened to student concerns.