By Brendan O’Reilly
Student Government Association Judicial Panel Associate Justice Matthew Bisanz was found by the SGA senate to be guilty of all charges levied against him last week.
On Oct. 24, during executive session, the SGA approved a resolution to impeach Bisanz for allegedly revealing the club appropriations budget to The Chronicle.
The impeachment proceedings occurred in executive session, meaning the gallery was dismissed and everything discussed within the session was to be kept confidential by members of the SGA.
“We cannot have the hearing in public, because it is not a legal proceeding,” said Pete DiSilvio, the student government president.
“If we do have it in public it would be considered libel, and the student government association can be sued for libel for making accusations of somebody on the public record,” said DiSilvio, citing Robert’s Rules of Order.
DiSilvio said he only learned of the possibility of litigation on Monday night, a day before the impeachment.
“I hate the idea of doing this in executive session, but we don’t have a choice,” added DiSilvio.
He said Bisanz might have been able to waive his right to litigate so the proceedings could be held in public and go on record. “Unless he does that we will have to do this in executive session,” said DiSilvio.
Bisanz said Monday he was requesting the proceedings be public, but was not going to waive his right to sue for libel or slander.
In a letter dated Oct. 28, to Russell Akiyama, the student government vice president, Bisanz requested Akiyama recuse himself as chair of the impeachment proceedings, saying, “I feel you have displayed an insurmountable degree of bias toward my position, which impairs my ability to conduct a proper defense of my good name and impairs my due process rights.”
When the motion was made to enter executive session, a few senators voiced their objections.
Lisa Giunta, chair of the Rules Committee cited Robert’s Rules in response to the opposition, to which senator Pat McDonald responded, “According to Robert’s Rules, we have to do a lot of things.” McDonald eventually withdrew his objection, with the caveat that the SGA should always follow Robert’s Rules of Order, not just when it suits their needs.
The SGA Judicial Panel was told to leave, as had been the case last week. However, this time, the justices were voted back into the proceedings by the senate.
On the night of the proceedings, Bruce Charnov, an associate professor in the Zarb School of Business, accompanied Bisanz. Charnov previously taught Bisanz in one of his classes, and said he has consulted with him in the design of a new major. “He may not be the smartest student in Hofstra’s history, but he is certainly the smartest I’ve seen in 27 years,” said Charnov.
Charnov prepared an opening statement to read on Bisanz’s behalf, but was never allowed to deliver it to the senate.
The rules for the impeachment proceedings read, “The defendant shall have upwards to five minutes to make his opening statement. He may have one additional person speak on his behalf during this time.” The same opportunity was offered for the defense’s closing statement as well.
The senate voted against allowing Charnov to enter the executive session to deliver an opening statement.
“The president did come out of that session and told me – described to me – some of the debate that occurred when they voted to deny me access and the opportunity to participate,” said Charnov. The debate DiSilvio described included whether Charnov would adhere to the confidentiality of executive session if given access.
“I don’t understand why that’s not considered a breach of executive session, ” he added.
The only individual outside of the SGA who was permitted to enter the hearing was Billy Florio, a University alumnus who graduated in May. Florio was the chief justice of the SGA Judicial Panel during the last academic year, and a charter member of the panel. Though a former member, the SGA had no method of making sure he observed executive session restrictions.
Florio was called into the session to answer a charge that last May he provided members of the Nonsense humor magazine, of which he was managing editor, with the club’s budget appropriation. Florio said he testified that he told Nonsense a false amount. “I intentionally told them the wrong number,” said Florio. “I figured they’d stop asking me questions.”
Florio said the SGA’s response to his testimony was, “silence and Pete calling me a ‘sly dog.'”
Charnov went on to say, “Apparently the president feels he can do anything he wants.”
In response to the suggestion that he broke executive session, DiSilvio said he told Charnov that the senate voted not to allow him into the proceedings as a courtesy. DiSilvio said he does not believe he breached executive session, because he did not go into details or mention anyone by name.
Charnov suggested that the SGA could have dispelled any fears that he would breach executive session by only allowing him to be present in the room to deliver his opening and closing statements. “I would have been perfectly willing to leave the room,” said Charnov of the time between the statements.
As an alternative method for allowing his presence in the session, Charnov said. “I would have taken an oath and agreed to be bound by execution session.”
Charnov said he believed Bisanz relied on him heavily, and not having him there to deliver his opening statement put Bisanz at an unanticipated disadvantage.
In a copy of the statement Charnov prepared, Charnov pointed out that the SGA constitution does not include a provision for the removal of elected members of the judicial panel by the senate. “You are bound by the words you put on the page,” said Charnov in an interview, who cited that he has a degree in law.
Charnov also argued that the resolution of impeachment was flawed because it contained an insufficient amount of signatures from senators.
The statement also argued that Bisanz was not present at the meetings of which he allegedly broke the executive session, so he was not bound to confidentiality.
Although Charnov said of Bisanz, “I was there as his advisor. We don’t have any legal fee arrangement,” the justice referred to Charnov as his “council.”
Bisanz said he maintains his innocence, but offered no further comment and would not say whether or not he would litigate if the SGA votes to remove him from the judicial panel next week. Rather than removed, Bisanz could be censured.
“It is a shame that it came to what it came to tonight,” said DiSilvio after the completion of the proceedings. “Matt can do things, and it’s a shame that it’s come to the point where he had to be impeached.”
Removal requires two-thirds of the full senate, rather than just a majority of those present at the meeting the vote occurs. DiSilvio said he believes enough senators will be present next week to constitute two-thirds, although the senate lost quorum at the end of the impeachment proceedings that took over two hours.
The loss of quorum meant that proposals on the agenda to revise election rules and publicize budgets had to be tabled to the following week. The latter proposal read, “At the close of Budget Weekend, once the budgets have been approved by the Senate and the Administration, the club budgets shall be made public to the student body through The Chronicle.”
Disclosure: Matthew Bisanz is a columnist for The Chronicle
SGA Associate Justice Matthew G. Bisanz and Associate Professor Bruce Charnov sitting in the gallery at the SGA meeting on Tuesday, pror to the impeachment proceedings.