Though the Student Government Board election may have taken place almost a week ago, who will… Though the Student Government Board election may have taken place almost a week ago, who will actually take office on Thursday is still to be determined after the SGB election’s committee opened up what Election Chair Jeff Alex called “Pandora’s Box.”

Candidates from the Results Now slate, John Martin, Scott Morley and Peter Stopp, had five votes taken from them Tuesday night after a closed-door elections committee hearing. SGB candidate Alissa Krutoff, who came in ninth place for the eight-member board, filed the complaint against the slate following the election. Morley came in eighth.

Both sides were given up to a half hour to present their case.

But the election committee’s deliberation process took much longer; the hearings started at about 9:15 p.m. and did not end until nearly 11 p.m.

Some of Results Now’s posters that were hung throughout campus said the Pitt rowing team endorsed the three candidates while officially they had not.

Alex said it was the organization’s responsibility – not the candidate’s – to fill out the endorsement application. The president of the rowing club had told the candidates the rowing team was going to endorse him; however, the proper paper work had not been filed, he added.

Martin described this problem as a miscommunication between the parties involved, something that was very minor and that should not change the decision made by students in the general election held Thursday.

Also, the slate did not have all of their posters taken down within 24 hours of the election, which is a requirement of the elections process. The particular poster in question was hung outside Clapp Hall.

This is the first time the elections committee has heard complaints after the elections results were announced; the committee has had complaints filed before the election results were in, though.

There are four other complaints the committee will hear. Every board and presidential candidate who ran has at least one complaint filed against him or her, Alex said. He added that all of the complaints were about technicalities that should not have affected the results to the election greatly.

According to the complaint filed against Results Now, Krutoff learned about the poster on Friday, April 11 at 2 a.m.

“Since the election results were so close, the false advertisement of this club who currently has 44 members could have had an effect on the election results,” according to the complaint.

The complaint is signed and dated April 14, 2003. This is more than 24 hours after the occurrence, which is when the complaint should have been filed by.

Stopp said, despite being “personally opposed” to the decision, no judicial board complaints will be filed over this decision.

Half jokingly, Martin said he did not want to appeal because he had already lost the election once before.

If the slate had decided to appeal the elections committee’s decision, it would have gone to the judicial board.

Alex said the decision was a difficult one because the Results Now slate had done everything they could to get the posters down, but he added it was the candidates’ responsibility to get all of the posters down.

Morley disagreed with the decision and said he and his slate-mates had “had no ill intentions.”

Krutoff, however, said it was a good decision on behalf of the committee because there are rules for a reason, and all candidates need to follow them.

According to Stopp, the complaint filed was a personal attack on his slate since other candidates had also violated rules.

“It was just a grab for the seat,” he said.

He added that during the election he had noticed several infractions; however, he did not think it was in part of the campaign spirit to file complaints.

Martin added that the election should be about issues and not “legalese” and technicalities.

The elections committee will look into changing some of the rules for filing complaints to avoid complications in the future, Alex said.

The changes could include limiting the time of a complaint to prior to the announcement of the election results and making the candidates responsible for reporting their endorsements.

Making the deadline for complaints prior to the results’ announcements is important to prevent the elections committee from having to decide the winners, Alex said.