Oregon Action Team executive ticket Michelle Haley and Ted Sebastian will be “permanently and irrevocably” removed from the ASUO ballot today, according to a ruling the ASUO Elections Board released Tuesday at 10 p.m.
The ruling came in response to a grievance that alleged Oregon Action Team candidates supplied underage volunteers with alcohol in exchange for campaign support. An affiliate of the True Blue Student Coalition filed the grievance.
The decision said the board obtained evidence that Haley’s “campaign was aware that said party was going to take place and that some members” of the Oregon Action Team “would be putting stickers on items to be handed out at said party.”
The ruling states all Oregon Action Team candidates will be removed from the ballot on Friday unless the campaign gives the elections board the names of all persons who attended the party. If the campaign gives the names of those involved, only those who are candidates will be removed from the ballot.
ASUO Elections Coordinator Aaron Tuttle implied he had few options for sanctioning the campaign because Oregon law prohibits restrictions on campaign finances and other campaigning activities.
Tuttle said the board based its decision on the information provided in the grievance as well as a Facebook message between Haley and a person Tuttle refused to identify. Tuttle said he left the evidence in the ASUO office and did not have access to it at home late Wednesday night.
Tuttle said in the message, “Basically, Michelle expresses that the members of her campaign shouldn’t throw said party but it was done anyway,” even though Oregon Action Team Campaign Manager Marcus Krieg and vice presidential candidate Ted Sebastian told them not to throw the party.
The message indicated the party did not take place at a candidate’s house, Tuttle said, and that Haley and Sebastian “were going to accept any consequences that come from this issue.”
Haley refused to confirm the existence of such a message, whether the party took place or what she expected to occur next.
“Our campaign has been honest, sincere and run with integrity from the very beginning,” she repeated as the answer to each question the Emerald asked Tuesday night. She also said the elections board had not provided her with any evidence and she blamed the decision on her opponent’s campaign.
The grievance included testimony from an anonymous source stating a 20-year-old roommate was rewarded for volunteering with a bottle each of rum and vodka. It also included black-and-white photographs of liquor bottles with Oregon Action Team stickers affixed to them.
Haley denied the allegations Monday.
Tuttle said the campaign was being penalized for bribery, which falls under the purview of the elections board, not for furnishing alcohol to minors, which is a violation of state and federal laws. Tuttle said candidates agreed to abide by elections rules and consequences when signing up to run for office.
Tuttle did not consult with University lawyers before making the decision because general counsel reviewed the elections rules in January and never raised objections to consequences “including but not limited to removal from the ballot.”
Tuttle said making the decision apart from the University administration was a matter of “autonomy in student government.”
The ASUO Constitution Court will decide the issue if Oregon Action Team files an appeal. Haley would not comment on whether she would next turn to the court, the administration or pursue legal action.
“We’re not doing this to slight the administration,” Tuttle said of the ruling. “We’re not doing this to slight the campaign. The elections board set out what we expected from the candidates. We’re operating under what we have been given, under the rules we have been given, and upholding what we’ve set forth. It’s a matter of principle. It’s not a matter of personal anything. It’s about the legitimacy of the elections board.”
Haley’s opponent Emma Kallaway said she expects Oregon Action Team to present whatever contrary evidence it has in an appeal.
“The candidates behaved in this way and I honestly think the rules were there for a reason,” Kallaway said. “And I hope that the rules are there so that we can elect ethical leaders on this campus. I support the elections board decision to do whatever they can to hold candidates accountable and to hold the ASUO accountable. On the other hand, though, we’re going to continue to campaign. We are not going to change our tactics until the elections board has told us we won.”
Kallaway said the primary mood in her campaign at 11 p.m. was confusion.
“Until we’ve won, we haven’t won. It would be wrong for us to be anything less than kind of confused,” she said.
ASUO President Sam Dotters-Katz released a statement at 11:30 p.m. calling the ruling “one of the most reprehensible and shameful acts I have witnessed at the ASUO.”
“It’s impetuous delivery is at best, extremely suspect. I am saddened and embarrassed that a member of the Executive staff would commit an act which greatly stains the integrity of our Association,” Dotters-Katz wrote. “It is indescribably difficult to stand by and watch such an injustice take place and do nothing. However, if I were to act in a manner which attempted to influence the course of these elections, for any reason, the result would be a crisis so acute it would threaten the stability of the entire student government. I cannot and will not attempt to stand in the way of this ruling.”
Alex Tomchak Scott contributed to this report.
[email protected]