<\/p>\n\n\n\n
By Janelle Sears <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Eva D. Coleman\u2019s eligibility to seek reelection as Vice President of Print came before the organization\u2019s Board of Directors during the 2026 convention in Atlanta after a group of former NABJ presidents challenged her candidacy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The NABJ Elections Committee had voted to uphold Coleman\u2019s candidacy during a special meeting Aug. 2, prior to the convention.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The committee was responding to a letter a group of former NABJ presidents sent to President Errin Haines earlier this summer questioning Coleman\u2019s eligibility.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The NABJ board reviewed that decision on Tuesday. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cThe question before the board today is whether the board wishes to exercise the authority branded to, under NABJ\u2019s governing documents, to supersede that elections committed decision,\u201d Sia Nyokor, the organization\u2019s parliamentarian, said. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
The bulk of the questioning focused on chapter 4, section 3 of the constitution, which states that board members classified as NABJ professional members must have a \u201cprincipal livelihood derived from journalism\u201d; however Nyokor noted that there is no specific definition of the requirement. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Will Sutton approached the board for review of this matter during Tuesday\u2019s board meeting. Sutton was a part of the coalition of former presidents who signed a letter to Haines in July. The group contested Coleman\u2019s certification as a professional member based on her current positions as communications and web director of Aubrey Independent School District and lifestyle and culture editor at I Messenger Media LLC. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cThis is about endured integrity of the National Association of Black Journalists,\u201d Sutton said to the board. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Elections Committee Chair Glenn Rice chronicled the process of gathering the documents to review Coleman\u2019s requirements of candidacy but noted that Coleman denied the committee a portion of the requested documents. The board members followed up with questions on how the decision was made. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cI have submitted paperwork, I have submitted documents, and I feel that you cannot make up things to fit the narrative that you want,\u201d Coleman said. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
However, Coleman stated multiple times during her response and questioning that the move felt personal. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
The topic of Coleman\u2019s primary employment, total work hours, benefits and income extended the board meeting around two hours longer than their original end time of 5 p.m. as they entered executive session to come to a final vote. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cExecutive session was necessary to discuss sensitive issues like people\u2019s financial matters,\u201d Haines said. \u201cThe constitution doesn’t require people to disclose what their income is.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
This is not the only time this election cycle that a candidate\u2019s certification as a professional member has been called into question. Region II Director candidate Konah Williams was removed from the ballot under similar circumstances. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cThere is an inconsistency of the certification,\u201d Sutton said. \u201cWe believe that the candidates were treated differently. We should have the same processes for all kingdoms, whether it’s this election or any other.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The final vote was 6-5, with two abstentions. Nine votes were needed to override the Elections Committee\u2019s decision, meaning Coleman will remain on the ballot unopposed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Coleman expressed her gratitude to her fellow board members that acknowledged her professional background with their vote; but emphasized that if members want change there is a process to follow. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cIf anybody wants to see any changes in how we, as an organization, operate and govern ourselves, follow the process to get it done,\u201d Coleman said following the vote. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Former President Vanessa Williams recalled that a previous version of the constitution clarified that a professional members\u2019 primary income had to come from journalism but was amended in the 2000s. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Williams was one of the five former presidents who signed the letter to Haines earlier this summer. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cIt would be in order for us to go and propose the constitutional amendment to go back to that very specific language,\u201d Williams said, \u201cto make sure that journalists serve in those executive positions on the board.\u201d<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"