On Jan. 19, the Dartmouth Student Government Senate considered and voted against the nomination of Roger Friedlander ’27 for the position of deputy project manager. According to West House senator Reece Sharp ’28, the vote failed because senators were “confused” by the process. More specifically, two people had volunteered for the position — Friedlander and Hanna Bilgin ’28 — but student body president Chukwuka Odigbo ’25 only called a vote for Friedlander. Notably, Odigbo holds the sole power to nominate candidates for appointed positions in DSG. The Senate voted down the nomination, which was the end of the story — or at least the one open to the public.
Several senators have since shared more about that Jan. 19 vote — and DSG culture in general. Namely, the events of that meeting reflect a deeper issue within the body: Student officers have widespread concerns about management approach and procedural matters. I am convinced that meaningful change is necessary. Odigbo should reevaluate his leadership style, and the organization at large should reassess its constitution to ensure it is as representative as possible.
Several senators — who requested anonymity so they could speak candidly about their experiences — spoke with The Dartmouth about the nomination situation and described broad frustration with Odigbo’s leadership style. The first senator, who I’ll call Senator One, described Odigbo as “temperamental,” flaring up when he doesn’t get his way. Senator One described, for example, what I find to be troubling tensions during the Jan. 19 closed nominating session. According to Senator One, Bilgin reminded Odigbo that she had also volunteered for the role, at which point another senator came to her defense. Senator One called Odigbo’s response to Bilgin “offensive,” claiming that he raised his voice and made direct eye contact with Bilgin. Senato One said that these comments felt “targeted.” The senator also described a larger sense of tension in DSG, one that they partially attributed to Odigbo’s temperament.
A second DSG senator described Odigbo’s leadership style as “autocratic” and “dictatorial,” adding that his approach rubbed many the wrong way. A third senator described growing frustration among their colleagues and a broader feeling that they weren’t being heard. The same senator even said they had heard “murmurs of impeachment” — while a weighty and unsubstantiated claim, a reflection of just how serious divisions have become nonetheless.
I reached out to Odigbo for comment about what transpired on Jan. 19 and about the anonymous reports on his behavior. In an emailed response, he wrote that he chose to nominate Friedlander over Bilgin because of Friedlander’s proficiency in past roles. He told me that during the meeting, he stressed to the senators that “the power to confirm or decline lay (and still lies) with the Senate.” He also wrote that the Senate recently nominated both Friedlander and Bilgin for the role of deputy project manager, and that they were confirmed via a vote on GroupMe. He added that he has “no recollection of treating Hanna B. in an aggressive or rude manner (before, during or after the confirmation process).” He furthermore stated that if he did “anything that came across that way,” he wants to “understand and address it.”
On his temperament, Odigbo wrote that he has “collected internal feedback for [himself] and the Vice President (twice in the fall, one of which was anonymous).” He added that he wants to “ensure that any concerns with leadership are addressed constructively,” and stressed that if members of DSG have concerns about his leadership style, he hopes they “consider sharing their takes.”
From these conversations, it’s clear that there’s a disconnect, and that the chamber is in need of reform. There is widespread frustration about DSG leadership, but there also seems to be frustration with its operating procedures, like nomination and agenda rules. Senators expressed frustration with some things that could be addressed with structural changes, such as Odigbo’s strict control over the agenda — which gives him the power to decide what’s discussed and voted on in meetings — and his selective nomination of certain people over others.
DSG should pass amendments to ease these tensions, granting more power to senators and taking some power from the president. This could mean allowing nominations for positions from senators and giving them formal advice and consent power on the agenda and order of business.
It is critical that we have a functioning and healthy student government. These elected representatives serve as a liaison to school administration who can relay concerns and advocate for student interests. When there is dysfunction in this body, it is harmful to all of us on campus. It is in this spirit that I encourage all members of DSG to work out their disagreements and figure out a way to work productively together for their constituents and the betterment of our campus.
Annabelle Zhang ’27 and Jackson Hyde ’28 contributed to reporting. They were not involved in the writing or editing of this article, and the opinion presented represents the views of Moyse alone. Opinion articles represent the views of their author(s), which are not necessarily those of The Dartmouth.
