By Brad Butterfield
After a university-wide election this April, Ethan LeVering was elected Associated Students president of Cal Poly Humboldt, receiving 196 votes, with the runner-up receiving only ten votes. On July 1, the student-run board of directors of Associated Students, consisting of seven voting members, voted to impeach LeVering. The board of directors accused him of neglecting duties, misusing power, and causing tension within the board. The impeachment was voted on only a few meetings into LeVering’s presidency and before the fall semester had even begun. The impeachment led to the appointment of Wysdem Singleton, an accounting major, to the presidency. Singleton was initially elected as Administrative Vice President, receiving ten votes.
Communication Breakdown
Among the reasons cited for LeVering’s removal, poor communication appears to be the most prevailing and heavily cited factor. Various examples of communication difficulties between LeVering and the rest of the board of directors dominated the articles of impeachment.
The articles of impeachment were co-authored by five members, including Singleton.
The articles called LeVering’s communication style aggressive while also citing a lack of proper communications with all involved parties. Additionally, they described LeVering as defensive and was unwilling to listen to criticism.
The authors of the document did not mince words in their characterization of Levering, He is also described as unreliable, disrespectful and “not ready to handle such an important position.” Perhaps most severely, LeVering is accused of not valuing input from other board members as well as having a tendency to interrupt. LeVering acknowledged a need to improve his listening skills and emphasized that the interruptions were not intentional.
“Sometimes I need to keep myself a little bit more reserved,” LeVering said.
LeVering’s first meeting as president, held on May 10, set the tone for his short presidency. According to the articles of impeachment, the meeting was dominated by LeVering discussing his own agenda and amendments.
“Ethan made constant interruptions and changes to previous amendments, elongating and complicating the meeting,” reads the articles of impeachment.
Leverings attempts to amend the agenda, coupled with his tendency to dominate the conversation both frustrated and confused the inexperienced board of directors.
“Most of the board – this was their first time in this position. Ethan had seemed to go through some of the A.S. processes before, so he knew a little bit more than we did,” Singleton said.
The board of directors’ frustrations were born — at least in part — by their own lack of experience, which is cited several times in the articles of impeachment.
Levering’s communication difficulties extended up the chain of command to the Dean of Students, Mitch Mitchell. According to the articles, during a meeting on June 20, LeVering addressed Mitchell without using his title and didn’t correct this mistake until prompted. Mitchell escalated the situation by calling LeVering an unfit representative of the university. Levering responded in kind.
“I decided, once he [Mitch Mitchell] was done speaking, to remind the board that he had been voted in ‘no confidence’ by the previous board, and that the words he was saying against me should be taken with a grain of salt,” LeVering said. “I meant no disrespect by not saying doctor in front of his name. However, he, at many points, referred to me simply as Ethan, and did not refer to me as president. I don’t know why we’re getting all stuck up about titles.”
The resulting atmosphere created by LeVering’s leadership style was not an environment that the rest of the board wanted to be a part of. Citing the stress created by LeVerings leadership, members considered resigning.
“I mean, honestly, it was either Ethan would be impeached, or we would lose half of our board just because we were not working well together,” Singleton said. “We couldn’t seem to come to a compromise.”
As eroding as the personality conflicts were, the miscommunications were perhaps most damaging. Atop the tall tower of miscommunications appears to have been confusion whether he even wanted to be president at all. In fact, on May 31, LeVering sent a letter of resignation to Kendra Higgins, Executive Director of Associated Students, and Chelsea Belden, Board Coordinator for Associated Students. LeVering later rescinded this letter, saying that it stemmed from a period of misunderstanding.
The rescinded letter read in part, “It appears unlikely that the global human condition will be significantly improved through means of political simulacra before an inevitable world-changing catastrophe.”
LeVering’s mention of political simulacra is cited in the articles of impeachment and led the board of directors to believe that LeVering would not be able to work within the bureaucratic pathways necessary in the Associated Students.
According to Singleton, it was difficult to work with LeVering, in part because of his own indecisiveness surrounding his presidency.
“He seemed like he was ready to resign and go to CCAT,” Singleton said.
As it would turn out, Levering was not eligible for the role he wanted at CCAT.
“Once I found out I was no longer eligible to be the CCAT co-director, it was my full intention to continue on with being the president and do my best job,” LeVering said. “Fulfilling and serving the student body’s interest to the best of my ability.”
Conflict at the PANETTA Conference
Another issue raised in the articles of impeachment relays occurrences at a conference in Monterey called PANETTA, which took place in June. The conference was organized and paid for by the university and LeVering would have received credits upon completion, which he did not.
According to LeVering, lack of sleep and a feeling of culture shock because of the opulent golf course near the conference led him to step away from the group without informing anyone beforehand.
“I started looking around at a golf course and feeling really bad at all the environmental degradation that was clearly happening around me,” LeVering said. “So, I stepped off for about thirty minutes to feel bad about the environment by myself.”
After his return to the group, LeVering was asked why he appeared upset.
“I told them that this place was causing a ton of environmental degradation, and that it was wrong for them to send the president of Cal Poly Humboldt to this place and think of it as a good time,” LeVering said.
Later, LeVering received a call from Higgins who told him that he was being recalled by the president’s office for the breaking of decorum. He was ordered to get back on a plane the following morning.
“I hadn’t really been given a clear answer to why I was being recalled at that point,” LeVering said.
According to LeVering, he awoke the morning of his new return flight incredibly stressed and even vomited. He missed his return flight and then took an Uber in an aim to make the connecting flight.
As a result, LeVering’s actions and inactions caused the Associated Students to spend money on unused travel items.
In addition to the wasted money, the articles of impeachment make note of LeVering’s alleged failure to take accountability for failing to complete the PANETTA conference.
“Ethan has yet to take full accountability for his actions at PANETTA and continues to place full blame on administration for why he was unable to continue,” the articles read.
Sam Parker – former A.S. president – questioned whether the drama at PANETTA should have been included in the articles of impeachment in the first place.
“I don’t really think that part should have been included,” Parker said. “I don’t think they should have sent him home for what he did. You know, we’re allowed to have emotions.”
Still, Parker emphasized the importance of communication, particularly in a position of leadership. According to Parker, he witnessed many instances of bad communication from LeVering, which highlighted a missing component in the LeVering leadership.
“That’s really the role of the president, if more than anything,” Parker said. “To build bridges between everyone and synthesize everyone’s ideas together, figure out how to all advance them together, and not just kind of go renegade.”
An Illegal Meeting?
According to LeVering, late at night before a special meeting was held, he was reading through the Gloria Romero act to prepare for the special meeting.
“I was very unfamiliar with parliamentary code,” LeVering said.
This late night reading through the Gloria Romero Act led LeVering to believe that since local newspapers had not been notified of the special meeting, the meeting was being held illegally. LeVering took it upon himself to contact The Lumberjack and El Leñador to notify them of the meeting.
“When we went into that meeting, we asked if they had reached out to the newspapers in order to make the meeting legitimate,” Levering said. “Apparently they had not, which I think made that meeting illegal.”
Levering’s concerns over press access to the special meeting and shaky knowledge of the Gloria Romero Act were cited in the article of impeachment.
“President Ethan LeVering attended the Association’s meeting with knowledge that it was being illegally held,” the articles of impeachment read.
Our Elected President, Impeached
Among the many issues raised by the Board of Directors, LeVering’s character, advocacy for his fellow student and motivation to affect change were never called into question.
At a special meeting held on June 13, at least five students spoke in support of LeVering. Among the voices of support was a letter written by Mary Mangubat, where she praised LeVering’s consistent participation in many programs across campus, including A.S., WRRAP, and the University Senate.
“Ethan has shown genuine interest and care to provide necessary resources for students and our campus community,” read Mangubat’s letter.
In any case, LeVering ran on a platform of shaking shit up. This evidently resonated with the campus community as LeVering completely dominated the vote.
“I will make no political promises to the outcomes that I can achieve. Doing so would amount to little more than a lie. If voting changed anything, they’d call it an act of violence,” LeVering’s campaign statement read.
President Singleton
Singleton, for her part, hopes to be the bridge builder that Levering wasn’t during his brief time in power. As a part of her goals as president, Singleton aims to strengthen the board of directors and increase student involvement in A.S.
“I really want people to get involved,” Singleton said. “There’s so much more that we can do besides just making noise, and there’s so many ways we can do it, and they will have to listen to us, because we pay to go here, right?”
The Lumberjack contacted all five co-authors of the articles of impeachment, but were only granted an interview with Singleton.
Brad Butterfield is employed by the Bicycle Learning Center, an organization under the WRRAP umbrella.
Be First to Comment