Forum
Dissention Over RHA Election
On the evening before campus elections, the governing
board of the Residence Hall Association (RHA) voted 5-2-1 to
endorse Scott Peeler and Christy Pons for RHA president.
Peeler, Pons and opposing candidate Charies Streeter all par
ticipated in the voting.
Peeler and Pons were elected on February 12 amid cheers
and dissention. The fact that RHA waited until the night before
elections to issue an endorsement upset some students. Some
felt that it was unfair that RHA waited until the last minute to
issue an endorsement against Streeter, who had received en
dorsements from both The Daily Tar Heel and the Black
Student Movement. They argued that the endorsement was
unethical and was an attempt to force Streeter out of the
elections. These feelings were further compounded by the fact
that Streeter is Afncan-American.
However, other students feel that the faa that RHA made
an endorsement at the last minute is irrelevant. The election
was not a close one. Peeler and Pons won by nearly 500
votes.These students feel that RHA’s last minute endorsement
could not possibly have influenced such a large amount of
voters.
The newly elected RHA Co-Presidents and Streeter both
agreed to address the African American community here, in
Forum.
Streeter Wishes To Continue
Work With RHA
Every year at election time, it seems
something happens pertaining to elections,
and this year was no exception. As many
readers may know, I received two major
endorsements from the Black Student
Movement and The Daily Tar Heel. I feel
these endorsements strengthened my cam
paign and may have given me the edge to
win.
Then came the endorsement of the RHA
governing board, which many have criti
cized as unethical. An organization should
have some say in the election of a leader.
But it appears from that an endorsement is
not the way, when the candidate is from
your own group. It is without a doubt the
way in which this final endorsement was
passed that disturbs me the most If one of
the RHA members felt so strongly about
endorsement, then why wait until the last
moment ?
Why after I had received two endorse
ments from well-respected groups? Let me
add that Gret Diffendal, RHA president,
said before the election that she was not en
dorsing a candidate.
There is also the issue of the display of
the endorsement on the front page of the
Tuesday DTH. I ask: Why is this? How
ever, I believe this was a decision of the
DTH.
These factors lead me to believe that
what happened was a willful act against me.
Many students feel it was due to my being
a black nuile vying for the presidency of a
predominantly while organization. Whether
it was racial or personal, I cannot say be
cause I am not a mind reader. But I look at
the facts and base a judgment on them.
I must concede that I lost, although I
have been wronged in the process. The
phrase “nothing ventured, nothing gained”
comes to mind. This does not mean that 1 am
out of the picture as far as RHA is con
cerned. Given the opportunity, I will stay on
the executive board after discussing these
problems and possible solutions to con
tinue to work toward the goal that initially
inspired me to run.
I will not be there as a token to make up
for the lack of diversity on the governing
board, or any animosity on behalf of cur
rent, future or past RHA members. I am,
and wouW be, in RHA to perform a duty
that has been placed upon me by the resi
dents, who must come before personal feel
ings (although wherever you place them,
they still affect working relationships). I
will not give up easily because it is only
through hard work and perseverance that
one accomplishes a goal.
— Charles Streeter
RHA Co-Presidents Believe
Validity Comes Resident Body
As election day 1991 approached, we
prepared ourselves for both the best and the
worst We hoped for victory, prepared for
loss, and anticipated our reactions to both
possibilities. We were not, however, pre
pared for the response we received last
Tuesday night. We felt hurt, devastated and
robbed of our celebration.
As the campaign has ended, we have
received feedback that indicate many be
lieve we are simply giving lip sCTvice on the
issue of minority affairs. Ironically, in our
attempt to avoid just this, we miscommuni-
cated our true goals and plans. We are
neither avoiding the issue nor paying lip
service. We simply want to ensure that our
final plan to tackle issues such as racial
separation in residence halls is solid and
concrete, and addresses residents’ desires
and needs. If we were to pursue a policy that
neither African-American nor white stu
dents wanted, then we have failed as your
representatives.
We understand that the central issue
seems to be the RHA governing board
endorsement Naturally, we were thrilled
that our peers would endorse us as the most
qualified candidates. However, we did not
ask this of them, nor did we initiate the
endorsement process. Holding us account
able for this is simply unfair.
We are excited about the next year and
our term as RHA co-presidents. We have
many things to accomplish — things that
cannot be completed successfully without
feedback from both the BSM and the Afri
can-American population as a whole. We
feel confident in our ability to put the events
of the past week bdiind us and move for
ward with purpose and a positive attitude
The cries of a few students in Manning
209 seemed to us an attempt to invalidate
our election. Our validity as RHA co-presi
dents comes from the resident body as a
whole, however, and we claim their sup
port. We won by a margin of roughly 500
votes. We feel sure these voters had made
their decision prior to reading the DTH
Tuesday.
It is our hope that these feelings of dis
comfort will soon deteriorate. We are open
to further discussion and criticism of our
platform and our plans for RHA, and we
hope that the hostilities can be replaced
with sincere, combined efforts to solve the
fffoblems before us. This is the best for the
future RHA and the resident body.
—Scott Peeler and Christy Pons