Almost No Candidates Run Contested for Student Assembly Seats
The Student Assembly (SA) is in the midst of its campaign period for 2026-27. Under the SA Charter, undergraduates must elect their 37 voting members annually, with their Freshman and Transfer Student representatives elected in the fall. Most of the SA seats were uncontested this year. However, there were three candidates for President and two candidates for Executive Vice President. Under the SA Charter, the candidate with the most votes in these two races gets to hold that office, and the first runner-up gets an at-large seat on the SA. So, in reality, four of the five people running in these races will serve in the SA, with only one candidate being denied any role.
Many of the SA seats are elected separately by each college. For the Brooks School, ILR, and Architecture, Art and Planning, there are two candidates running for a single seat.
All undergraduates can vote for President and Executive Vice President, as well as a number of seats set aside for various minority interests. There are four contested elections, with two candidates running for single seats addressing first-generation students, international students, and student workers. Three candidates are running for the two minority-interest seats.
This means that of the 37 voting seats, only nine seats are at stake in this election. To make matters worse, there are a number of vacant seats lacking candidates, with two candidates running for three Arts & Sciences seats, and no candidate for the Veterans seat.
Of course, if a candidate in an uncontested race is disqualified for violating the campaign rules, the candidate will not be seated, even if he had no opponent. In past years, people have filed challenges on even uncontested SA candidates.
RELATED: 2023 SA Elections Results Withheld
In 2018, the top vote earner for SA President was disqualified because one of his supporters posted a meme on the “Any Person, Any Meme” Facebook group, which contained a tiny Cornell seal. This prompted allegations that members of the Elections Committee had been biased. Election Committee members who later claimed to have recused themselves actually participated in the votes on the election challenges, according to reporting by the Cornell Daily Sun.
Although there are very few contested elections, all the candidates will be tabling and performing other mandatory campaign functions required by the Election Rules.
Another factor undercutting candidate recruitment and voter turnout is that the SA now has a competing body. Historically, the SA provided valuable feedback on issues regarding Cornell’s services provided to students, such as housing and dining. However, recently, Vice President for Student and Campus Life, Ryan Lombardi, has established a separate focus group called the Undergraduate Student Leadership Council. The council is hand-picked by the Student and Campus Life staff instead of being elected by students. The council meets monthly to ”provide feedback on priorities, projects, and policies impacting the student experience at Cornell University.” So, it appears that Vice President Lombardi is undercutting the SA with a parallel group that does not spend time adopting resolutions that Day Hall would find objectionable. While SA members are unpaid volunteers, council members are paid $16.25 per hour.
There is no policy document explaining how the council and the SA work with each other. The SA holds public meetings, but the council meetings are private. If the SA were to make a specific recommendation that Vice President Lombardi disliked, he is free to ask the council to make the opposite recommendation, and then use the council’s recommendation as a pretext for having the President reject the SA’s position.
Given the alternative of a paid position, it is not surprising that students are applying to serve on the 2026-27 council instead of running for an SA seat.
Voting in the SA election runs from April 20 to 11:59 p.m. on April 27.
