[Editor’s Note: TechNews is always looking for more perspectives on hot-button issues. Please see our “About Us” page to see how you can add your voice to the conversation!]
I was recently going through one of my weekly “I hate the Illinois Tech Student Government Association (SGA)” thoughts when I came to a sudden realization: most of the students at Illinois Tech today do not know what SGA was like before the current administration. For those who do not know, Rezwan Rifat and Derrick Hill have been SGA’s President and Executive Vice President (EVP) for the last 2 years, respectively (there’s an asterisk to that I will get into later). Given that the majority of students at Illinois Tech are graduate students, as well as a lot of the undergraduates being current freshmen and sophomores, that means that the vast majority of students don’t know what SGA used to be. I was active in the student government the two years preceding Rifat and Hill, and so before I leave Illinois Tech I wanted to give a recount of what SGA was like before their administration — comparing and contrasting the past to the present (as of the time of writing) — and maybe to hopefully inspire the next executive board, or at the very least, to have it written in text so that it may be referenced in the future.
Accessibility
I think by far the largest crime to come out of the Rifat-Hill administration was the gradual and nearly-complete shutdown of accessible communication with the student body. From 2021-2022, when I was a Senator, SGA operated on Slack. The Slack, though far from perfect, was publicly accessible to all students at Illinois Tech. Any student could create an invite to send to any other student, and almost all communications were visible to all students who joined the Slack. To this day, I can still use the invite code that was used to invite me, to invite other students if I really wanted. Unfortunately, the Slack had problems: communications were autodeleted after 90 days, and truth be told, no one used Slack.
Faced with this reality, communications between the outgoing administration of the time (Barber-Kelsey) and the incoming administration of the time (Mays-Kelsey) led to the creation of the Discord. Focused in the principal of increasing transparency through increased reached, I witnessed the Discord be made with the express purpose of ease of access. From 2022, going into 2023, we chose Discord as a way to meet the students where they were. It may be slightly less professional, but we figured it was a fair price to pay to ensure that more students could access SGA. And by all measures, it worked. As of the time of writing, about a year after the Discord was essentially shut down, there are still almost 300 members on the dormant Discord. I recall new faces constantly joining the conversation throughout the year, and I believe its fair to say many people got involved with SGA because of the Discord.
The first year of the Rifat-Hill administration was rocky to say the least. The Discord, ballooning in size thanks to the success of the Mays-Kelsey administration, brought with it more need for moderation, and greater scrutiny from the student body. The focus on accessibility from the Mays-Kelsey administration brought with it unprecedented attendance, a problem that the Mays-Kelsey administration wanted, but would evidently turn out, to not be one the Rifat-Hill administration wanted. The first year was marked with constant struggles both within the Discord and in Senate of dealing with this new scrutiny, ultimately ending with the Discord being shut down entirely by the end of the first year. No information was given as to when the server would come up, and many assumed it was a temporary measure for the summer when it had less of a need to be up.
The beginning of the second year of Rifat-Hill proved this to be an incorrect assumption. The first weeks went by without any sign of opening. At the first SGA meeting of the 2024-25 year, I attended to ask about the Discord. Citing the inability to moderate, which I shall tackle shortly, I was told by the executive board that the Discord would not be coming back up. In the following weeks, a private Slack was made. The same platform that was moved away from for the express purpose of increasing accessibility. Not only this, but I must emphasize that it was a private Slack. Only SGA members seemed to be invited. This essentially cut off the Student Government from its greatest source of student interaction. To this day, I believe that most students aren’t even aware that there is a Slack, and I wouldn’t blame them. There was no formal communication about this on the Discord, via email, Instagram, or the website. To say SGA is inaccessible to the common student would be an understatement, especially as I further develop my points.
Criticism
Where there is power, there will be those who critique the use of power. Even for something as seemingly mundane as a tech school’s student government, there is no administration that is free from criticism. Admittedly, I was a bit absent from the first half of the Barber-Kelsey administration, so if there were any major scandals then, I am unsure. However, the beginning of 2022 marked Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Seeing the outpouring of support for Ukraine across the country, the Barber-Kelsey administration discussed potential ways for Illinois Tech to show its support. While I think most students were in support of helping Ukraine, the question of how the Student Activity Fund (SAF) could or could not be used, and if SGA should have a role in global affairs, were both hotly contested, both in Senate and the Slack. Barber and Kelsey were both in favor, and the way this ultimately played out was through the Judicial Board (JBoard). Kelsey represented the Senate against a small coalition of students and Senators, ultimately deciding to compromise with them before a ruling could be made. While I don’t personally agree with the outcome, I do recognize that it was an incredibly mature and cooperative measure by the Barber-Kelsey administration in the face of this “scandal.”
The Mays-Kelsey administration was fairly smooth sailing for a while. However, there were two major legislative issues that I personally led that were subject to a fair bit of debate and criticism: the constitutional reform and the bylaws reform. The Mays-Kelsey administration, myself included, saw the SGA Constitution and Bylaws as antiquated and in desperate need of modernization and cleaning up. This included going through the entire Constitution and Bylaws, line-by-line, and decided if it was necessary, the intent, the possible reform, and the final organization. Most of the Constitution and Bylaws were written without issue, but there were a myriad of smaller points that dwelled for a while due to opposition. In the face of this opposition, I personally reached out to many Senators to hear their complaints. Among this opposition was none other than then-Senator Derrick Hill. One of the key issues of the Bylaw reforms was the apportionment of the Senate, in particular, with regards to Diversity Equity and Inclusion (DEI) seats, which were previously constituted by appointed seats from key student organizations. Hill, along others, joined a side which was cautious against DEI seats, ultimately leading to fewer seats being appointed, alongside other measures. Again, while I didn’t agree with the outcome, I believe that cooperating with the opposition was an important step in the monumental task that was rewriting the entire SGA foundation, cooperation that ultimately led to the passage of the bylaws I had written by Derrick Hill in my absence.
As alluded to previously, the Rifat-Hill administration was rife with criticism in its first year. I do not remember specifics at this time, as I was forced out of the Student Government, but I know one issue was the censorship of both myself and later another student, Erik Olijnyk. Hill, who now chaired the Senate meetings, seemed to want to duck the issue entirely, not directly engaging with the students who cared about this issue. With student demands not being met in Senate, students took to the Discord with their issues. Conversation would bubble in and out over the year, likely accumulating as new issues piled onto the old unmet issues, and would continue to grow in both volume and veracity. I am by no means defending the actions of the students during this time, but I do believe the continual roar made by these students was a direct and logical consequence of an inability to approach criticism by both Rifat and especially Hill.
As a result, SGA closed the Discord. Instead of engaging the student body with their critiques, Rifat and Hill shut down, and closed themselves off. The last major issue I recall was mentioned previously, where I attempted to push SGA into reopening the Discord. The executive board responded by directly citing the criticisms they got, calling it bullying and uncalled for. While I sympathize with them to some degree, it’s hard to not fall on the quote from President Harry S. Truman; “If you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.” Today, I am unsure if there have been any major criticisms or scandals of the second year Rifat-Hill administration, not out of a lack of substance (as I will get into), but out of a lack of engagement and mediums for which these criticisms and scandals can be worked.
Communication
While a good chunk of SGA’s communications did come through its public Slack and Discord, it was not the only vector in which students could learn about the Student Government. Instagram, events, email, and posters are all methods SGA has employed to help engage with the student body. Truth be told, this minutia of engagement was never my forte, so for the Barber-Kelsey administration, I do not remember much. However, I do know one of my first interactions at Illinois Tech was with Barber during Welcome Week 2021. He sat at a relatively undecorated table, probably just with just the banner hanging down the front and a laptop for a Google Form. I remember he looked tired, but he was still eager to talk with me as I walked up to the table. Later that year, SGA would help promote Late NIITe in March 2022. SGA also helped decide that a masking policy should be instituted (ah, the years of COVID-19).
Seeing record low engagement, much of the Mays-Kelsey administration was focused on increasing engagement as much as possible. The Instagram, which before was seldom used, was put into overdrive by Vice President of Engagement (VPE) Elio Armas-Rojo. Each Senate meeting was put onto the page, and I believe for a short time, there was a TikTok. Both the Mays-Kelsey and Barber-Kelsey administration hosted livestreams, both for posterity and so that commuter students would have a chance to attend the meetings. The head of the Residence Hall Assembly (RHA, formerly Residence Hall Association), Na’im Muhammad, who was also grandfathered into the then-new Vice President of Residence Life (VPRL), also actively promoted both RHA and Late NIITe to the students. I still have access to the emails from Muhammad enthusiastically promoting an SGA that we cared about. The Mays-Kelsey executive board worked together to help innovate posters, and generally tried to give the Engagement Committee as much room as possible to see their dreams come true.
VPRL Muhammad and VPE Armas-Rojo actually continued into the first year of the Rifat-Hill administration, putting in an incredible amount of work to continue promoting SGA, though as I understand it, they may have been a little less supported. The Instagram was still active, and I still received emails from RHA promoting both itself and the Late NIITes. However, with both of their departures as the second year of Rifat-Hill came into being, SGA rapidly fell into silence. A glance at the Instagram shows a stark dropoff from nearly weekly communications through the first half of 2024 to just a handful in the later half. No more weekly reminders and recaps of Senate meetings, with most posts being reserved for cross-promotion between SGA x Student Org events. It seems SGA has relegated its outreach to slapping its name onto the efforts of other student organizations, rather than promoting its own work. Admittedly, this seems to have changed a bit this last semester, with four posts dedicated to Karaoke Night on March 6, a post for the executive board election nominations, and a post for the research banquet. However, RHA (a constituent part of SGA) has dropped its branding and promotion of Late NIITe, one of Illinois Tech’s largest events, and has dropped its collaboration with TechNews for the debates, a long-standing tradition between the two orgs (and yes, a fact I am salty about). SGA and Finance Board (another constituent part of SGA) have also been continually ducking requests for comments by TechNews, including almost every installment of Avery Watson’s “FACT Amendment” investigative series, as evidenced by a short text at the end of all but one of Watson’s articles.
Vacancies
Vacancies alone are not necessarily indicative of any bad work by an administration. A vacancy may open up due to unforeseen circumstances, personal reasons, or just a shift in priorities in the individuals who once occupied those positions. However, I do believe an administration’s response to vacancies says a lot about the administration tasked with handling the vacancy. Fast turnarounds, transparent procedures, and confident constituents are great markers of a well-handled vacancy.
The Mays-Kelsey administration had two instances of executive vacancies as far as I can remember. The first was during the first half of the term, in which the Vice President of Communications and the Vice President of Events (the progenitors to VPE) was opened up. Unfortunately, due to lack of access to materials from this era, I do not know the exact turnaround time. However, I don’t believe it was long before we got VPE Armas-Rojo, as I recall working with him for a large share of the Mays-Kelsey administration. Later, more vacancies were manufactured as a result of the Constitution Vice President of Student Life, into three, Vice President of Campus Life (VPCL, which I was grandfathered into), Vice President of Residence Life, and Vice President of DEI (VPDEI). The VPRL position was immediately filled due to its immediate necessity, which was decided by a Senate confirmation vote for VPRL Muhammad. VPDEI was to eventually lead the new DEI seats, which, as they were not yet finalized, was to be elected by the student body on the next election. Also created was a distinct Vice President of Research position, which was also voted and confirmed by the Senate shortly before the elections, as to establish the committee and position for the coming administration.
Today, I am told the Rifat-Hill administration sits with five long-standing vacancies. The President, VPCL, VPRL, Chief Justice, and Executive Secretary are all potentially currently vacant positions within the executive board, according to various sources. Yes, as far as I am told, even the titular President position, once held by Rezwan Rifat, is currently vacant, and may have been vacant for a good portion of this semester (I told you that asterisk from the first paragraph would be revisited). I am unsure of when each of these vacancies opened up, thanks to the closed nature of SGA during this administration, but I believe they have all been open for at least a month at this point, with no signs of Senate hearings or confirmations to fill the voids. This means that the Rifat*-Hill administration is currently running a skeleton crew of Executive Vice President, Finance Board Chair, Vice President of Academic Affairs, VPE, VP Research, and VPDEI. While I am told that Senators are picking up the slack in the meantime, I believe that is no excuse to leave these positions vacant for as long as they have been.
President-Student Advisory
The President’s Student Advisory Council (PSAC) was genuinely a once-secret organization that met with the Illinois Tech President. Unfortunately, the page for the council seems to have been now deleted, but I am fairly confident that the page once stated that this council even met cloaked in hoods with the presidents at its inception. If anyone can back up this claim, I would be greatly appreciative. By the time of Barber-Kelsey, PSAC had graduated from this Illuminati-like status, and had become a normal, though not well communicated, council that met with the Illinois Tech President on a regular basis.
As part of the Constitution and Bylaws reform, SGA made an effort to concentrate student advocacy into the elected Student Government. Part of this included PSAC, which was almost wholly unelected at this point, consisting mostly of various student organization leaders. Since this was an independent organization, SGA made the somewhat-sleezy move of infiltrating PSAC from the inside, obtaining a majority within PSAC so that it could be forced into SGA. I say confidently that this was somewhat sleezy as one of the key orchestrators of this operation. While our methods were dubious, I believe there was good intention behind it, and this intention was communicated with SGA and members of PSAC as it was conducted. The idea was to still have PSAC, though instead of a variety of usually unnamed student advisors, it’d be elected members of the SGA executive board as well as appointed Senators and invited interested students. With Vice Presidents from various functions of the university, it was hoped that this change would bring about greater accountability to PSAC.
Rifat-Hill killed those hopes. Though I have repeatedly mentioned that the events of this article are my understanding of the events, I want to especially emphasize that here. PSAC was already a fairly unknown and unpublicized organization, and PSAC into the Rifat-Hill administration remained that way. From the few insiders I have spoken to, the executive board of Rifat-Hill may have met with the President and his associates a few times. As far as I understand, no senators or students were invited. Meetings were irregular and, again, as far as I am aware, have only decreased in frequency into the second year of Rifat-Hill. I have personally heard no reports of any meetings in this second year, though of all the things I have said in this article, this could easily prove to be the most fallible.
Conclusion
SGA has the power to be something good. We don’t have to live on a campus where students aren’t included in the conversation. In a better world, students would have a seat at the table. The two years I got to be part of SGA showed promise for a transparent and student-inclusive Senate, and I am hopeful this reality could come true. Luckily, it seems neither Rifat nor Hill are continuing their executive terms in SGA, meaning whoever will come to be in SGA has the chance to make the organization relevant once more. Ultimately, I hope that someone from the next executive board will read this and be inspired to do better. That withstanding, I hope that at least someone from the Senate will happen upon this article and get some ideas. Failing that, this has been 3200 words of “former SGA VP of Student Life reads list of complaints, removed.”
