A few weeks ago, members of the Senior Class Council submitted a list of grievances to Payal Patel asking her to resign her office. After this request for her resignation, she collected signatures and submitted a petition to the BoE to recall Senior Class Vice President Brian Drolet.
To be fair, Patel commented that the petition was in no way related to the list of grievances. She stated that the petition was in response to the event at the Mansion and not political retaliation to the request for her resignation. She pointed to the fact that "the petition was started the day after [the Mansion] event occurred ... two or three weeks after I received the list of grievances." Thus, it is her claim that her attempt to recall Drolet was not a matter of retaliation, but out of legitimate concern of his actions and the possible harm that they could bring to the senior class.
Drolet disagrees. He said, "Payal's petition is clearly a vindictive attack in response to a decision by our class to ask for her resignation due to her poor leadership." Continuing he commented that, "It is unfortunate that Payal has taken the route of vengeance rather than the route of humility... [The petition] is full of libelous untruths."
As I conducted my investigation, evidence mounted that supported Brian's claim. Senior Senator Stephen Popowski said "Payal was presented with our list of grievances the Tuesday before the Mansion event."
Senior David McGovern, who signed her petition remarked to me that at the time of their signing they were told that a reason to impeach Drolet was that he "tried to remove Pate; even though she didn't do anything to merit that." Although Patel herself did not hand deliver the petition to this student, the statement implicates the petition as an act of political retaliation.
Regardless of the motivations behind the petition, the reasons listed on the petition to impeach Drolet are antithetical to the interests of the senior class. The petition attacks Drolet for his planning of the Senior Night at the Mansion. It claims that he broke administration rules by planning the event and that the class incurred a loss of $3,000 from "an intentional $5 loss per ticket." Furthermore, the petition claims that "Drolet deliberately led the effort to make social event plans for the class without informing all officers." Finally, the petition asserts that Drolet has shirked class duties and planned the social event without informing all other class officers.
To begin, any senior who was at this event knows that it was the best social event that our class has ever sponsored. In the words of Senior Senator Justin Belisario, "That was the best $3,000 we ever spent." The money came from a class fund specifically earmarked for social events and was spent to subsidize the cost of tickets for seniors to attend the event. Of course there was a loss of $3,000 -- the event was not a fund-raiser. Unused money from the social events fund is lost at the end of the year, so it makes sense that the class would spend it on subsidizing social events.
Furthermore, the claim that Drolet deliberately broke administration rules is murky. Patel says, "Dean Boswell and I had made it clear to the class council that the way this event was to be run was clearly in violation of administrative policy."
Drolet counters that "The social event was submitted to [Director of Student Involvement Jeff Groden-Thomas] for approval." Jeff Groden-Thomas backed up Drolet's story and said that approval for the event was properly sought and given. He continued to explain that any parts of the event that were against policy were the fault of the Mansion's misinterpretation of the contract that was signed.
Groden-Thomas stated that "the class council did nothing wrong." Therefore, as Drolet did consult with Groden-Thomas prior to the event to ensure it was in line with administration policy, it seems difficult to accuse him of deliberately breaking administration policy.
To address whether or not all officers had been informed of the event, I met with and questioned each member of the senior class council. Besides unanimously praising Drolet's leadership and emphasizing that his impeachment would be a blow to the class, all told me that they were aware of the event and were engaged in planning its specifics. Additionally, Patel admitted that she was aware of the event. Obviously, the claim that the other class officers were not informed is a farce.
Given these findings, I call on the class council and the president to rescind their calls for various resignations and address the grievances of both sides in an honest and forthright manner. If the leadership of the council cannot reconcile their differences, then someone will have to go. However, given his dedication to the class, and the backing of all of his fellow class council officers, the person to leave should not be Brian Drolet.
The Class of 2005 needs Drolet and the rest of our officers to work for our benefit so that we can have a great Senior Week and graduation. We need unselfish leadership not afraid to work for our interests. Political retaliation and petitions for recall are not in our interests.
--Eric Wolkoff is a senior political science major.
