University of Toronto Students’ Union

Local 98, Canadian Federation of Students

Board of Directors

Package #12

Friday, March 30, 2012

Board Room Student Centre

Mississauga Campus 5 pm

1

2

NCA Credo for Ethical Communication Approved by the NCA Legislative Council in 1999 Questions of right and wrong arise whenever people communicate. Ethical communication is fundamental to responsible thinking, decision making, and the development of relationships and communities within and across contexts, cultures, channels, and media. Moreover, ethical communication enhances human worth and dignity by fostering truthfulness, fairness, responsibility, personal integrity, and respect for self and others. We believe that unethical communication threatens the quality of all communication and consequently the well-being of individuals and the society in which we live. Therefore we, the members of the National Communication Association, endorse and are committed to practicing the following principles of ethical communication: • We advocate truthfulness, accuracy, honesty, and reason as essential to the integrity of communication. • We endorse freedom of expression, diversity of perspective, and tolerance of dissent to achieve the informed and responsible decision making fundamental to a civil society. • We strive to understand and respect other communicators before evaluating and responding to their messages. • We promote access to communication resources and opportunities as necessary to fulfill human potential and contribute to the well-being of families, communities, and society. • We promote communication climates of caring and mutual understanding that respect the unique needs and characteristics of individual communicators. • We condemn communication that degrades individuals and humanity through distortion, intimidation, coercion, and violence, and through the expression of intolerance and hatred. • We are committed to the courageous expression of personal convictions in pursuit of fairness and justice. • We advocate sharing information, opinions, and feelings when facing significant choices while also respecting privacy and confidentiality. • We accept responsibility for the short- and long-term consequences for our own communication and expect the same of others. This portion of www.natcom.org is managed by Jennifer Peltak. If you have suggestions or additions, please contact her directly. NCA: 1765 N Street, NW, Washington, D.C. 20036; 202- 464-4622; 202-464-4600 (fax) Source: http://www.natcom.org/policies/External/EthicalComm.htm (1/19/2005 8:24:42 PM)

3

CONSTITUENCY or POSITIONLAST NAME FIRST NAME

Board of Directors, University of Toronto Students' Union Show All & Sort

St. Michael's CollegeAbrahams Stephanie stephanie@utsu.University CollegeAhmad Jarrar jarrar@utsu.caUniversity of Toronto MississaugaAhmed Abdi abdi@utmsu.caFaculty of EngineeringAzfar Akid akid@utsu.caVice-President Campus LifeAziz Albi albi@utsu.caFaculty of MusicChouhan Kishan kishan@utsu.caFaculty of PharmacyChowdhury Farhana farhana@utsu.caUniversity CollegeCudjoe Abigail abi@utsu.caToronto School of TheologyDawood Bishoy bishoy@utsu.caVictoria CollegeDegenstein Carly carly@utsu.caNew CollegeDhawan Shreena shreena@utsu.caVice-President EquityElamin Lena lena@utsu.caFaculty of Kinesiology and Physical EducationEmmons Danielle

Faculty of NursingEsufali Jessie

St. Michael's CollegeFerrari Lissette lissette@utsu.caWoodsworth CollegeFoster Jon jon@utsu.caWoodsworth CollegeHarvey Rebecca rebecca@utsu.caVice-President University AffairsHo Clara clara@utsu.caUniversity of Toronto MississaugaHusain Gina gina@utmsu.caWoodsworth CollegeHwang Susan susan@utsu.caArts & Science At-largeJanandharan Ramya ramya@utsu.caSt. Michael's CollegeJong Prescilla prescilla@utsu.caNew CollegeKandasamy Thuwanika thuwanika@utsu.University of Toronto MississaugaKhan Saba saba@utmsu.caVictoria CollegeKyu-Kim Min min@utsu.caFaculty of LawMandryk Joshua

Faculty of EngineeringMathur Abhishek abhishek@utsu.caFaculty of MedicineMeng Howard

Transitional Year ProgramMezengwe Brine

Faculty of EngineeringRadebe Dimpho dimpho@utsu.caArts & Science At-largeRokhsefat Sana sana@utsu.caOntario Institute for Studies in EducationRoxas Mark

UTMSU RepresentativeSajjad Munib munib@utmsu.caPresidentSandhu Danielle sandhu@utsu.caVice-President Internal and ServicesScott Corey corey@utsu.caTrinity CollegeScott Michael michael@utsu.caVice-President ExternalShepherd Shaun shaun@utsu.caProfessional Faculty At-largeShilensky Dan dshilensky@utsu.Professional Faculty At-largeSiddiqui Midhat midhat@utsu.caFaculty of DentistryStaibano Anthony

University of Toronto MississaugaUppal Keshav keshav@utmsu.ca

NB: Vacant seats and non-voting members are not listed. 2012-02-03Last updated:

4

CONSTITUENCY or POSITIONLAST NAME FIRST NAME

Board of Directors, University of Toronto Students' Union Show All & Sort

University of Toronto MississaugaUrsel Andrew andrew@utmsu.caUniversity of Toronto MississaugaXu Anne anne@utmsu.caUniversity of Toronto MississaugaYoussef Yasmine yasmine@utmsu.

NB: Vacant seats and non-voting members are not listed. 2012-02-03Last updated:

5

AGENDA Board of Directors Meeting #12 of the University of Toronto Students’ Union Friday, March 30, 2012 ● 5 pm ● Student Centre Board Room, Mississauga Campus

1. CALL TO ORDER

2. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA MOTION Moved: Seconded:

Be it resolved that the agenda for the March 30, 2012 U.T.S.U. Board of Directors meeting be approved as presented.

3. OLD BUSINESS MOTION SERVED WITH NOTICE-002 MOTION Moved: Seconded:

Be It Resolved That the Board of Directors request the executive take all action necessary to facilitate the transition to the new regulatory framework provided by the Canada Not-for-profit Corporations Act to be completed by October 17, 2013.

Be It Further Resolved That the Board of Directors instruct the Policy and Procedures Committee to begin a review of the by-laws with a view for ensuring that they are in line with the Canada Not-for-profit Corporations Act.

4. EXECUTIVE REPORTS MOTION Moved: Seconded:

Be it resolved that the UTSU Board of Directors approve the Executive Reports submitted for the February 17, 2012 Board meeting. Be it further resolved that the UTSU Board of Directors approve the Executive Reports as presented at the March 30, 2012 Board meeting.

5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES MOTION Moved: Seconded:

Be it resolved that the March 30, 2012 minutes package including the following documents be approved by the U.T.S.U. Board of Directors:

a. Board of Directors (2011-2012), January 24 b. Executive Committee Meeting, January 6, February 3, 10, March 14 c. Community Action Commission, January 10, March 26 d. Academic and Student Rights Commission, January 30 e. Professional Faculties Committee, January 30 f. Election and Referenda Committee, February 7, 23, 26, March 3, 5,6, 7, 23, 24 g. Clubs Committee, February 10, March 18 h. Budget Committee, March 25 i. Policy Committee, March 25

6

AGENDA Board of Directors Meeting #12 of the University of Toronto Students’ Union Friday, March 30, 2012 ● 5 pm ● Student Centre Board Room, Mississauga Campus

j. Elections and Referenda Appeals Committee, February 29, March 8, 26 k. Sustainability Commission, February 28

6. REPORT OF CHIEF RETURNING OFFICER MOTION Moved: Seconded:

Be it resolved that the Chief Returning Officer report be approved as presented

7. RATIFICATION OF ELECTIONS RESULTS

MOTION Moved: Seconded: Be it resolved that the UTSU Spring 2012 election results be ratified.

8. APPROVAL OF UTSU REVISED BUDGET MOTION Moved: Seconded:

Be it resolved that the UTSU 2011-2012 Revised Budget be approved as presented

9. MEMBERSHIP FEE CHANGES (for approval)

MOTION Moved: Seconded:

Be it resolved that the Board of Directors approve:

• an increase of $0.34 per session, per member, to the UTSU (i.e. Students’ Administrative Council) membership fee; and

• an increase of $0.14 per session, per member, to the Canadian Federation of Students membership fee; and

• an increase of $0.01 per session, per member, to the WUSC Student Refugee Program fee.

10. UTSU HEALTH AND DENTAL PLAN FEE (for approval) MOTION Moved: Seconded:

Be it resolved that the UTSU Board of Directors approve an increase of 4% (or $2.41) per year, per student for the UTSU Health Plan fee and an increase of 10% (or $5.14) per year, per student for the UTSU Dental Plan fee as permitted by our membership.

11. STUDENT COMMONS FEE (for approval) MOTION Moved: Seconded:

7

AGENDA Board of Directors Meeting #12 of the University of Toronto Students’ Union Friday, March 30, 2012 ● 5 pm ● Student Centre Board Room, Mississauga Campus

Be it resolved that the UTSU Board of Directors approve an increase of $0.62, per session, per St. George member to the Student Commons fee as permitted by our membership.

12. NEXT BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING

13. OTHER BUSINESS

14. ADJOURNMENT

MOTION Moved: Seconded:

Be it resolved that the March 30, 2012 meeting of the Board of Directors be adjourned.

8

Executive Reports

President Vice-President Campus Life

Vice-President Equity Vice-President External

Vice-President University Affairs Vice-President Internal and Services

9

  

 

 

Executive Report – February 17, 2012 Danielle Sandhu – President Executive Summary:

1) National Day of Action 2) CUPE 3902 Bargaining Update 3) Engineering Town Hall 4) Student Commons Update 5) MAM students update

1) National Day of Action

February 1st was an inspiring reminder about the collective strength of students and the necessity for us to continue our work in fighting for access to education. We saw nearly 5,000 students gather and march across campus to Queen’s Park, united in our call for more funding for our post-secondary institutions and more affordable education for students. It was incredible to see the energy of our members – many of whom participated in their first rally – as they chanted and marched, demanding that our government be more accountable, and extend the tuition fee reduction grant to all students. Already Glen Murray, Minister of Training Colleges and Universities, has stated that the Ministry will look to expand the grant eligibility and that there may be additional funding to be put towards post-secondary education. We have already seen that political pressure from students resulted in the first round of grants being issued by the government to coincide with our Day of Action. We will continue to follow up with the Ministry and connect with our members when new developments emerge. Congratulations to members of our Drop Fees Coalition on coordinating an incredibly successful Day of Action. From postering and banner-painting to class announcements and canvassing one-on-one, coalition members put in lots of time and effort to build a successful day of action. We had great participation from our campus clubs, who formed their own contingents in the march. Congratulations to our sister students’ unions, the GSU, APUS, SCSU and UTMSU, for your efforts in coordinating the Day of Action. This was a strong, united effort and we thank you for your ongoing solidarity. Thank you to all of our staff and volunteers for your support and assistance in executing a safe and spirited rally.

2) CUPE 3902 Bargaining Update

The bargaining process between CUPE 3902 and the University administration continues. The conciliation period, where negotiations were being mediated by an impartial mediator has ended. During that period, the University Administration rejected all of the key proposals put forward by CUPE3902, including their Quality of Education Proposal. This proposal addresses the quality of undergraduate education, particular the quality of undergraduate tutorials, and includes a demand that tutorials be capped at 50 students. The Administration did put forward a new agreement on the bargaining table, but this too did not address any of the key proposals, including the Quality of Education Proposal. Members of CUPE 3902 Unit 1 met on January 30 to vote on the agreement put forward by the Administration. Overwhelmingly, members voted to

10

  

 

 

reject the proposed agreement and set a strike date of February 24, 2012. The conciliation period has expired, and both parties are in a cooling period before negotiations resume on February 21 for two days. It is our hope that negotiations later this month will result in an agreement, without any disruption in classes. If no satisfactory agreement materialises, CUPE3902 members are in a position to hold a legal strike. Members should note that if the University Administration accepts the Quality of Education proposal, all tutorials across the University would be capped at 50 students. CUPE3902 members have demonstrated a strong will to strike in order to fight for this hard tutorial cap for undergraduate tutorials. Members should also note the University is legally obligated to bargain with CUPE3902 in order to establish a new agreement. The UTSU will continue to connect with the CUPE 3902 bargaining team to ensure that our members are kept informed as to the developments in bargaining. 3. Engineering Town Hall The Union recently participated in the Dean of Applied Science and Engineering’s town hall meeting on February 10, 2012. Here students, staff, faculty and administrators were able to come together to discuss issues of interest to the Faculty. Topics for this town hall included the new Engineering building, to be built at Site 10 (behind Simcoe Hall), the Faculty’s new online course evaluation system, student priorities for the Faculty’s IT systems and career preparation. Approximately 80 participants discussed these items and provided insight into how the Faculty could move forward. We were encouraged by the healthy dialogue and the space created by Dean Cristina Amon, who previously hosted a similar town hall in the fall semester. We encourage the deans of others faculties to host similar initiatives to allow for students to shape their experience here at the University. 4. Student Commons Update It has been incredibly exciting to work on the Student Commons project over the course of the year. We have been moving along in our negotiations with the University Administration to develop the Operating Agreement governing the operation of the building. We are also encouraged by the progress made in the Project Planning report, which is being developed through collaboration between Union representatives and the Facilities and Planning office of the University. Both the Operating Agreement and Project Planning Report will be circulated through governance for approval. 5. MAM Students Update As the Board may recall, our members in the Mississauga Academy of Medicine were hoping to become UTMSU members in order to have access to UTMSU services, in addition to benefitting from UTM campus services. We are pleased to report that in a recent referendum, MAM students voted 74% in favour of becoming UTMSU members. We are continuing to work with the Office of the Vice Provost, Students, the UTMSU and Medical Society to ensure these students have access to all UTM and UTMSU services. Respectfully submitted, Danielle Sandhu President, University of Toronto Students’ Union Local 98 of the Canadian Federation of Students president@utsu.ca

11

  

 

 

Executive Report – March 30, 2012 Danielle Sandhu – President Executive Summary:

1. CUPE 3902 Bargaining Update 2. Quebec Solidarity 3. 3 Cubed Report 4. Canada Corporations Act

1. CUPE 3902 Bargaining Update The bargaining process between CUPE3902 and the University Administration has come to an end with a signed agreement. During the last scheduled days of bargaining, members of the bargaining teams for both sides were able to negotiate a tentative settlement. The settlement then went to a ratification vote of Unit 1 members, who voted in favour of sending the settlement to a unit-wide vote. In a ratification vote held on March 5 and 6, 2012, 1797 members of CUPE3902 Unit 1 voted to ratify the agreement, with 1197 members voting in favour and 600 against. Details about the agreement can be found online at http://cupe3902.org/boundless/. As a response to CUPE3902’s Quality of Education proposal, the University Administration proposed a joint working group on undergraduate tutorials to study pedagogically acceptable tutorial and lab sizes, and to make recommendations which could be implemented upon approval by the Provost. The UTSU is happy to see that there has been some progress on evaluating the undergraduate experience, and we look forward to the recommendations that emerge from this working group. We hope to see tutorial and laboratory caps, similar to those that exist at other institutions, being put in place.

2. Quebec Solidarity Students and allies in Quebec have been on strike for weeks in response to proposed tuition fee increases in the province. The Charest government is citing that the province’s education system is in ruins, and is calling for a 75% increase in tuition fees over a five-year period. At present, nearly 200 000 students are on strike in the province. Educational institutions in Quebec have historically been better funded than institutions in the rest of the country, especially as compared to Ontario. This is due to public pressure on the government to prioritise funding for education. Students believe the tuition fee increases are unjustified, citing that the government and educational institutions need to better spend the funding that is available. Further, students believe that the tuition fee increases will continue to marginalise low and middle income students, leaving many with significant student debt-loads. Students are on strike to maintain accessibility to post-secondary education and for social equality. Members of the executive have been working with general members and campus organisations to raise awareness of the government action and student responses in Quebec. We offer our solidarity to students in Quebec fighting for access to education, as well as to our sister student unions working hard to mobilise their membership.

12

  

 

 

3. 3 Cubed Report At the end of February, a policy paper from the Ministry of Training Colleges and Universities (MTCU) not yet released was leaked by the Canadian Press. This paper – the 3 Cubed Report – proposes a ‘3x3’ approach wherein colleges and universities will realise a three percent savings in each of three years by offering one-third of their courses online, adding a summer term in a trimester system and offering accelerated three-year degrees. The 3x3 Report is troubling for the future of post-secondary education in Ontario. It seems that the report will be used to justify the government's continued failure to prioritise education in Ontario. A three-year degree, with an emphasis on online education, can undermine the fundamental purpose of our institutions - to provide a quality undergraduate education. Online education should not be used to replace critical engagement with a professor and peers in the classroom. We need to see a commitment to adequate funding of the post-secondary sector, rather than the creation of online campuses and continued increases in tuition fees. Many students have increased opportunities during the summer to earn income to help pay for their education. Being in school year-round can detract from these opportunities. We also have to consider how institutions and employers across the country and in the United States will perceive the value of a three-year degree where the bulk of the learning takes place online, and students do not get the same level of practical learning. We would like to see a more consultative process from the MTCU, one that involves students and faculty, to help inform provincial policy on higher education. We will work with sister student unions across the province and our provincial representatives at the CFS-O to advocate for higher education policy that prioritises quality and accessibility.

4. Canada Corporations Act Members of the Executive Committee are currently working with our lawyers to review the recent changes to the Canada Corporations Act, under which we are incorporated as an organisation. The Canada Corporations Act was amended in October of 2011, and since then we have been working with our legal team to understand fully the changes and how they might impact our organisation. Following a review of the Act in full, we will be working to ensure we make any necessary changes to be fully compliant with the Act by the time those changes come into effect in October, 2014. Respectfully submitted, Danielle Sandhu President, University of Toronto Students’ Union Local 98 of the Canadian Federation of Students president@utsu.ca

13

Executive Report – February 17th

, 2012

Albi Aziz – Vice President Campus Life

Executive Summary:

1. Clubs Funding

2. Unity Ball

3. UTSU Club Leadership Awards

4. UTSU Club Seminar

5. Club Consultation

1. Clubs Funding

The UTSU continues to disburse short-term clubs funding. Short Term Funding is designed to fund one single event, and cannot exceed $500. This type of funding is intended for groups that require funding for only one event during the school year. Applications for an event subsidy are due at least one month prior to the event. A group may only apply for one Short Term event subsidy per year. The UTSU Clubs Committee met on February 10th to wrap up any outstanding long-term funding applications. Please see the Clubs Committee meeting minutes attached in this Package. 2. Unity Ball

The UTSU will be hosting our third annual Unity Ball on March 1, 2012 at the Chestnut Ballroom (89 Chestnut St). Tickets go on sale on Tuesday, February 14, 2012 at the UTSU office. The evening will include dinner, dancing, live performances and a presentation of club awards. The Unity Ball is an opportunity for Clubs to recognize each other’s accomplishments and work on campus through the year. This year, tickets to the Unity Ball are priced at an early-bird price of $20 until February 17 and $25 after February 17. We are also providing an incentive to clubs that are interested in purchasing an entire table; tables are priced at $160 and include two complimentary bottles of wine. 3. UTSU Club Leadership Awards

Campus clubs are an integral part of campus life at the University of Toronto. The University of Toronto Students' Union would like to commend and recognize the amazing efforts made by campus clubs through the Third Annual Club Leadership Awards. Any U.T.S.U. member may nominate a U.T.S.U. recognized club or member of a U.T.S.U. recognized club by submitting a nomination form which can be found on the UTSU website. The U.T.S.U. Clubs Committee will review all nominations and collect relevant information. Nomination Deadline: February 17, 2012, 6pm.

14

Award winners will be announced at our Third Annual Unity Ball Semi-Formal on March 1, 2012 at 89 Chestnut Ballroom. Nominated clubs, nominators and U.T.S.U. members are encouraged to attend and celebrate a successful year of programming at the University of Toronto. The awards are: Social Justice & Equity Award Academic and Students Rights Award Community Action Award Sustainability Award Outstanding New Club Award Outstanding Club Executive Team Award Outstanding Academic Union Award Outstanding Publication Award Outstanding Event Award Outstanding Community Engagement Award Outstanding Promotions Outstanding Cultural Club Award

4. UTSU Club Seminar

This year, the UTSU has introduced a series of club seminars aimed at teaching various skills to club executives. The Club Seminars cover Executive Training, Introductions to Social Media, How to Get Sponsorship & Funding, Becoming Sustainable, and Preparing for Executive Transition. The next Club Seminar is on March 12 at 6:00pm in UC140. 5. Clubs Consultation

Clubs consultation has been an ongoing project. Budget, event planning, and event promotion consultations are available to all clubs. Clubs are welcome to email me at vpcampuslife@utsu.ca to setup a meeting.

In solidarity, Albi Aziz Vice-President Campus Life University of Toronto Students’ Union Local 98, Canadian Federation of Students vpcampuslife@utsu.ca

15

Executive Report – March 30, 2012 Albi Aziz – Vice-President Campus Life Executive Summary:

1. UofT’s Got Talent – March 8, 2012 2. Unity Ball – March 1, 2012 3. Clubs Leadership Awards 4. Clubs Funding 5. UTSU’s Got You – April Edition

1. UofT’s Got Talent – March 8, 2012 On Thursday March 8th, the UTMSU, SCSU, and UTSU hosted a collaborative talent show at the XS Nightclub and Event Centre. Each students’ union had finalists from preliminary shows hosted across each campus that ranged from magicians, cultural dances, bands, and vocalists. The St. George preliminary was hosted at New College's 'Turn It Up' annual talent show. During the finale show, we hosted a lineup of judges who are Canadian pop-artists: rapper P. Reign, pop-singer Kristina Maria, and RnB performer JRDN. The artists also put on a live performance following the talent competition. The UTSU has received great feedback from the artists, student performers and event attendees. We closed out the night with a club after-party that was open to all students. UofT's Got Talent has been a great opportunity to showcase of the University's diversity and the talent of UTSU members. We want to encourage more individuals and campus clubs to get involved in future shows. Special thank you to Chris Thompson from the UTMSU who took a lead on the project, Leah Robertson from SCSU who coordinated for the Scarborough campus, all of the associates and volunteers who helped with the production of the show, and New College Student Council for the hosting of the St. George preliminary show. We look forward to next year's UofT's Got Talent!

2. Unity Ball – March 1, 2012 The UTSU is pleased to have hosted an incredibly successful Unity Ball this year. This is the third year of the event, and it has been great to see the event grow since it was established in 2010. We saw a great turnout from our club executives and members, and UTSU members at-large, as well as lots of support from our campus clubs in hosting the event. We hosted a wonderful line up of performers from several UTSU dance and cultural groups who provided the dinner entertainment as well as a DJ which hosted a dance-party following the dinner portion of the evening. We hope this event will continue to grow as a clubs showcase over the years to come. Thank you to our Unity Ball team for their support in organizing the logistics of the event. Special thank you goes to all of our dance and performance groups for their contributions to the event and to all of our clubs that do great work all year round.

16

3. Clubs Leadership Awards UTSU campus clubs contribute so much to the campus community by creating spaces for students to connect with each other and get involved. The UTSU Clubs Leadership Awards were designed to recognize clubs and club executives for their outstanding contributions to the University community. We are excited to announce the winners of this year’s UTSU Clubs Leadership Awards and wish to congratulate each and every club on their outstanding achievements. All of the recipients were well deserving of their awards. Congratulations and all the best in the new year! 2011-2012 Winners Academic Student Rights: UofT Student Buddy Academic Union: Equity Studies Students Union, Health Studies Students Union Community Action: International Socialists Athletic Club Award: New College New Dragons Dragon Boat Club Outstanding Club Exec Member: Fariya Mohiuddin (LGBTOUT), Arsala Samdani (PDF), Kishan Chouhan (SAA) Outstanding Club Executive Team: Muslim Students Association, Organisation of Latin American Students Outstanding Community Engagement Award: UofT Rotaract Club Outstanding Culture Club Award: Indian Students Society, Greek Students Association Outstanding Event Award: Chinese Students and Scholars Association Outstanding New Club Award: Pakistan Development Fund Outstanding Publication Award: UT Chinese Magazine Outstanding Club Promotions: South Asian Alliance Social Justice and Equity: African Studies Course Union, Muslim Students Association Sustainability Award: Public Water Initiative, Bike Chain

4. Clubs Funding The Clubs Committee has been working diligently to review all outstanding long and short-term applications. Members of the Committee have been working with clubs to resolve any outstanding

17

requirements that clubs with tabled applications needed to fulfill as requisite to receiving funding. We have been able to assist many clubs in fulfilling the requirements so they can be considered for UTSU funding. The minutes from the Clubs Committee meeting are appended to this package for review. Thank you to the Clubs Committee members who have contributed their time to ensuring our clubs continue to be supported through the clubs funding process.

5. UTSU’s Got You – April Edition The Campus Life Commission will be hosting one more session of the popular UTSU’s Got You exam destressor. Once again, we will be supporting students through the exam period with snacks at Robarts Library, as well as other locations across campus. Board members are encouraged to sign up to assist with the sessions taking place in locations across campus, or to suggest locations for the event. In solidarity, Albi Aziz Vice-President Campus Life University of Toronto Students’ Union Local 98, Canadian Federation of Students vpcampuslife@utsu.ca

18

Executive Report – February 17th

, 2012

Lena Elamin – Vice President Equity

Executive Summary:

1. eXpression Against Oppression (XAO)

2. Religion

1. XAO

a. Man 2 Man

Man 2 Man took place on February 7, 2012 at Hart House. The show is an exploration of racial, cultural and sexual prejudices. The show was presented in collaboration with a number of campus groups, including but not limited to the African Students Association, the Black Students Association, Caribbean Studies, Hart House, LGBTOUT, the MultiFaith Centre, Positive Space at St. George and Qu(e)erying Religion.

b. African Studies Course Union: Islamic Africa and Diaspora: Historical

and Contemporary perspectives

This series explores the diversity of experiences, histories and traditions of peoples of African descent who identify as Muslim, both on the continent and in the Diaspora. Through a series of three events, an evening of arts and performance, an academic panel and a keynote lecture. This project will highlight the many ways that Muslims of African descent have lived and expressed their black and Muslim identities. The first event, Islamic Africa and Diaspora: Historical and Contemporary Perspectives Roundtable took place on February 9. The remaining event schedule is as follows: Feb 16

| 6 pm | Mooz-lum (dir. Basir, 2011) Film Screening and Discussion |William Doo Auditorium, New College (45 Willcocks St.) Film Screening Mar 1| Keynote: Islam, Race and Ethnicity in Contemporary Africa feat. Dr. Khalid Mustafa Medani | Koffler House Auditorium (569 Spadina Ave) |

c. Olive Tree Foundation: Giving Ourselves A Voice Screening Launch

Giving Ourselves a Voice is a documentary of Muslim students encountering stigma and stereotypes based on their religion. It is an opportunity to display the point of view and challenges faced by Muslim Youth in Canada. The film launch is based on two short documentaries on the difficulties facing Muslim youth in Canada. “Giving Ourselves a Voice” will help young Muslims explain, in their own words to their diverse community, what it is like to be a Canadian growing up in the prevailing culture of Islamophobia and negative stereotypes. The event will take place on February 16, 2012, the location is TBA.

19

d. Faculty of Kinesiology and Physical Education

The Black History Month Committee of The Faculty of Kinesiology and Physical Education will be hosting a panel discussion on Thursday February 16 that is themed around Afro-centric schools, with a special focus on the role of physical education, sport and health studies in these schools. Respectfully submitted, Lena Elamin Vice-President Equity University of Toronto Students’ Union Local 98, Canadian Federation of Students vpequity@utsu.ca

20

Executive Report – March 30, 2012 Lena Elamin – Vice-President Equity Executive Summary:

1. International Day for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination – March 21, 2012 2. Religious Conference Update 3. Trans Film Screening – March 19, 2012 4. International Women’s Day- March 3, 2012

1. International Day for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination – March 21, 2012 We are proud to have partnered up with the Anti-Racism and Cultural Diversity Office, as well as the Council of Agencies Serving South Asians on two initiatives for the International Day for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination. The ARCDO collaborative initiative highlighted campus organisations that facilitate dialogue on race, racism and anti-racism. This communications campaign aimed at raising awareness about how all of us can contribute to building a safer community and the groups and spaces that exist where members of the community can engage safely. We also partnered with CASSA, as well as a number of community organisations on hosting the Racism-free Ontario forum on March 21st, at OISE. This forum aimed to address racial inequities that exist within our communities, specifically to discuss the impact of racism on youth. The forum also looked at identifying strategies to address racism experienced by youth in school, in the work place and more broadly in their communities.

2. Religious Conference Update We have been working closely with a number of the faith-based groups across campus to organise a conference looking at the intersection of faith and gender. The proposed conference will look at feminism, religious observance and how shared identities impact the realisation of values, practices and experiences by women of faith. As the scope of the project has changed since it began, we are looking at developing this conference over time and hosting it in the future.

3. Trans Film Screening – March 19, 2012 The Social Justice and Equity Commission sponsored a film screening as part of the ongoing Trans Film Screening Series on campus, affiliated with the Centre for Women and Trans People. The series is in now in its fourth year, and we are proud to be supporting this initiative that has grown over the years. The film screening featured “Tom Boy”, a French film which explores the construction of gender and relationships through the perspectives of children. Happy anniversary to the TFSS!

4. International Women’s Day – March 3, 2012 We participated in International Women’s Day rally and demonstration in Toronto on March 3, 2012. The focus of this year’s march was the impact of the austerity agenda on women. Specifically, the cuts to

21

public sector spending have resulted in cuts to critical public services used by women and other marginalised groups in the community. The march comprised of labour groups, public sector workers, student unions and community groups. Rally participants highlighting issues on municipal, provincial and federal levels; including good jobs for all, access to municipal services, federal spending on military and lack of a national public childcare system. It was great to see solidarity across communities at the rally and we hope that this solidarity will continue in the fight for justice for all women. Respectfully submitted, Lena Elamin Vice-President Equity University of Toronto Students’ Union Local 98, Canadian Federation of Students vpequity@utsu.ca

22

Executive Report – February 17, 2012 Shaun Shepherd – Vice-President External Executive Summary:

1. National Day of Action - Feb. 1 2. UTM Campus Food Town hall 3. Canadian Federation of Students-Ontario Annual General Meeting

1. National Day of Action The 2012 National Day of Action was an opportunity for students and allies across the country to unite and voice a collective discontent with the ever-increasing cost of education, and failed government commitments to increase post-secondary education funding. Since the early 1990s tuition fees have increased by approximately 250% when matched against inflation. In recent years, we have seen dramatic changes in how education is funded. From the deregulation of professional program fees to the implementation of flat fees, the financial burdens placed on students are immense. The National Day of Action, realized as the Drop Fees rally across Ontario, was aimed at addressing such concerns through collective student action. At the rally we saw our students excited to hit the streets and demand a more affordable and accessible education from our government. Collectively, thousands of students united to take our message to Queen’s Park – that education should be a right, and our government needs to make a commitment to ensure that it is accessible to students and their families. As a part of organizing for the Day of Action, the Union hosted several events and created forums for discussion in which members were encouraged to participate. The events hosted and outreach strategies employed came directly from the input of our members, during our weekly Drop Fees Coalition meetings. We organized the 'Drop Peas' Free Food Fair, where clubs were invited to support the campaign by serving free food to members and talking about the funding realities of our University and the need to strengthen public funding of our educational institutions. The Drop Peas event attracted over 500 students who were engaged in discussions about post-secondary education funding. The communication strategy for the campaign was structured to ensure that every student would receive notice of the rally in some form. The Union is proud to report that a Drop Fees edition mass email was sent to our membership on behalf of the Office of the Vice Provost, Students. Advertisements were placed in The Varsity, and a series of posters were created and posted in high visibility locations across campus. The Union hosted weekly coalition meetings where students were invited to participate and shape the campaign as well as pose questions. Particularly, there were many questions posed by students regarding the recent provincial government’s tuition fee grant. There were concerns expressed regarding the elimination of needs-based grants in order to finance this particular program which is especially concerning for those ineligible for the grant.

Members of the broader community saw coverage of the Day of Action in the media. Our media presence was done through the support of the Canadian Federation of Students-Ontario. The CFS-O office has reported that over 5.8 million people were reached through the media attention garnered on February 1st.

23

The success of the campaign is due in large part to be dedication of Members of the Board. We are proud to report that nearly 4,000 students participated in the Day of Action throughout the day. None of this would be possible without the time and effort of the U.T.S.U. staff, Board, members, and allies. Already, we are experiencing the impact of mass student mobilization. On February 2nd, the Minister of Training Colleges and Universities, Glen Murray announced that transfer funding for colleges and Universities and student aid would be increased as the government releases its budget this spring. He has also stated the government will look at modifying the eligibility of the tuition fee reduction grant, in recognition that many students are currently left out of this program. This is a victory of the campaign, and the UTSU, along with its allies will continue to work to ensure that all new funding addresses the needs of all students represented by the Union.

2. UTM Campus Food Townhall Planning is underway to host a Campus Food Townhall on the Mississauga campus. This event is an opportunity to discuss a university-wide need for access to affordable, healthy food that meets the needs of our membership.

3. Canadian Federation of Students-Ontario Annual General Meeting Please see the report-back attached in this Board of Directors package. In solidarity, Shaun Shepherd Vice-President External University of Toronto Students’ Union Local 98, Canadian Federation of Students vpexternal@utsu.ca

24

 

 

 

Executive Report – March 30, 2012 Shaun Shepherd – Vice-President External Executive Summary:

1. Ontario Tuition Fee Framework 2. Provincial Moratorium on Flat Fees 3. Municipal Updates 4. CFS-Ontario Lobby Week

1. Ontario Tuition Fee Framework

The amount which publicly funding post-secondary institutions may annually increase tuition fees is regulated by the provincial government. For the past seven years, under the “Reaching Higher” education framework, the government of Ontario has allowed for post-secondary institutions to increase tuition fees by about five percent annually – an increase above the rate of inflation On March 8th, the Ministry of Training, Colleges, and Universities announced that it would extend the current tuition fee framework for 2012-2013. This will allow institutions to continue to increase tuition fees by five percent annually for domestic undergraduate students (tuition fees for international students are de-regulated and can increase by any amount per year). The Ministry has stated that it will consult with institutions, organisation and students on the development of a new tuition fee policy over the course of the year to be in place for Fall 2013. For more information, please review this press release from the Canadian Federation of Students - Ontario: http://bit.ly/H8BYGI

2. Provincial Moratorium on Flat Fees In 2009, there was widespread community uproar over the introduction of flat programme fees in the Faculty of Arts and Science at the University of Toronto. In its current form, the flat fee results in students who take anywhere between three and five courses being charged for the full course compliment. The fee structure unfairly charges students who choose to take a reduced course load for a number of personal, financial, and/or academic reasons. Since its inception, the UTSU has been on the forefront of advocating for its removal at the level of University governance, as well as provincial governance. On March 8th, as part of its announcement on the tuition fee framework, the Ministry of Training, Colleges, and Universities announced that it will be placing a moratorium on increasing or establishing flat and deferral fees for 2012-2013. Deferral fees are often paid to institutions by students on OSAP waiting for the release of their loan funding. The MTCU further states that the moratorium period will be used to work with the sector on a system-wide approach to institution flat and deferral fees. This announcement is a victory for UTSU members as we have worked hard to raise the profile of the marginalising impact of programme fees. We look forward to continuing the work on the path to the elimination of the flat programme fee structure.

25

 

 

 

For more information, please review the following press release from the Government of Ontario: http://bit.ly/xPIX5s

3. Municipal Updates

On March 22 and 23, Toronto City Council met to discuss motions pertaining to the future of public transportation. Motions on the table included the acceptance of a report of the Expert Advisory Transit Panel, research into the feasibility of a new transit dedicated parking tax, and broad public consultation on the city's transit needs over the next 50 years. On March 12, city councillors received a document called the "Report of the Expert Advisory Panel Regarding Transit on Sheppard Avenue East". The report assessed the merits of light rail transit against other transit options based on nine criteria: economic development, cost effectiveness & fiscal sustainability, timeframe, ridership, network connectivity, level of service, equity & accessibility, environmental sustainability, and community impact. By accepting the Report, the city of Toronto is on its way to expanding transit infrastructure on Sheppard Avenue East from Don Mills to Morningside. Students residing in the area will benefit from the expanded transit infrastructure. The full Expert Transit Panel Report can be found here: http://bit.ly/yl9Mnc We will continue our ongoing work to ensure our members have accessible to affordable, sustainable transit. Members are encouraged to email vpexternal@utsu.ca if interested in getting involved with the Union’s work on access to transit.

4. CFS-Ontario Lobby Week

As part of our ongoing lobbying efforts, representatives from student unions across the province met with MPPs at Queen’s Park during the week of March 5-9, 2012. This was an opportunity for us to highlight the challenges facing students in accessing a high-quality education in Ontario, and inform the government’s future policies on higher education. We hope that our recommendations will inform a provincial framework that prioritises funding, access and quality.

In Solidarity, Shaun Shepherd Vice-President, External University of Toronto Students’ Union Local 98, Canadian Federation of Students vpexternal@utsu.ca

26

Executive Report – February 17th, 2012 Clara Ho – Vice President University Affairs Executive Summary:

1. U of T Signs Access Copyright Agreement 2. Professional Faculties Outreach

a. Lunch n’ Learns b. Faculty of Dentistry Students

3. Academic Advocacy Office

1. U of T Signs Access Copyright Agreement On January 30th, the University Administration quietly signed an agreement with Access Copyright, a copyright licensing organization, in conjunction with the University of Western Ontario, which results in a substantial increase in copyright costs that will be downloaded onto students as a large increase in ancillary fees. It will also have substantial negative implications for researchers, such as restrictions on the use of materials and mandated electronic surveillance of the academic community. Since the signing of the agreement, the University has received strong criticism from renowned copyright experts and lawyers, such as Ariel Katz from the U of T Faculty of Law, Howard Knopf, and Sam Trosow, from the University of Western Ontario. Students, faculty, and the academic community have raised serious concerns about the costs, process, content, and timing of the agreement. The agreement increases the student CANCOPY fee from $3.38 to $27.50. There are questions about the legality of this increase without adequate student consultation. As well, the agreement was signed with no proper discussion with faculty and the U of T academic community, despite it having very real implications. For example, there are concerns about how the agreement contains clauses that permit the surveillance of students’ and faculty’s personal email accounts, as the definition of copying expanded to include “transmission of electronic mail”. The agreement also appears to duplicate and make students pay for, existing rights to reproduction of materials that are granted under the Copyright Act’s fair dealing clause, and through site licenses, which the University currently pays millions of dollars as part of its operating costs. Furthermore, copyright lawyers have raised criticisms regarding the legitimacy of the indemnity that the agreement supposedly provides the University, if they are sued for copying “Published Works”. Within the agreement, “Published Works” are defined as materials that are created by individuals who are not members of Access Copyright. Thus, the indemnity encourages the University to duplicate other people’s works. In other words, Access Copyright’s business model is premised on profiting from the illegal reproduction of other’s works. This, in itself, constitutes a massive copyright infringement. Students and faculty are also concerned about the very poor timing of the agreement, as other Universities are awaiting the results of the Copyright Modernization Act, Bill C-11, in a few months. This act will clarify and expand the definition of fair dealing to include uses in for educational purposes. As well, many educational institutions are fighting Access Copyright on the tariff at the Copyright Board, and the University was part and supportive of this legal battle. The academic community in Canada is shocked to see U of T (and University of Western Ontario) suddenly capitulate to Access Copyright, rather than demonstrating leadership in the fight for fair access to information.

27

As well, students, faculty and the academic community feel that this agreement is not in the best interests of the University. There are effective alternatives to Access Copyright, such as fair dealing, site licenses, and open access, and the scope of usage that it offers to researchers is questionable. The University has received overwhelming criticism and negative press for this agreement, and this hurts the reputation of the University as a leader in research innovation. The University Administration has failed to show leadership in the fight for open access and using copyright as an encourager of learning and research, not suppressing it. The University Administration needs to respect students, faculty and its academic community, who are the bedrock of its research success. The UTSU, with the Canadian Federation of Students and the Graduate Students’ Union at UWO have issued a press release, condemning the agreement. An article has also been written in “The Newspaper” that raises the above concerns. As well, student governors are raising concerns about this agreement, which will be on the upcoming Governing Council agenda. We encourage all students to call on governors to request the University Administration to reconsider and repeal this agreement until proper consultation of students and faculty has been achieved.

2. Professional Faculties Outreach

a. Lunch n’ Learns The UTSU recently organized Lunch n’ Learns at the Faculties of Music and Law. They were both very well received and members greatly appreciated the informative presentations and free food. The UTSU will continue outreaching to all Professional Faculty programs through email updates.

b. Faculty of Dentistry Students Dentistry students have requested for a meeting with Lucy Fromowitz, from the Office of Student Life, to discuss how they can access more student services. The UTSU will be working with them to develop a way to increase communications between student services and dental students, and to ensure that students have a strong voice in these discussions.

3. Academic Advocacy Office The UTSU has been doing research to develop the Academic Advocacy Office by looking at the best practices of these offices at other universities, and what kind of services students would find most helpful. From preliminary research, students find services regarding help on writing academic appeals/petitions, advice on handling academic offences, and resources for financial aid to be a priority. Students were also interested in getting information on turnitin.com and tenants’ rights. We welcome any suggestions from Board Directors and members on what services they think would be useful to offer at an academic advocacy office. Respectfully submitted, Clara Ho Vice-President University Affairs University of Toronto Students’ Union Local 98, Canadian Federation of Students vpua@utsu.ca

28

  

 

 

Executive Report – March 30th, 2012 Clara Ho – Vice-President University Affairs  

Executive Summary:

1. Update on the U of T Access Copyright Agreement 2. Council Of Student Services (COSS) Meeting and Retreat 3. Academic Board Budget Approval 4. Scholarship Guide 5. Academic Advocacy Office

1. Update on the U of T Access Copyright Agreement Since the release of the joint letter by UTSU, GSU, and UTFA condemning the recently signed Access Copyright agreement by the University of Toronto, concerns regarding the issue were raised at the February 16th, 2012 Governing Council meeting. Although student and alumni governors highlighted a number of problems with the agreement at that meeting, it is still uncertain whether the agreement has received its required governance approval as per Section 22 of the agreement. Students and faculty are currently investigating the legality of such an ancillary fee increase under Category 5 of the “Policy on Ancillary Fees”, and whether the nature of the fee increase was approved by the Ministry of Training, Colleges, and Universities. As the letter has been circulated widely within the educational and copyright community, we continue to work with faculty and graduate students to pressure the administration to reconsider the agreement. Graduate students at the University of Western Ontario have also released letters condemning the same agreement signed by their University. We will continue to raise concerns with the administration at the Advisory Committee to U of T Library Systems and other Boards in Governing Council, and encourage students at other institutions to raise similar concerns as outlined in the letter, to their respective administrations.

2. Council Of Student Services (COSS) Meeting and Retreat

At the February 27th, 2012 meeting of COSS, studentunions unanimously voted against the resolutions put forward by Hart House, Athletics, and the Office of Student Life to approve permanent increases to student fees. U.T.S.U. and other Unions raised many concerns on how student fees consistently contribute more, year after year, towards paying for essential campus services, and cited the severe lack of commitment from the University administration to contribute towards operating costs of services. We also raised concerns to the administration on the need to advocate for more funding from the province. As well, we urged administration to advocate for student needs and improved services at higher levels of governance within the University. The results of the resolutions were then approved at the University Affairs Board meeting on Tuesday, March 13th, 2012. Administrators commented on how permanent student fee increases were approved at UTM and UTSC, but not at the St. George campus. In light of the growing concerns raised by students on the disproportionate contributions of student fees towards services and in the spirit of improving student services, members at COSS agreed to organize a retreat this summer, which will invite incoming and outgoing members of COSS. The purpose of the

29

  

 

 

retreat is to work with student representatives and those involved in the COSS decision-making process to have effective and productive discussions on improving the quality and accessibility of student services, to develop a good understanding of ancillary fees development and budget contexts, and to create best strategies for collaborative efforts on services. We may also invite members of Council on Athletics and Recreation and Hart House Board of Stewards as they approve budgets that are sent to COSS for further approval. We are looking forward to working with Student Life on developing this first-ever retreat, and are optimistic about the collaborative nature of the project. All members of COSS and student representatives from Hart House have expressed interest and provided positive feedback about the idea.

3. Budget Approval at Academic Board

At the March 14th, 2012 meeting of the Academic Board, governors approved the short and long-term budget for 2012 – 2013. At this meeting, administrators highlighted that student fees (49%) will be contributing more towards the operating budget of the University, than public funding (40%) from the province. This trend is worrisome as the University shifts away from being a predominantly publically funded institution. The costs of tuition are increasingly being downloaded on students, as the province shirks its financial responsibilities to public educational institutions. Other important points of interest and concern regarding the 2012-2013 University budget included:

The University fund is dedicated to faculty divisions and undergraduate course development. This year, the goal is to make meaningful differences towards student-faculty ratios.

Uncertainties about the effects of the tuition grant on the budget and financial aid allocations. Uncertainty about the province’s tuition fee framework Compensation growth of 5.22% from the previous year is not sustainable. Provincial funding is decreasing.

Administrators concluded by stating that the University might need to explore going into further borrowing and debt. The University has currently borrowed $1.15 billion dollars thus far to support its lack of revenue and increasing operating costs. All in all, the lack of funding from the provincial government is resulting in student fees contributing even more towards the University’s operating budget. Students need to continue demanding a greater commitment from their provincial government towards funding post-secondary education.

4. Scholarship Guide

The most updated version of the scholarship guide is finally complete, with scholarships from all faculties, colleges, and Faculty of Arts and Science academic departments. All content is currently being uploaded on to the U.T.S.U. website and will be available to students seeking financial support and aid in a few weeks.

5. Academic Advocacy Office

We are currently well into the planning stages of the office, and are finishing up a project planning report that will outline the recommendations for the office. In the report, we looked into the current services offered at other Universities with offices of a similar nature. Through this research, we have determined

30

  

 

 

that support for students with issues regarding academic offenses, disciplines, and petitions are a priority, and we are also looking into providing non-academic support as well, such as information on tenants’ rights and conflict resolution. The Policy and Student Rights Coordinator will manage the office and its services, with potential opportunities for students to fill supportive positions. The planning process for this new service for students has been very exciting, and we welcome any feedback and suggestions from students. In solidarity,

Clara Ho Vice-President University Affairs University of Toronto Students’ Union Local 98, Canadian Federation of Students vpua@utsu.ca  

31

  

 

 

Executive Report-February 17, 2012 Corey Scott- Vice-President Internal & Services Executive Summary:

1. Member Services 2. Union Operations 3. SGDO Hiring 4. Board of Directors Meeting Schedule

1. MEMBER SERVICES

UTSU Book Bursary The UTSU is currently carrying out research on other students’ unions process for allocating bursaries. A policy recommendation based on the collective body of research on practices on and off-campus will be made to the Board shortly. Book Exchange The Book Exchange service is one of the most popular services of the UTSU and has over 1,000 books within its database. We expect that the system will continue to grow and see an increased usage once the program is advertised in our handbook and throughout the summer session. Members are encouraged to post books for the winter and summer sessions! Health and Dental Plan Opt Out Periods The UTSU provides comprehensive health and dental plan coverage for members through the National Student Health Network. Plan details can be found online at www.greenshield.ca/studentcentre (look for the University of Toronto Students’ Union under the University of Toronto heading). The winter opt-out/in period is held each year for students who begin classes in January and were not enrolled in the previous Fall session. Opt-out applications can be submitted online at www.studentplans.ca. All Refund cheques are sent by mail in March following the deadline to drop Y section code courses, after which the University is able to confirm which students have paid for the Fall and Winter session. Members are asked to ensure mailing addresses are kept up to date on ROSI. We are continuing to have meetings with the Office of the Vice-Provost Students to get access to our membership information to help speed up this process. Dollars for Daycare The Union believes that childcare for low-income families should never be a barrier to access to education. All UTSU members contribute to a levy to fund day care to support students who cannot afford childcare. These funds are distributed to students through the Family Care Office. Recipients of the bursary will be notified in early March.

32

  

 

 

ISIC Blitz On Wednesday, February 10 and Thursday, February 11, the UTSU produced and distributed free ISICs to members in Bahen and Sidney Smith, respectively. Altogether, the Union distributed almost 1000 cards to members over the two day blitz. We look forward to continuing to distribute ISICs throughout campus so that members can enjoy the discounts available to them as members of the Canadian Federation of Students. Members can visit myisic.ca for more details about discounts. Toronto Raptors Tickets The UTSU sold out of tickets to the Toronto Raptors vs. Boston Celtics game. Each ticket came with a free ticket to another Raptors game. Board members should let any constituents who purchased tickets know that their free ticket will be e-mailed to them. As a result of high demand, the Union is currently selling Raptors vs. Chicago Bulls tickets for the game on Wednesday, March 21 at 7 pm. Tickets are $42 and now available from the UTSU office.

2. UNION OPERATIONS Reading Week Operations With the exception of Monday, the UTSU office will remain open from 9 am to 6 pm during the Winter reading week (Monday, February 20 to Friday, February 24). The office will be closed for Family Day on Monday, February 20.

3. Sexual and Gender Diversity Office (SGDO) HIRING The SGDO services all three University of Toronto campuses and has a full-time staff complement of one SGDO Officer and one SGDO Program Assistant. In September 2011, both positions became vacant despite administrative knowledge of the Officer’s vacancy three months prior. In the fall, several campus groups and individuals on campus, including the UTSU met to discuss the vacant office and develop a campaign to have student presence on the hiring committee. Despite some criticism for requesting too much of the University Administration, the working committee was able to secure all four requested seats for student representatives on the search committee – successfully securing a seat for LGBTOUT, OUT@UTM, SC:OUT and a UTSU representative. The hiring committee has concluded the first round of interviews and will be moving on to the second. Unfortunately, administrators have communicated that student representatives will not sit in on the second round. The Union will continue to follow up in order to ensure that students are adequately represented in all stages of the hiring process.

4. BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING SCHEDULE On November 28, 2011 a Doodle Poll was initiated to obtain board member availability and any regularly scheduled class schedules. Those schedules have been used to determine dates and times for Board of Directors and Committee meetings in the Winter Session, which were approved by the Board. As a result, the next scheduled board meeting will take place on March 30, 2012.

33

  

 

 

Board members are reminded that they must fulfill attendance requirements in order to remain a Director. Please review Bylaw X for the attendance requirements. Respectfully Submitted, Corey Scott Vice-President Internal and Services University of Toronto Students’ Union Local 98, Canadian Federation of Students vpis@utsu.ca

34

  

 

 

Executive Report – March 30, 2012 Corey Scott- Vice-President Internal & Services Executive Summary:

1. Member Services a. Health and Dental Plan Refunds b. Toronto Raptors Tickets c. Income Tax Clinics

2. Union Operations a. Orientation Coordinator Hiring b. VP Campus Life Hiring c. Member Handbook d. Clubs Funding

3. SGDO Hiring 4. Board of Directors Meeting Schedule

1. Members Services

a. Health and Dental Plan Cheques The UTSU provides comprehensive health and dental plan coverage for members through the National Student Health Network. Plan details can be found online at www.greenshield.ca/studentcentre (look for the University of Toronto Students’ Union under the University of Toronto heading). The Health and Dental opt out refund cheques are to be mailed out to our members this month. Opt out refund cheques will be sent to home addresses as indicated on our members’ ROSI accounts. Thus, we encourage members to keep their home addresses up-to-date. All refunds will be mailed out at this time, to help cut down on administrative costs.

b. Toronto Raptors Tickets We are pleased to report that we have once again, sold out of our batch of Toronto Raptors tickets. We sold out of tickets to the Toronto Raptors vs. Chicago Bulls tickets for the game on Wednesday, March 21 at 7 pm. Due to the popularity of Raptors tickets sales, we are looking into long-term and affordable entertainment discount opportunities to make Raptors, Argos, Toronto FC and Maple Leafs tickets available to our membership.

c. Income Tax Clinics The UTSU Income Tax Clinics provide our members with free one-on-one assistance filing their taxes each year. The Income Tax Clinics period will start on March 26, 2012 and will run until April 30, 2012. All UTSU members are eligible for a free appointment. The tax clinics are run by student volunteers that

35

  

 

 

have been trained through the Canada Revenue Agency’s Volunteer Income Tax Program. Last year, our Income Tax Clinic was able to help 438 students! Appointments can be booked online at www.taxclinic.utsu.ca. Through membership in the Canadian Federation of Students, individual members are also able to file their taxes for free through UFile.ca. UFile.ca is Canada’s leading online tax preparation software. It is simple to use and because it is fully compatible with the Canada Revenue Agency’s NETFILE service, will reduce the wait time for your tax refund. The UTSU promotion code for our members is FAY1493.

2. Union Operations

a. Orientation Coordinator Hiring Orientation is the first opportunity that the Students’ Union has to make an impression on incoming and returning students. It marks the beginning of a new academic year and creates the ability to welcome new and returning members to the university by offering them a showcase of campus life and student spirit. The Orientation Coordinators of the Union have the responsibility of planning and hosting the Union’s annual Orientation Day(s) as well as carrying out other responsibilities outlined in policy. The posting for the Orientation Coordinator position is available on the UTSU website. We traditionally hire two coordinators. Directors are encouraged to share the job posting with any qualified candidates of which you may be aware. The hiring committee as defined by the Union policy includes the Outgoing and Incoming President, the Vice-President Internal and Services, the Outgoing Vice-President Campus Life, the outgoing Orientation Coordinators (non-voting) and the Executive Director (non-voting). The hiring committee will thus be composed of: Danielle Sandhu, Corey Scott, Albi Aziz, Hong Nguyen, Elliot Coombe, Amir Bashir and the ratified incoming President.

b. Vice-President Campus Life Hiring The Vice-President Campus Life is one of the six executives of the Students’ Union. The VP Campus Life is responsible for overseeing Orientation, clubs funding and student life related matters of the university. At the first meeting of the incoming Board of Directors, the board will elect a candidate from at least two candidates put forward for the position by the hiring committee. The hiring committee as defined by Union policy includes the Outgoing and Incoming President, the Vice-President Internal and Services, the Outgoing Vice-President Campus Life, one additional member of the Executive and the Executive Director (non-voting). The hiring committee will thus be composed of: Danielle Sandhu, Corey Scott, Clara Ho, Albi Aziz, Amir Bashir and the ratified incoming President. The posting for the Vice-President Campus Life position is available on the UTSU website. Directors are encouraged to share the job posting with any qualified candidates of which you may be aware.

36

  

 

 

c. Member Handbook Every year, the Students’ Union develops and prints handbooks for our membership. In addition to being an agenda for our members to keep track of their academic and non-academic appointments and schedules, the handbook serves to help introduce UTSU services, events and campaigns. It also features a campus map, directory and helpful information about campus services and resources available. We are proud to produce a handbook that is cost-effective and sustainable through the Canadian Federation of Students handbook service. All handbooks are made from 100% post-consumer recycled paper and vegetable ink. Layout, content production and graphic design has begun for the 2012-13 member handbook and we expect next year’s handbook to be completed on time and look better than ever.

d. Clubs Funding The deadline for short-term funding applications and Individual Academic Endeavor Grants was March 1, 2012. Many of the clubs funding applications were reviewed and funding decisions are presented in this board package. However, there have been ongoing consultations with some clubs and retrieving of information to make informed decisions on allocations. Please anticipate one final clubs committee package for the final board meeting.

3. Sexual and Gender Diversity Office (SGDO) HIRING The SGDO services all three University of Toronto campuses and has a full-time staff complement of one SGDO Officer and one SGDO Program Assistant. In September 2011, both positions became vacant. As board members will recall, last fall several campus groups and individuals on campus, including the UTSU met to discuss the vacant office and develop a campaign to ensure student presence on the hiring committee. Despite some criticism for requesting too much of the University Administration, the working committee was able to secure all four requested seats for student representatives on the search committee – successfully securing a seat for LGBTOUT, OUT@UTM, SC:OUT and a UTSU representative. We are happy to announce that the full-time SGDO Officer position has been filled by Allison Burgess. Burgess is a former UofT undergraduate student who holds a PhD from the Department of Sociology and Equity Studies in Education at OISE/UT. We are very excited to begin working with the new SGD Officer on projects such as UofT Pride, Queer Orientation and other queer and trans programming. We would like to thank Hilary Receno, Simon Bredin and Pallavi Suresan for participating in the search committee and providing feedback for the search committee. We would also like to commend the University administration for including student representatives in the search committee.

4. Board of Directors Meeting Schedule The final board meeting of the year will be held on Saturday, April 28, 2012 from 2-4pm. The board meeting will be held prior to the first meeting of the 2012-13 incoming board which will take place from 4pm to 6pm. Incoming board members will be encouraged to attend and witness the final meeting of the 2011-12 board. Outgoing board members are similarly invited to attend the first meeting of the incoming board. The two meetings provide an opportunity for the incoming board members to see Robert’s Rules

37

  

 

 

of Order in action and to have a sense of the structure of our board meetings. We encourage all current directors to play a role in helping new board members to understand the proceedings of the meeting. Respectfully Submitted, Corey Scott Vice-President Internal and Services University of Toronto Students’ Union Local 98, Canadian Federation of Students vpis@utsu.ca

38

Minutes of the Board of Directors

January 24, 2012

39

MINUTES

Board of Directors Meeting #10 of the University of Toronto Students’ Union Tuesday, January 24 2012 ● 6 pm ● Sanford Fleming 2202

In attendance:

Stephanie Abrahams (St. Michael’s College) Abdi Ahmed (University of Toronto Mississauga) Akid Azfar (Faculty of Applied Science and Engineering) Abigail Cudjoe (University College) Carly Degenstein (Victoria College) Danielle Emmons (Faculty of Kinesiology and Physical Education) Rebecca Harvey (Woodsworth College) Clara Ho (Vice-President University Affairs) Prescilla Jong (St. Michael’s College) Saba Khan (University of Toronto Mississauga) Joshua Mandryk (Faculty of Law) Brine Mezengwe (Transitional Year Program) Dimpho Radebe (Faculty of Engineering) Sana Rokhsefat (Arts & Science At-Large) Mark Roxas (Ontario Institute for Studies in Education) Danielle Sandhu (President) Corey Scott (Vice-President Internal) Michael Scott (Trinity College) Shaun Shepherd (Vice-President External) Anthony Staibano (Faculty of Dentisry) Andrew Ursel (University of Toronto Mississauga) Jonathan Vallely (Innis College) Proxies:

Min Kyu Kim to Carley Degenstein seconded to Clara Ho Dan Shilensky to Clara Ho seconded to Corey Scott Susan Hwang to Corey Scott seconded to Rebecca Harvey Anne Xu to Keshav Uppal seconded to Munib Sajjad Jon Foster to Rebecca Harvey seconded to Susan Hwang Kishan Chouhan to Danielle Sandhu Munib Sajjad to Shaun Shepherd Gina Husain to Saba Khan seconded to Munib Sajjad Lissette Rosado Ferrari to Stephanie Abrahams seconded to Prescilla Jong

1. CALL TO ORDER

Meeting is called to order at 6:11 pm Scott, M. calls a point of order. Scott, M. states that though sufficient notice was given for the meeting the location was not included. Hashemi rules meeting is in order. He further states that the spirit of giving notice for meetings is that Board of Directors and members alike are aware of it and can arrange to attend. He further states that everyone knew that there would be a meeting at 6 pm today on St. George campus. He further states that as everyone would reasonably to have known about the meeting, the lack of location does not invalidate the meeting.

40

MINUTES

Board of Directors Meeting #10 of the University of Toronto Students’ Union Tuesday, January 24 2012 ● 6 pm ● Sanford Fleming 2202 Scott, M states that one meeting per semester is required to be at UTM and there is no way to have known if this particular meeting would take place there. Hashemi states that notice went out four days prior to meeting with the location included in the e-mail. Scott, M. appeals Chair’s ruling

MOTION (to uphold chair’s ruling) Moved: Ursel Seconded: Cudjoe Hashemi states notice for the meeting was given in accordance with the bylaws. He further states that notice has not typically been given with location. He further states that the spirit of giving notice of a meeting is informing that there is a meeting coming up so that those who are expected to attend can make reasonable efforts to attend. He further states that it is very clear the meeting is in order. Scott, M. states that in this particular case we ought to listen to the wording of the bylaws that require the meeting location be announced two weeks prior. He further states that the chair has overstepped his bounds as he is not applying the bylaws correctly. He further states that there is a clear issue of a bylaw violation. He further states that though he loves coming to meetings and being annoying, he is doing this reluctantly but we have an obligation to govern legitimately. He further states that overstepping the bylaws is dangerous. He further states that he has read the bylaw which is an embarrassing admission. Ursel states that while Scott is right in the letter of the law, it is high unlikely that a Board member has somehow been prevented from attending. Degenstein states that booking space at U of T is often a challenge. She further states that after about six months of being a Board Director, everyone knows that a meeting is coming up and Board members can simply check their emails periodically. Valelley asks Scott, M. if he has informed anyone that no location was specified when the meeting was announced. Hashemi states that bylaws say “shall” and not “must” which is a substantive difference in wording and thus obligations. He further states that lack of location should have been brought to the attention of the Chair when it was noticed. VOTE

CARRIED

Opposed; Scott, M. 2. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA

MOTION Moved: Sandhu Seconded: Cudjoe

Be it resolved that the agenda for the January 24, 2012 U.T.S.U. Board of Directors meeting be approved as presented.

41

MINUTES

Board of Directors Meeting #10 of the University of Toronto Students’ Union Tuesday, January 24 2012 ● 6 pm ● Sanford Fleming 2202

MOTION TO AMEND Moved: Sandhu Seconded: Khan

Be it resolved that the Executive Committee Meeting minutes from January 6, 2012 be added to the agenda.

DISCUSSION

Sandhu states they were omitted through a simple error. VOTE

MOTION FAILS

MOTION Moved: Kahn Seconded: Ursel

Be it resolved that speaking be limited to two minutes per motion. VOTE

MOTION FAILS

VOTE (On agenda as presented)

CARRIED

3. EXECUTIVE REPORTS

MOTION Moved: Sandhu Seconded: Abrahams

Be it resolved that the U.T.S.U. Board of Directors approve the Executive Reports as presented at the January 24, 2012 Board meeting.

DISCUSSION

Sandhu states that we are fast approaching a National Day of Action and will be doing intensive outreach in the coming days. She further states that Winter Week of Welcome is a brand new set of events the UTSU has introduced this year. She further states that the Week was incredibly successful and that Albi is very appreciative of those who contributed. She further states that CUPE 3902 is in a period of conciliation and the UTSU follows up in order to keep UTSU members updated. Scott, M. asks when Executive Review Committee met last. Sandhu states that she is not aware of a meeting but he should contact the Chair of the Executive Review Committee. Mezengwe asks where the Transitional Year Program students fit in in terms of the strike.

42

MINUTES

Board of Directors Meeting #10 of the University of Toronto Students’ Union Tuesday, January 24 2012 ● 6 pm ● Sanford Fleming 2202 Sandhu states that any teaching assistant employed by the University and unionzed under CUPE 3902 would be affected by a potential strike. Mezengwe states that he would appreciate it if the Union worked on this issue. He further states that TYP is suffering discrimination on campus. Shepherd states that the University and CUPE 3902 are currently in conciliation. As the students’ union, it is out of our hands as we do not have a seat at the negotiation table. He further states that it is up to the UTSU to educate our members. Sandhu states that TYP’s position is often a precarious one. She further states that it is great to see TYP representatives are advocating on behalf of their members. She further states that it is up to the UTSU board to include TYP students in the Union’s work. She further states that we should be educating our members on how CUPE 3902’s work affects our members. She further states that she will suggest to CUPE 3902 that they work with TYP students to educate them on the issues. Shepherd states that the UTSU successfully secured academic accommodation for the National Day of Action for the first time ever. He further states that the Provost sent a memo to all departments asking to accommodate students wishing to attend the Day of Action on February 1, 2012. He further states that we will be calling for more public funding to institutions as tuition fees increase and per-student funding stagnates. He further states that he would like to thank Professional Faculty Directors for educating their members on the Grant.. Harvey asks about logistics for the Day of Action. Shepherd states that U of T students will be meeting outside of Sidney Smith at 11 am. He further states that we will meeting with feeder marches from other GTA schools at 1 pm in front of Convocation Hall. He further states that we are asking directors to attend marshal training in order to help ensure the march runs smoothly and our members remain safe. Mezengwe states that we should not just stop at the Day of Action as students are the future. Scott, C. states that we are trying to access our membership list and get the university to send a link to the academic accommodation memo as well as logistical details regarding the Day of Action. Sandhu states that the University of Toronto Faculty Association has voted on a motion to endorse the Day of Action and expressed support for academic accommodation. Ho states that she attended a COSS presentation. She explains the mandate of COSS. She further states that there was much productive discussion around ways to improve student services. She further states that the UTSU has been working closely with Professional Faculties and ensuring they can access student services. Scott, C. states that the UTSU is now operating from 9 to 6. He further states that Data Card will be in the UTSU office this week to make student I.D cards for members. He further states that he encourages Directors to read through his report as members often ask about services. He further states that Board meeting dates are listed in his report as well. Vallely asks where how SGDO hiring is going. Scott, C. states that he cannot discuss specific human resources issues but he is on the hiring committee as a UTSU representative along with other campus groups.

43

MINUTES

Board of Directors Meeting #10 of the University of Toronto Students’ Union Tuesday, January 24 2012 ● 6 pm ● Sanford Fleming 2202

VOTE

CARRIED

4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES

MOTION Moved: Sandhu Seconded: Ursel

Be it resolved that the January 24, 2012 minutes package including the following documents be approved by the U.T.S.U. Board of Directors:

a. Board of Directors (2011-2012), December 8 b. Campus Life Commission, November 30 c. Social Justice and Equity Commission, January 10 d. Election and Referenda Committee, January 19

VOTE

CARRIED

5. FYI- REPORT BACK

a. Canadian Federation of Students-Ontario Executive Committee Meeting b. Canadian Federation of Student-Annual General Meeting

Shepherd states that the last Ontario Executive meeting was largely focused on organizing for the Day of Action. Scott, M. asks if there were constitutional amendments at the last CFS-Ontario AGM. Shepherd states there were not any. Scott M. asks how the motions were created and submitted. Shepherd states that the UTSU develops the motions in response to issues members are facing and discuss with the Union.

6. NEXT BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING

Scott, C. states that the next Board of Directors meeting will take place on February 17, 2012 at 6 pm. It will take place at the St. George Campus.

7. OTHER BUSINESS

Valley states he will be leaving to Amsterdam and as such is resigning his position as a Director.

44

MINUTES

Board of Directors Meeting #10 of the University of Toronto Students’ Union Tuesday, January 24 2012 ● 6 pm ● Sanford Fleming 2202

8. ADJOURNMENT

MOTION Moved: Azfar Seconded: Jong

Be it resolved that the January 24, 2012 meeting of the Board of Directors be adjourned. VOTE

CARRIED

Opposed: Michael, M.

45

Minutes of the Executive Committee Meeting

January 6, 2012 February 3, 2012 February 10, 2012

March 14, 2012

46

Minutes Executive Committee of the University of Toronto Students’ Union Friday, January 6, 2012– UTSU Office In Attendance: Danielle Sandhu Shaun Shepherd Clara Ho Corey Scott Albi Aziz Lena Elamin Amir Bashir

1. CALL TO ORDER

The meeting was called to order at 9:10 am.

2. WINTER WEEK OF WELCOME

Aziz provides an overview of planned Winter Week of Welcome events. Scott states that doing a breakfast event would be a good idea as students head off to class. Sandhu states that we can do a pancake breakfast and speak to members about the National Day of Action.

3. SEXUAL AND GENDER DIVERSITY OFFICE (SGDO) HIRING Scott states that he will be attending SGDO officer interviews this month.

4. DROP FEES Shepherd states that we will be doing intensive outreach in the lead-up to the National Day of Action. He lists outreach events. He further states that the Union will be creating new materials as more information becomes available on the new grant. Sandhu states that this is another exciting opportunity to engage with UTSU members.

5. COMMITTEE APPOINTMENTS Bashir provides an overview of the committee appointment bylaws and policies. MOTION Moved: Scott Seconded: Sandhu

Be it resolved that Shaun Shepherd be appointed as the additional executive to the Organizational Development and Services Committee.

VOTE CARRIED

47

Minutes Executive Committee of the University of Toronto Students’ Union Friday, January 6, 2012– UTSU Office MOTION Moved: Sandhu Seconded: Aziz

Be it resolved that Clara Ho and Lena Elamin be appointed to the Elections Review Committee.

VOTE CARRIED

6. ADJOURNMENT MOTION Moved: Sandhu Seconded: Aziz VOTE CARRIED Meeting adjourned at 10:10 am.

48

MINUTES

Executive Committee Meeting of the University of Toronto Students' Union Friday, February 3, 2012 – U.T.S.U. Office ____________________________________________________________________________________

In attendance:

Danielle Sandhu Corey Scott Clara Ho Shaun Shepherd Amir Bashir 1. CALL TO ORDER

2. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA

MOTION Moved: Sandhu Seconded: Scott

Be it resolved that the Friday, February 3, 2012, Executive referenda Committee Meeting agenda be approved as presented.

VOTE

CARRIED

3. DAY OF ACTION DEBRIEF

Sandhu states that from a logistical standpoint, the Day of Action went smoothly. Shepherd states that he has received much positive feedback from members. He further states that many first time marchers had a great time. He further states that things went well logistically and we should send a thank you e-mail to staff for helping with the day. Bashir states that CP24 estimated that 3,000-4,000 people attended the rally. He further states that an e-mail should be sent to the Provost, Jill Matus to thank her for supporting the Day of Action. He further states we should also send a thank you e-mail to the Office of Space Management, the Sid Smith building manager and to campus labour. 4. XAO

Sandhu states that the UTSU will be collaborating on events with campus groups. She further states that we are supporting the events but are not headlining them. She further states that Man to Man has asked for some financial support from the students’ unions on campus, including the UTSU.

MOTION Moved: Sandhu Seconded: Scott

Be it resolved that $500 be allocated to Man to Man. DISCUSSION

Scott states that the play has been very popular in the U of T community. He explains the context of the play. He further states that the play intends to stimulate discussion and that it is free of charge to attend.

49

MINUTES

Executive Committee Meeting of the University of Toronto Students' Union Friday, February 3, 2012 – U.T.S.U. Office ____________________________________________________________________________________

VOTE

CARRIED

5. READING WEEK TRIP

Sandhu states that we are not hosting our own trip but will be promoting the New College Montreal Reading Week Trip as well as UTMSU’s

6. ACADEMIC ADVOCACY

Ho states that she has been working with the UTSU’s new research associate to look into other students’ unions academic advocacy offices and the services they have to offer. She further states that she hopes to have this work completed by the end of the month.

7. SGDO UPDATE

Scott states that the hiring committee has moved on to do a second round of interviews for the SGDO officer position. He further states that the administrators on the committee do not want to include student representatives in the second round but the Union will be following up to ensure students are represented on the committee.

8. ADJOURNMENT

MOTION Moved: Shepherd Seconded: Scott VOTE

CARRIED

50

MINUTES

Executive Committee Meeting of the University of Toronto Students’ Union February 10, 2012- UTSU Office _____________________________________________________________________________

In attendance:

Danielle Sandhu Corey Scott Shaun Shepherd Clara Ho Amir Bashir

1. CALL TO ORDER

The meeting is called to order at 3:30 pm.

2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA

MOTION Moved: Sandhu Seconded: Ho

Be it resolved the February 10, 2012 Executive Committee meeting agenda be approved as presented.

3. COSS

Sandhu states that student representatives at COSS will be voting on fee increases in the near future. She further states that the Union will take direction from the Board on how to vote on the proposed fee increases. She goes through proposed budgets.

4. ACCESS COPYRIGHT

Ho states that she has sent out a document with links and information regarding the recently signed agreement with Access Copyright. She explains the nature of the contract and the impacts on the University community. She further states that student Governors will be speaking out against this agreement at next week’s GC meeting as the decision was unilateral and undemocratic. Sandhu states that both the UTSU and UTMSU were scheduled for consultation meetings with the Provost but that it was cancelled today.

5. UNITY BALL

Scott states that a prep meeting for Unity Ball took place today. He further states that there are 40 tables to sell. He further states that the early bird price will end next week but the UTSU will continue to offer a discounted price to buy an entire table. He further states that performances are yet to be confirmed. He further states that each commission has an award to give away and should decide amongst its voting members what clubs will receive them. Bashir states that tickets should be arriving next week. Suggest that we table when they arrive.

51

MINUTES

Executive Committee Meeting of the University of Toronto Students’ Union February 10, 2012- UTSU Office _____________________________________________________________________________

6. XAO

Sandhu states that though we are not spearheading any events but are supporting them and are responsible for promoting them. She further states that we have some t-shirts left from last semester and should be giving them away.

7. CLUBS

Scott states that Clubs bulletin is going out on Monday with information. He further states that there will be a Clubs Committee meeting tonight.

8. UTM FOOD TOWN HALL

Shepherd states that there is a Food Town hall slated for March 13 on the UTM campus. He further states that one of the associates is working on logistical details and that speakers have been secured. He further states that we will require promotional material and a room booking.

9. ADJOURNMENT

MOTION TO ADJOURN Moved: Shepherd Seconded: Scott The Meeting is adjourned at 4:53 pm.

52

MINUTES Executive Committee Meeting of the University of Toronto Students’ Union Wednesday, March 14, 2012 – UTSU Office In attendance: Shaun Shepherd Lena Elamin Corey Scott Amir Bashir Danielle Sandhu Clara Ho

1. CALL TO ORDER Meeting is called to order at 10:01 am.

2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION Moved: Sandhu Seconded: Shepherd

Be it resolved that the agenda for the March 14, 2012 U.T.S.U. Executive Committee meeting be approved as presented.

VOTE CARRIED

3. INTERNATIONAL DAY ON THE ELIMINATION OF RACIAL

DISCRIMINATION Sandhu states that the UTSU has been approached by The Anti-Racism and Cultural Diversity Office (ARCDO) as well as the Council of Agencies Serving South Asians (CASSA) to collaborate on a number of anti-racism initiatives. She further states that CASSA has asked the UTSU to help fund ASL interpretation the Racism-Free Ontario event on March 21, 2012. She further states that the forum will examine racism and its impacts within communities.

4. NEGLECTED VOICES SCREENING Sandhu states that the UTSU co-hosted a screening of Neglected Voices for XAO. Sandhu further states that organizers were interested in doing another screening. Bashir states that he is concerned that this event would cut too close to exams and affect attendance. Scott asks if it is possible to do this event in the Fall. He states the screening can be hosted in Hart House as an installation where people can drop by and watch the film. Shepherd suggests that we can collaborate with the Hart House Art Gallery in the summer.

53

MINUTES Executive Committee Meeting of the University of Toronto Students’ Union Wednesday, March 14, 2012 – UTSU Office

5. BUDGET Sandhu states that Union is wrapping up the fiscal year in April. She further states that today is the last day for executives to file all outstanding cheque requisitions and receipts.

6. KIN KRASH Sandhu states that the UTSU is partnering up with the PHEUA for their annual club night, Kin Krash. She further states that it is a club night to raise funds for Kin Games in which PHEUA members participate in against other schools. She further states that the UTSU is selling tickets to the event and executives should be helping to promote the event.

7. TRANS FILM SCREENING Elamin states that the UTSU will be co-hosting a screening of “Tom Boy” on March 19, 2012 as part of the ongoing Trans Film Screening Series. She further states that the event is in collaboration with the Centre for Women and Trans People.

8. UTSU’S GOT YOU Scott states that he will send an email to Robarts staff to book the space the UTSU has previously used. He further states that we will request the four day time slot the UTSU typically hosts the event. Bashir states that we should look into distributing snacks other than sandwiches as they make logistics difficult. He further states that the Bookstore has also approached the Union to collaborate on PS3 promotions as they will now be selling the game consoles. Shepherd states that he will work on UTSU’s Got You with Scott.

9. EXECUTIVE TRANSITION AND TERM WRAP-UP

Sandhu states that executives should be wrapping up any work they have left for the year and begin to write a Transition Report for their successor. Bashir states that executives should also ensure to clean out their respective offices and archiving any relevant items. He further states that executives should be scheduling transition time with incoming executives before April 30.

10. ADJOURNMENT

MOTION TO ADJOURN Moved: Elamin Seconded: Ho

VOTE

CARRIED Meeting adjourned at 11:15 am.

54

Minutes of the Community Action Commission Meeting

January 10 March 26, 2012

55

MINUTES Community Action Commission of the University of Toronto Students’ Union January 10, 2012 ● Sidney Smith Hall

In attendance: Shaun Shephard Daniel Vandervoort Mohdhar Noor Tristan Pereira Terrance Luscombe Madiha Choksi Josee Matte Stephanie Abrahams Corey Scott Navdeep Johal Prescilla Jong Clara Ho Andrew Louis Rashida Leslie

1. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 4:09 pm.

2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION Moved: Shepherd Seconded: Ho

Be it resolved the January 10, 2012 Community Action Commission meeting agenda be approved as presented

VOTE CARRIED

3. INTRODUCTIONS Each member introduced themselves.

4. OVERVIEW

Scott discussed the Liberal Party’s platform as presented in the October 2011 Provincial election. He further states that The Liberal Party has implemented a 30 percent rebate on tuition for students who are eligible. He discusses the eligibility requirements and who is left out of the grant. He further states that the rebate program is being financed through cuts to many other grants and scholarships. Shepherd discussed the Day of Action and its national implications. Shepherd discussed the differences in funding across Canada due to a lack of national educational framework.

5. CAMPAIGN BRAINSTORM Attendees brainstormed event ideas for the lead up to the Day of Action to create awareness and get members excited about Feb. 1.

56

MINUTES Community Action Commission of the University of Toronto Students’ Union January 10, 2012 ● Sidney Smith Hall

Shepherd states that the Union can create a pledge which outlines information regarding the rally and ask that members sign it as a pledge to attend the Day of Action. Matte, Leslie and Johal volunteer to liaise between the coalition and campus groups for endorsements and to confirm their attendance. Shepherd states that we will also be holding a competition for clubs in order to encourage their attendance at the rally. Vandervoort states that the Graduate Students’ Union is holding a Trivia Night at their pub to inform students about the grant. Shepherd asks for volunteers for the task-list being passed around.

6. NEXT MEETING Shepherd states that Drop Fees Coalition meetings will take place every Tuesday at 4 pm in Sid Smith.

7. ADJOURNMENT

MOTION TO ADJOURN Moved: Abrahams Seconded: Scott

VOTE CARRIED Meeting is adjourned at 4:58 pm

57

MINUTES Community Action Commission of the University of Toronto Students’ Union Monday, March 26, 2012 • UC 148

In Attendance Voting Members: Corey Scott Shaun Shepherd Stephanie Abrahams Navdeep Johal 1. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 12:13 pm. 2. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA MOTION          Moved: Abrahams Seconded: Johal  

Be it resolved that the March 26, 2012 Community Action Commission meeting agenda be approved as presented

VOTE CARRIED 3. FLAT AND ANCILLARY FEE MORATORIUM Shepherd states that the Ontario government has released a press statement earlier this month, putting a moratorium on flat fee structures and ancillary fee increases. He further states that this does not work retroactively and will only apply to institutions that are currently in the process of or are thinking of implementing flat fee models. Johal asks how UofT will be affected. Shepherd states that though the moratorium will not reverse the UofT flat fee model students do have allies in the legislature fighting to defeat flat fees at UofT. 4. TTC CUSTOMER SERVICE TOWN HALL Shepherd states that there will be TTC customer service town halls this week on Thursday, March 29, 2012. He further states that the first will take place from 6:30 to 7 and will allow individuals to have one on one meetings with management to discuss concerns. He further states that there will be an open forum from 7 to 9 pm on the same day where individuals can discuss their concerns in a town hall style meeting. He further states that the event takes place at York University in the Accolade Building, room 109. Abrahams states that she is interested in attending the Town Hall.

58

MINUTES Community Action Commission of the University of Toronto Students’ Union Monday, March 26, 2012 • UC 148

5. ONTARIO BUDGET Shepherd states that the Ontario budget is being presented this week. He further states that after the Drop Fees campaign, the Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities promised to increase student aid and per-student funding and that we will be keeping an eye on what students receive in the budget. Johal asks what the impact of a tuition fee freeze or reduction instead of a grant would be. Shepherd states that it would affect all students and include many students who are otherwise ineligible for the grant as it stands now. He further states that the Union will be keeping an eye on whether “increasing student aid” will come to mean grants or loans. 6. UNITED HERE! LOCAL 75 CAMPAIGN Shepherd states that the local has approached the UTSU to help run a campaign around fair working hours for workers and a raise in wages. He further states that the workers now split shifts so they don’t get breaks or benefits. Scott state that the employer actually tries to keep the workers part-time so they do not have job security or benefits either. Shepherd states that there will be petitions in the office and we will be circulating some in order to help with the Union’s efforts. 7. ADJOURNMENT

MOTION TO ADJOURN Moved: Abrahams Seconded: Johal

VOTE

CARRIED

The meeting adjourned at 12:25 pm.

 

59

Minutes of the Academic and Student Rights

Commission

January 30, 2012

60

MINUTES

Academic and Student Rights Commission Meeting of the University of Toronto Students’ Union January 30th, 2012 – Sid Smith Room 2116

In Attendance:

Voting Members:

Clara Ho Navdeep Johal Stephanie Abrahams Yolen Bollo-Kamara

1. CALL TO ORDER

The meeting was called to order at 5:16 pm.

2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA

MOTION Moved: Ho Seconded: Johal

Be it resolved the agenda for the January 30, 2012 Academic and Student Rights Commission meeting be approved as presented.

VOTE

CARRIED

3. ACADEMIC ADVOCACY OFFICE

Ho states that there has been ongoing research on how to establish an effective Academic Advocacy Office at the students’ union and presents key services that may be of help to students, such as advice on writing academic appeals, petitions, and finding financial aid. Johal asks whether there would there be drop-in hours or by appointment only. Ho states that the office would have a staff member overseeing it and trained student advocates also operating the office. Ho further states that these student advocates could also be work-study students. Bollo-Kamara states that she likes the idea because students would feel more comfortable speaking with fellow students as opposed to an academic department or registrar’s office. Ho states that there would be more research done on the internal operations of the office, and that the Union is looking at how advocacy offices are run at the Ryerson Students’ Union and the York Federation of Students. She further states that the office would also direct students to appropriate resources on campus. Johal states it would be effective to provide resources on campus residence and rights as tenants in residence. Bollo-Kamara suggests naming the office to make it obvious that the office deals with a variety of issues such as academic rights, housing/tenant issues, etc.

61

MINUTES

Academic and Student Rights Commission Meeting of the University of Toronto Students’ Union January 30th, 2012 – Sid Smith Room 2116 Johal states that she likes that the office will aim to educate members about turnitin.com as students often do not know about it. She further states that it might be useful to find out from the RSU and YFS on how to handle traffic and variations in traffic during busy times and how this would impact staff hours (i.e. – work study positions can only work a set number of hours per week and per semester)

4. STUDENT SERVICES DISCUSSION

Johal states she really appreciates the UofT Health Clinic services because it is very helpful to students who move to Toronto and no longer live close to their family doctor and can’t find a clinic accepting new patients. Bollo-Kamara states that she is frustrated with the understaffing of the health clinics. She further states it is difficult to see the same doctor at the Health Clinic. Abrahams states services aren’t very well publicized and INTUIT, the Office of Student Life’s handbook, should be advertised. She further states that there should be greater advertisement of services through social media.

5. UNDERGRADUATE TEACHING AWARDS 2012

Ho states that promotions for the Undergraduate Teaching Awards in 2012 will begin in late February to early March.

Johal suggests that ads should highlight that lecturers are also eligible in addition to professors.

6. UPCOMING EVENTS

Ho states that there is a National Day of Action for the Drop Fees campaign on Feb 1st and a Yoga, Zumba, Nia Party! Event, a food bank fundraiser, cohosted with Hart House and the Faculty of Kinesiology and Physical Education on March 11th.

7. NEXT MEETING

The next meeting will be in late February, Location TBA.

8. ADJOURNMENT

MOTION TO ADJOURN

VOTE Moved: Johal Seconded: Abrahams

CARRIED

The meeting adjourned at 5:56 pm.

62

Minutes of the Professional Faculties Committee

Meeting

January 30, 2012

63

MINUTES

Professional Faculties Committee Meeting of the University of Toronto Students’ Union Monday, January 30th, 2012 – UTSU Office

In Attendance:

Voting Members:

Clara Ho Anthony Staibano Howard Meng Josh Mandryk Mark Roxas Dan Shilensky

1. CALL TO ORDER

The meeting was called to order at 6:43 pm.

2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA

MOTION Moved: Ho Seconded: Staibano VOTE

CARRIED

1. FACULTY OUTREACH UPDATES

Ho states that the UTSU has organized a Lunch n’ Learn with the Faculty of Music and has completed one at the Faculty of Law. She further states that the event was well-received and students appreciated the information. Mandryk states that he has been sending out emails to keep students in the loop. Meng states that members in his faculty are familiarizing themselves with the Drop Fees Campaign.

2. FEES & FUNDING REPORT BACKS

Roxas states that he has found information on tuition fees for students at OISE and the operation funding provided by the government to OISE. He further states that there has been a sharp incline in the cost of international student fees over the past few years. He further states that international students are a valuable part of the educational experience for everyone, as they contribute towards global perspectives. He further states that OISE receives $35 million from the Ministry of Training and Colleges and $20 million from students. The gap between student fees and public funding is closing. He further states that the faculty may be expanding its program from one year to two years, which may negatively affect students because they will be paying double the tuition fees and spending twice the amount of time in studies. Mandryk states that first year tuition fees in the Faculty of Law are about $25, 000 and has increased 36 per cent over the past nine years. Historically, tuition was only $8000 ten years ago and has increased astronomically due to internal policies in the Law school. He further states that in 2002-03, the Dean of the Law school put out a plan to double tuition to become “the best law school in the world” but the money has gone towards increasing salaries. When that was

64

MINUTES

Professional Faculties Committee Meeting of the University of Toronto Students’ Union Monday, January 30th, 2012 – UTSU Office originally approved, the increase was supposed to occur alongside increase in financial aid, but tuition fee increases have outpaced increase of financial aid. He further states that tuition fees increased 68 per cent while financial aid increased 26 per cent. This year alone, tuition fees have increased 8 per cent and U of T has the most expensive law school in Ontario. Shilensky asks if U of T is trying to become like an American law school. Mandryk states that U of T is trying to increase its worldwide reputation. He further states that the recent renovations may be used to justify higher tuition fees. He further states that students might have “sticker shock” and be deterred from going to law school. He further states that most students are from higher socio-economic statuses, thus students from lower socioeconomic statuses may be deterred. Meng states that tuition fees for a medical degree are about $20, 000 per year, whereas in 2003, it was just over $16, 000. Over the last few years, there has been 3 to 4 per cent increase. He further states that within Ontario and Canada, U of T has the highest tuition fees for medical school. He further states that at the same time, the Faculty of Medicine provides a number of grants and loans, and 60 to 80 per cent of students receive them. He further states that last year, graduates accumulated about $85,000 of public debt over the past seven years. He further states that the faculty realizes that the high costs are a barrier. He further states that a student survey was conducted and students are generally concerned about the high costs of education. Mandryk states that although there is much financial aid available to law students it is outpaced by the rising of tuition fees. Shilensky states that because the rapid tuition rise is so recent, many faculties have not had to contend with the level of debt that current students have to deal with now. Staibano states that he hopes to acquire more specific financial information from a meeting with the Dean of Dentistry. Dentistry is one of the most expensive programs in Canada. He further states that due to deregulation, trends have been getting worse and often out of hand. He further states that between 2007-08, tuition fees rose from $12, 500 to $16, 000. He further states that provinces with more government funding see lower fees. He further states that the financial burden is very high and students take on most of this. He further states that the prospect of future debt with overall lack of public funding will restrict one’s choice of dental school or ability to apply to specialized graduate programs. Mandryk states that it is an explicit choice by the Faculty of Law administration to keep increasing the fees. He further states that it is also U of T issue rather than simply a government funding issue. Shilensky states that although fees are increasing, the reasons for the increase and the effects of these increases vary from faculty to faculty. Roxas states that teaching jobs are scarce domestically and students need to be prepared to teach overseas. Ho states that each faculty could provide a summary no longer than one page with basic information on costs, trends, funding, compared to other schools, and the barriers this creates in terms of accessibility to education.

65

MINUTES

Professional Faculties Committee Meeting of the University of Toronto Students’ Union Monday, January 30th, 2012 – UTSU Office Shilensky states that we would want to outreach to undergrads who want to apply and to think about the key facts for each faculty, what they need to know in terms of costs, job prospects, cons, amount of funding.

3. FACULTY STUDENT ISSUES

Staibano states that dentistry students are concerned that there is a lack of accessibility to student services because they close early and are far from the Faculty of Dentistry. He further states that only the writing center has visits to the dental school, but students find it hard to access other student services. He further states that the students at the Faculty of Dentistry feel physically and psychologically separated from campus and feel they are lacking campus support. He further states that he is interested in holding an information session where student life representatives can come in to speak. He is interested in doing a survey of what services students want to access. Shilensky states that this is a good idea to spread to other professional faculties

4. OPPORTUNITIES FOR COLLABORATION

Mandryk states that some Law students are organizing a fundraising event for the White Ribbon Campaign called “Walk a Mile in Her Shoes”.

5. ACADEMIC ADVOCACY OFFICE

Ho states that herself and the Research Associate have been doing research on how to establish an effective Academic Advocacy Office at the students’ union and presents key services that may be of help to students, such as advice on writing academic appeals, petitions, finding financial aid, etc. Meng states that services for academic appeals and offences would be beneficial.

6. ADJOURNMENT

MOTION TO ADJOURN

VOTE Moved: Meng Seconded: Mandryk

CARRIED

The meeting adjourned at 8:00 pm.

66

Minutes of the Elections and Referenda Committee

Meeting

February 7, 2012 February 23, 2012 February 26, 2012

March 3, 2012 March 5, 2012 March 6, 2012 March 7, 2012 March 23, 2012 March 24, 2012

67

MINUTES Elections and Referenda Committee Meeting of the University of Toronto Students’ Union Thursday, February 23rd, 2012 – U.T.S.U. Office In Attendance: Clara Ho Thuwanika Kandasamy Ramya Janandharan Proxy: Lean Elamin to Clara Ho 1. CALL TO ORDER The meeting is called to order at 12:06 pm.

2. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA MOTION Moved: Ho Seconded: Kandasamy

Be it resolved that the Thursday, February 23rd, 2012, Elections and Referenda Committee Meeting be approved as presented.

VOTE CARRIED 3. UPDATE Ho provided updates on the progress of the planning for the elections, and states that all election notices have been publicized. Ho further states that elections staff are in the process of hiring poll clerks. 4. CHANGING LOCATION OF POLLING STATION FROM OISE TO FACULTY OF

SOCIAL WORK Ho states that the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education (OISE) does not permit the booking of space within its building for a polling station during voting days. Ho further states that moving the polling station to the next building at the Faculty of Social Work still allows students around the area to easily access the polling station at the North end of campus. MOTION Moved: Ho Seconded: Janandharan

Be it resolved that the assigned polling station at the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education be moved to the Faculty of Social Work.

VOTE CARRIED

68

MINUTES Elections and Referenda Committee Meeting of the University of Toronto Students’ Union Thursday, February 23rd, 2012 – U.T.S.U. Office 5. ADDING A NEW POLLING STATION AT THE INSTRUCTIONAL COMPLEX AT U of T

MISSISSAUGA CAMPUS Ho states that the new Instructional Complex building receives a lot of traffic and an additional polling station on the UTM campus would help increase voter turnout and improve accessibility to polling stations at UTM. MOTION Moved: Ho Seconded: Kandasamy

Be it resolved that a polling station be added in the Instructional Complex building at the University of Toronto Mississauga Campus.

VOTE CARRIED 6. ADJOURNMENT MOTION TO ADJOURN Moved: Ho Seconded: Kandasamy The meeting adjourned at 12:16 pm.

69

MINUTES Elections and Referenda Committee Meeting of the University of Toronto Students’ Union Sunday, February 26th, 2012 – St. George Campus In Attendance: Clara Ho Thuwanika Kandasamy Ramya Janandharan Lena Elamin 1. CALL TO ORDER The meeting is called to order at 9:10 pm.

2. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA MOTION Moved: Ho Seconded: Elamin

Be it resolved that the Sunday, February 26th, 2012, Elections and Referenda Committee Meeting be approved as presented.

VOTE CARRIED 3. ELIGIBILITY OF MO DELWAR’S CANDIDACY IN 2012 UTSU ELECTIONS Ho states that Mo Delwar, a 3rd year Professional Experience Year student in the Faculty of Applied Science and Engineering, is seeking eligibility for candidacy in the upcoming 2012 U.T.S.U. Election. Ho further states that he was discovered to be ineligible to run in the elections, because he was a part-time student during the nomination period. Ho further states that Delwar alleges he will be a full-time student in September 2012, and thus should be permitted to run in the elections. Ho further states that Delwar alleges a precedent has been set in past U.T.S.U. elections where Professional Experience Year students were permitted to run in the Spring 2010 UTSU Elections, and that this precedent should be upheld. Kandasamy states that the Elections Procedure Code and bylaws clearly state the requirements for candidate eligibility, which includes students who are registered as full-time undergraduates and have paid union fees at the time of the nomination period. She further states that the precedent set by the 2010 ERC was based on false information that the Governing Council also permitted PEY students to run as full-time undergraduates in their 2010 elections. She further states that Governing Council never permitted PEY students to run as full-time undergraduates in any of their elections, as proven in the meeting minutes and electoral codes of the Governing Council. Elamin states the eligibility requirements are clearly stated. She further states that the Governing Council elections operate on very different terms and should not be used as a main example for student union elections. Kandasamy states that Delwar’s financial information from ROSI states he is a registered part time student and has not paid Union fees. She states that he may be committed to fulfill the responsibilities of this position, but it would not be right to negotiate the bylaws with a precedent based on false information. Elamin states that there was no clear evidence provided whether a PEY student ran in the 2010 UTSU Spring Elections. She further states that it is unclear whether the precedent was even followed in the 2010

70

MINUTES Elections and Referenda Committee Meeting of the University of Toronto Students’ Union Sunday, February 26th, 2012 – St. George Campus U.T.S.U. Spring Elections. She reiterates that the EPC and bylaws clearly state the requirements for candidate eligibility, and that these terms should be upheld in the face of a precedent set on false information. MOTION Moved: Ho Seconded: Janandharan

Be it resolved that Mo Delwar, a Professional Experience Year student, be deemed eligible to run as a candidate in the 2012 U.T.S.U. General Elections.

VOTE FAILED 6. ADJOURNMENT MOTION TO ADJOURN Moved: Ho Seconded: Elamin The meeting adjourned at 9:46 pm.

71

MINUTES Elections and Referenda Committee Meeting of the University of Toronto Students’ Union Saturday, March 3rd, 2012 – St. George Campus In Attendance: Clara Ho Thuwanika Kandasamy Ramya Janandharan Lena Elamin Non-Voting Members: Amir Bashir Guests: Michael Scott 1. CALL TO ORDER The meeting is called to order at 2:23 pm.

2. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA MOTION Moved: Ho Seconded: Elamin

Be it resolved that the Saturday, March 3rd, 2012, Elections and Referenda Committee Meeting be approved as presented.

VOTE CARRIED 3. APPEAL OF CRO RULING 003 Scott, the appellant, alleges that the members of the Unity slate committed an intentional misrepresentation of fact as written in Article VI(3)(j)(i). Scott alleges that under “Victories This Year” on a page of the Vote Unity website, the Unity slate states “Successfully lobbied for free access to Varsity and Athletic Centre space for UTSU-recognized clubs”, and that this claim was false and misleading, because access to student space is not afforded to UTSU-recognized clubs, but afforded to clubs recognized by the Office of Student Life (OSL). Scott states that if a statement is false, it is a priori a misrepresentation of fact. Scott further states that campus group recognition by the Union and OSL are different processes, which are governed by different policies. He further states that the statement misleads students to believe that only clubs recognition by the Union is required to access the Varsity and Athletic centre for booking. He further states that there are scenarios whereby a campus group could hypothetically be recognized by the Union, but not recognized by OSL. He further states that the difference in recognition process and timelines for recognition could create a situation where a club is recognized by the Union, but experiences a period awaiting OSL recognition, thus would not be able to book space during that period. Kandasamy asks if there are U.T.S.U. clubs that are not recognized by the Office of Student Life and whether the U.T.S.U. would book space in the Varsity and Athletic Centre on their behalf.

72

MINUTES Elections and Referenda Committee Meeting of the University of Toronto Students’ Union Saturday, March 3rd, 2012 – St. George Campus Bashir states that the Union offers liability insurance coverage for its clubs, but believes that the Union has booked space in the Varsity and Athletic Centre on behalf of clubs. Janandharan states that more information is required on the Union club recognition practices and whether there are UTSU clubs that are ever not recognized by OSL. 4. APPEAL OF CRO RULING 004 Scott, the appellant, alleges that members of the Unity slate committed an intentional misrepresentation of fact as written in Article VI(3)(j)(i). The appellant alleges that under “Victories This Year” on a page of the Vote Unity website, the Unity slate states, “Increased clubs funding”. The appellant alleges that this claim is false and misleading, because of discrepancies between the line items in the Audited Financial Statements and the Operating Budget, that would suggest a decrease in clubs funding. Bashir states that the audited financial statements and the operating budget numbers for clubs funding cannot be compared, because they are fundamentally different documents. Scott states that by comparing the figures from last year’s audited statements and this year’s operating budgets, it suggests that the Union would have to overspend in order to exceed the amount actually allocated to clubs funding this year. Kandasamy states that more information is required on the most updated amount allocated to clubs funding by the Union thus far. 5. APPEAL OF CRO RULING 007 Scott, the appellant, alleges that members of the Unity slate committed an intentional misrepresentation of fact as written in Article VI(3)(j)(i). The appellant alleges that under “Victories This Year” on a page of the Vote Unity website, the Unity slate states, “Hosted an affordable Unity Ball Semi-Formal”. Scott alleges that this claim was false and misleading, because a Unity Ball had not yet been held when the statement was released on February 27th, 2012. The Unity Ball event was held on March 1st, 2012, of the 2011 – 2012 executive term. Scott further states that even if the Unity slate were referring to the Unity Ball event held in 2011, there is no year (academic, executive, solar) used by students that would include that date from the point of the platform release. 6. APPEAL OF CRO RULING 002 Scott, the appellant, alleges that members of the Unity slate committed an intentional misrepresentation of fact as written in Article VI(3)(j)(i). The appellant alleges that under “Victories This Year” on a page of the Vote Unity website, the Unity slate states, “Successfully lobbied to expand tuition grant eligibility to include first-entry professional students”, and that this claim was false and misleading, because the Ontario Liberal Party had not indicted that the tuition grant would not be applicable to first-entry professional students, when they launched their platform on September 5th, 2011, for the provincial elections. Scott provides statements made by the Ontario Undergraduate Students’ Alliance, College Students’ Alliance, Tanya Blazine, and an article from MacLean’s, alleging that first-entry professional students were always intended to receive the tuition grant. Scott further states that the Unity state could not have expanded the tuition grant eligibility to include first-entry professional students if aforementioned students were originally included in the grant proposal. Scott further states that this statement is a falsely claimed victory by the Unity slate. Ho states that members of the Unity slate have lobbied for this expansion of eligibility to first-entry professional students, based on information provided by the Canadian Federation of Students.

73

MINUTES Elections and Referenda Committee Meeting of the University of Toronto Students’ Union Saturday, March 3rd, 2012 – St. George Campus Kandasamy states that more information is required on the correspondences between the Canadian Federation of Students and the Ontario Liberal Party, confirming that the CFS had received information from the OLP that first-entry professional students were not originally included in the grant’s eligibility requirements. Ho states that there is not enough information currently to make an informed decision. Ho further states that more research into the appeals will greatly help decision making on the appeals at the next meeting. 7. ADJOURNMENT MOTION TO ADJOURN Moved: Ho Seconded: Elamin The meeting adjourned at 4:02 pm.

74

MINUTES Elections and Referenda Committee Meeting of the University of Toronto Students’ Union Monday, March 5th, 2012 – St. George Campus In Attendance: Clara Ho Thuwanika Kandasamy Ramya Janandharan Lena Elamin Non-Voting Members: Amir Bashir Guests: Daniel Lo 1. CALL TO ORDER The meeting is called to order at 10:05 pm.

2. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA MOTION Moved: Ho Seconded: Kandasamy

Be it resolved that the Monday, March 5th, 2012, Elections and Referenda Committee Meeting be approved as presented.

VOTE CARRIED 3. APPEAL OF CRO RULING 003 Ho reviews the arguments made by the appellant of CRO Ruling 003. Kandasamy states that students would assume that their clubs could access Varsity and Athletic Centre space through UTSU recognition only. However, OSL recognition, a completely different process, is what grants students the ability to book space on campus. To have students think they can book space with only UTSU recognition and later find out they need to have OSL recognition can be misleading. Bashir states that he was not aware of any clubs that were recognized by UTSU but not by OSL. He further states that the Union refers groups to OSM to book space, but that there is a practice where UTSU books space for clubs. Kandasamy asks if that creates liability issues. Janandharan states that there is no guarantee for clubs, which aren’t OSL recognized but are UTSU recognized, that they could book space. There needs to be a written guarantee in the Clubs Policy for Team Unity to make such a statement.

75

MINUTES Elections and Referenda Committee Meeting of the University of Toronto Students’ Union Monday, March 5th, 2012 – St. George Campus Kandasamy states that UTSU and OSL recognition are two separate processes governed by two different bodies. Janandharan states that the application processes are on different timelines. She further states that there can be a situation where a club is waiting for their recognition approval from OSL, despite having UTSU recognition, and still be unable to book space. MOTION Moved: Kandasamy Seconded: Elamin

Be it resolved that 3 demerit points be assigned to the entire Team Unity slate for unintentional misrepresentation of fact regarding the statement under “Victories this year”: “Successfully lobbied for free access to Varsity and Athletic Centre space for UTSU-recognized clubs”.

VOTE CARRIED 4. APPEAL OF CRO RULING 007 Ho reviews the arguments made by the appellant of CRO Ruling 007. Janandharan states that the wording can be misleading, but it is still ambiguous. Kandasamy states that a strict reading of the Unity Ball date and when the website was released does suggest misrepresentation of fact. Lo states that it can be argued that the statement refers to a previous year’s victory. He states there is confusion about past and present victory and that it seems to be unintentional misrepresentation. He states the complaint appears borderline frivolous. Kandasamy states that the wording should have been clarified. MOTION Moved: Ho Seconded: Elamin

Be it resolved that CRO Ruling 007 be upheld. VOTE CARRIED 5. APPEAL OF CRO RULING 004 Ho reviews the arguments made by the appellant of CRO Ruling 004. Bashir provides an excel file document which has all the clubs that were funded last year and this year to date. He states that the total of funding has increased from 2010-2011 to 2011-2012. He states that short term funding is continually increasing so the values in the spreadsheet will increase. He states the numbers were taken from Clubs Committee minutes, which were approved at Board meetings.

76

MINUTES Elections and Referenda Committee Meeting of the University of Toronto Students’ Union Monday, March 5th, 2012 – St. George Campus Kandasamy states that students do not have access to this document, and they only have access to the Audited Financial statements and the Operating Budget, which is a concern. Bashir states that clubs funding has increased by $10,000, and from the operating budgets, there has been a $10,000 increase in clubs funding. He states that this year, there have been cost saving measures which would increase clubs funding. Janandharan asks why the Tamil Students’ Association and EFUT are not in the excel document provided. Elamin states that the issue needs to be clarified before making a decision. She further states that there appear to be information missing. 6. APPEAL OF CRO RULING 002 Ho reviews the arguments made by the appellant of CRO Ruling 002. Elamin states that the appellant has provided ample evidence to suggest that first-entry professional faculty students were always eligible for the tuition grant. Elamin further states that the statement on the website strongly suggests that the eligibility expansion resulted from successful lobbying efforts. Ho states that there is no question that members of Team Unity campaigned for the grant to be extended. However, the issue is whether the lobbying can constitute a “victory” for the team if first entry professional faculty students have always been eligible for the grant. Lo states that the evidence used in his ruling was based on board minutes and executive reports, which stated lobbying efforts to expand the grant eligibility. Kandasamy states that the issue is not whether members of Team Unity lobbied for expansion of grant eligibility, but whether the lobbying resulted in an expansion of eligibility because first entry students were not eligible in the first place. How is there such a large discrepancy in some student organizations knowing that first entry professional students were always eligible for the grant and others claiming that they were not? Ho states that information regarding grant eligibility was received primarily from the Canadian Federation of Students. If there had been a misunderstanding in communication between the Federation and the Ministry, then members of Team Unity would be committing an unintentional misrepresentation of fact. Lo states that if they successfully lobbied, they did the act of lobbying. He states that there are assumptions Team Unity is claiming a singular victory, and that the lobbying had no effect. MOTION Moved: Kandasamy Seconded: Janandharan

Be it resolved that 3 demerit points be assigned to the entire Team Unity slate for unintentional misrepresentation of fact regarding the statement under “Victories this year”: “Successfully lobbied to expand tuition grant eligibility to include first-entry professional students”.

VOTE CARRIED

77

MINUTES Elections and Referenda Committee Meeting of the University of Toronto Students’ Union Monday, March 5th, 2012 – St. George Campus 7. ADJOURNMENT MOTION TO ADJOURN Moved: Ho Seconded: Janandharan The meeting adjourned at 11:35 pm.

78

MINUTES Elections and Referenda Committee Meeting of the University of Toronto Students’ Union Tuesday, March 6th, 2012 – St. George Campus In Attendance: Clara Ho Thuwanika Kandasamy Ramya Janandharan Lena Elamin Non-Voting Members: Amir Bashir Guests: Daniel Lo Michael Scott Brent Schmidt 1. CALL TO ORDER The meeting is called to order at 12:36 pm.

2. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA MOTION Moved: Ho Seconded: Kandasamy

Be it resolved that the Tuesday, March 6th, 2012, Elections and Referenda Committee Meeting be approved as presented.

VOTE CARRIED 3. APPEAL OF CRO RULING 010 Scott, the appellant, stated that the statement “Hosted Winter Clubs Day as part of Winter Clubs Week 2011” under Team Unity’s “Victories This Year” is false and misleading, because there is no year (academic, calendar, or solar) which incorporates both Winter Clubs Day, which occurred in January 2011, and the campaigning period in the 2012 UTSU elections. 3. APPEAL OF CRO RULING 013 Scott, the appellant, states that the interest-free period on OSAP for 6 months after graduation occurred on August 1st, 2010. He states that for Team Unity to imply that it occurred recently and considered a victory for this year is false and misleading. He further states that it is problematic to take credit for something that did not occur this past year.

79

4. APPEAL OF CRO RULING 019 Scott, the appellant, states that Team Unity committed an intentional misrepresentation of fact by stating under their “Victories This Year” on a page of their website that they “Won an increase to the Ontario Student Opportunity Grant (OSOG)”. He further states that the individual portions of OSOG have not changed, and that since most students interpret the statement as their individual benefit from the program, the statement is misleading if it refers to the a collective increase. He further states that Team Unity should have specified that the lump sum value of the grant has increased. Janandharan states that the wording does not clearly say the individual or collective value of the grant increase. She states it can be construed as slightly misleading, but it is ambiguous enough to not constitute a misrepresentation of fact. Bashir states that Team Unity has simply stated there is an increase to the OSOG, and if a student chooses to interpret it based on individual increases, that is their choice. Kandasamy states that the campaign material is targeting individual students, and so students might interpret the OSOG increase as referring to an “individual increase”. Janandharan states that when one thinks of “grant”, they think of a grant as having a collective and individual impact. Thus students might have understood what Unity was trying to suggest. Scott states that at the end of the day, the student as an individual is responsible for his/her student debt. The student does not get to collectivize it. He states that the primary lens we should look in regards to OSAP is at the individual level, because students pay for it and it is their responsibility. Thus, the program change happens at an individual level. A better way for Unity to have phrased their victory is by stating, “OSOG is available to more students”. However, they stated something easily interpreted as an individual increase. 5. APPEAL OF CRO RULING 020 Scott, the appellant, states that for the CRO to use the comparison of executive salary (2012) to the Low Income Cut Off for gross income in 2010, underestimates the actual difference between the UTSU executive salary (2012) and the LICO (2012), and is thus a factually incorrect ruling. He further states that there has been failure of CRO to comply with Article 6, section 3.d. as no written notification was given on the complaint, but it requires explicit notification when a decision is made, and some responses have exceeded the time limit for decision making, Article VI, 3.e. 6. APPEAL OF CRO RULING 015 Ho states that CRO Ruling 015 assigned demerit points for a non-arm’s length party supporters of Students First and Rohail Tanoli bringing “unapproved” campaign material into the All Candidate’s Debate. Bashir states that if the CRO’s ruling is overturned, then those claiming not affiliated with candidates will be able to say whatever they want. Kandasamy states that this argument goes both ways. Bashir states that regardless of how the ruling goes, such a decision will open floodgates. Schmidt, the appellant, states that Students First and Tanoli publically stated that they were not affiliated with those who created or were holding the signs. He states that before and after the action, Students First disavowed ties with those who dispersed the signs. He further states he found it odd that the moderator encouraged the signs at the debate, and said that he would encourage the use of signs, as long as they are at the back.

80

7. APPEAL OF CRO RULING 016 Schmidt, the appellant, stated that there was no proof of who created the image of Gaddafi in a Unity poster. He states his team was not aware of this poster until they received demerit points. He states that Students First disavowed this poster because it was offensive. 8. APPEAL OF CRO RULING 017 Schmidt, the appellant, stated that Miss Karthy Chin asked everyone to “quiet down” with the heckling, as a statement to their supporters, and try to fix what happened at the debate. He further states that Mr. Rohail Tanoli also asked that people should have more respect for the speakers. He further states that their campaign volunteers knew to be quiet and respectful of the debate. He states that those who were not affiliated with Students First and Mr. Tanoli had other ideas. He states that the team is confused why they were given demerit points for the actions of individuals that his team does not affiliate with. 9. APPEAL OF CRO RULING 018 Schmidt, the appellant, states that Robert Boissoneault is a non-arm’s length supporter of Students First. He states that Mr. Boissoneault’s comments concerning the Canadian Federation of Students, which is neither a slate of candidates in the election or key to the maintenance of the authority of the CRO or the Elections Committee, cannot be considered a violation of fair play. 10. ADJOURNMENT MOTION TO ADJOURN Moved: Ho Seconded: Janandharan The meeting adjourned at 2:02 pm.

81

MINUTES Elections and Referenda Committee Meeting of the University of Toronto Students’ Union Wednesday, March 7th, 2012 – St. George Campus In Attendance: Clara Ho Thuwanika Kandasamy Ramya Janandharan Lena Elamin Non-Voting Members: Amir Bashir 1. CALL TO ORDER The meeting is called to order at 10:55 pm.

2. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA MOTION Moved: Ho Seconded: Elamin

Be it resolved that the Wednesday, March 7th, 2012, Elections and Referenda Committee Meeting be approved as presented.

VOTE CARRIED 3. APPEAL OF CRO RULING 010 Kandasamy states that there is insufficient evidence to suggest a misrepresentation of fact. Janandharan states there might be confusion about the years, but the wording is ambiguous enough to not give enough grounds for misrepresentation of fact. MOTION Moved: Ho Seconded: Kandasamy

Be it resolved that CRO Ruling 010 be upheld. VOTE CARRIED 4. APPEAL OF CRO RULING 019 Ho states that the statement can be misleading, because some students can read it as an individual increase to the Ontario Student Opportunity Grant. Janandharan states that it is still ambiguous enough to be interpreted the other way.

82

Kandasamy states that the statement needs to be clarified. MOTION Moved: Ho Seconded: Kandasamy

Be it resolved that CRO Ruling 019 be upheld. VOTE CARRIED 5. APPEAL OF CRO RULING 013 Kandasamy states that the statement “Won an interest free period on OSAP for 6 months after graduation” on the Team Unity website under “Victories This Year” is problematic because the interest free period was introduced in August 2010, and the slate is taking credit for efforts not achieved during the past year. Janandharan states the past victories section explicitly says it refers to those achieved this past 2011-2012 year, not two years ago. Kandasamy states that considering past executive candidates of Unity were part of the initiative, they should have known it was a win from previous years and that it was claimed in campaign materials from previous years’ slates they were part of. Janandharan states that the word “won” has implications, and what it is insinuating is not ambiguous. It is implying that it is not being continually worked on. MOTION Moved: Janandharan Seconded: Kandasamy

Be it resolved that 5 demerit points be issued to all members of Team Unity for intentional misrepresentation of fact regarding the statement “Won an interest free period on OSAP for six months after graduation”.

VOTE CARRIED 6. APPEAL OF CRO RULING 004 Ho states that the Tamil Students’ Association was allocated $8000 and EFUT was allocated $8500 in 2010-2011. She further states that this information was missing from the original Excel spreadsheet of total clubs funding presented to the committee in last meetings. She further states that this brings the total clubs funding allocations to $137,004.50 in 2010-2011 and $131,233.33 in 2011-2012, creating a difference of $5771.17, which suggest a decrease from 2010-2011 to 2011-2012. Janandharan states that claiming clubs funding has increased is a significant platform point that convinces clubs to endorse your slate. She further states that it is troubling why $16,500 was not accounted for in allocated clubs funding for 2010-2011. Bashir states that it is possible there was an error in putting those values in last year’s clubs committee minutes. Kandasamy states that the statement “Increased clubs funding” on the Unity website constitutes a very serious misrepresentation of fact. She further states that to see inconsistences in the minutes regarding clubs funding is concerning. She further states that members of the Unity slate ought to have known about the clubs funding situation, as members had worked closely with Union budgets in the past.

83

MOTION Moved: Kandasamy Seconded: Janandharan

Be it resolved that 10 demerit points be issued to all members of Team Unity for intentional misrepresentation of fact regarding the statement “Increased clubs funding”.

VOTE CARRIED 7. APPEAL OF CRO RULING 015 Elamin states that there is insufficient evidence that those creating and holding the posters were non-arms length part supporters of Rohail Tanoli and Students First. Ho states that Students First publically disavowed the posters. MOTION Moved: Ho Seconded: Janandharan

Be it resolved that CRO Ruling 015 be overturned. VOTE CARRIED 8. APPEAL OF CRO RULING 016 Kandasamy states that there is insufficient evidence to suggest that Students First was responsible for the poster created. MOTION Moved: Kandasamy Seconded: Janandharan

Be it resolved that CRO Ruling 016 be overturned. VOTE CARRIED 9. APPEAL OF CRO RULING 017 Elamin states there is insufficient evidence that those who were disruptive at the All-Candidates Debate were non-arm’s length party supporters of Students First and Rohail Tanoli. She further states that those candidates had requested the audience be respectful of speakers and quiet down. MOTION Moved: Kandasamy Seconded: Janandharan

Be it resolved that CRO Ruling 017 be overturned. VOTE CARRIED

84

10. APPEAL OF CRO RULING 018 Ho states implicating that an external organization was responsible for the twitter scandal is not relevant to the elections, and does not constitute a breach of fair play. MOTION Moved: Ho Seconded: Kandasamy

Be it resolved that CRO Ruling 018 be overturned. VOTE CARRIED 10. ADJOURNMENT MOTION TO ADJOURN Moved: Ho Seconded: Kandasamy The meeting adjourned at 12:30 am.

85

MINUTES Elections and Referenda Committee Meeting of the University of Toronto Students’ Union Friday, March 23rd, 2012 – St. George Campus In Attendance: Clara Ho Ramya Janandharan Lena Elamin Non-Voting Members: Amir Bashir Proxy: Ramya Janandharan for Thuwanika Kandasamy 1. CALL TO ORDER The meeting is called to order at 9:05 pm.

2. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA MOTION Moved: Ho Seconded: Janandharan

Be it resolved that the Friday, March 23rd, 2012, Elections and Referenda Committee Meeting be approved as presented.

VOTE CARRIED 3. APPEAL OF CRO RULING 028 Ho reviews the appeal of CRO Ruling 028. Janandharan states that the postering violations at Chestnut Residence should not have been amalgamated with the postering violations at Wilson Hall into CRO Ruling 028, because these are incidents occurring in separate buildings and locations. She further states that it is clear that there were three instances of postering violations at Chestnut Residence. Bashir states that if postering violations at Chestnut Residence and Wilson are ruled separate, the demerit points should perhaps be lowered, such that candidates are not disqualified. He further states that the demerit points system is not designed to disqualify candidates, but to deter them from future penalties. Janandharan states that candidates were informed of the campaign rules at the All-Candidates Meeting and that it was their responsibility to follow the EPC. The separate violations at Chestnut Residence should be addressed. Ho states there were clearly multiple postering violations in different locations within the same Wilson Hall Residence Building.

86

MOTION #1 Moved: Janandharan Seconded: Elamin

Be it resolved that 5 demerit points be issued to Ali Mustafa Bello, Baliqis Hashiru and Khalid Khan for breaching Article VI (1)(s)(i) “Campaigning is not allowed within 6 metres of a Student Residence”, and thus had campaign materials in an unauthorized area.

VOTE CARRIED MOTION #2 Moved: Janandharan Seconded: Elamin

Be it resolved that 4 demerit points be issued to Ali Mustafa Bello, Baliqis Hashiru and Khalid Khan for multiple violations in the same building, as there were three (3) locations in Wilson Hall Residence where the aforementioned candidates’ campaign posters were placed within six (6) metres of the Wilson Hall student residence.

VOTE CARRIED 4. APPEAL OF CRO RULING 031 Janandharan states that the CRO saw the violation with his own eyes and recognized that it was an unintentional violation, which is why only 3 demerit points were issued. She states that CRO Ruling 031 was fair. MOTION Moved: Ho Seconded: Janandharan

Be it resolved that CRO Ruling 031 be upheld. VOTE CARRIED 5. APPEAL OF CRO RULING 055 Ho states that Mr. Shepherd made the statement as a sign of respect, and that it was not a campaign tactic. MOTION Moved: Ho Seconded: Elamin

Be it resolved that CRO Ruling 055 be upheld. VOTE CARRIED 6. APPEAL OF CRO RULING 056 Ho states that the statement is ambiguous and that there is no evidence from video recordings that Shaun stated that first-entry professional students were now included.

87

Ramya states she does not agree with the rationale behind the CRO ruling, but the statement does appear ambiguous. Ho states there is lack of evidence that members of Team Unity did not contribute towards securing the new provincial grant system for students. MOTION Moved: Elamin Seconded: Janandharan

Be it resolved that the CRO Ruling 056 be overturned due to insufficient evidence that Unity successfully lobbied which resulted in expansion of tuition grant eligibility to first year professional students.

And be it further resolved that due to lack of evidence for the allegation that Unity did not take part in securing a new provincial grant system for students and lack of video evidence for Shaun’s statement regarding successfully lobbying to include first-entry professional students in the tuition grant, no demerit points will be assigned for this appeal.

VOTE CARRIED 7. APPEAL OF CRO RULING 057 Elamin states that OSOG has been increased collectively, but the statement on the Team Unity website can be misleading to students. Janandharan says this appeal refers to a similar CRO Ruling that the ERC had made an earlier ruling on. 8. APPEAL OF CRO RULING 037 Janandharan states that there is a problem when there is insufficient evidence on the source of the flyers and who left them in the library. Be it resolved that CRO Ruling 37 be upheld. MOTION Moved: Ho Seconded: Elamin

Be it resolved that CRO Ruling 037 be upheld. VOTE CARRIED 9. APPEAL OF CRO RULINGS 043, 045, 046, 047, 051 Elamin states that there is insufficient evidence for the source of the campaign materials. MOTION Moved: Ho Seconded: Janandharan

Be it resolved that CRO Rulings 043, 045, 046, 047, and 051 be upheld.

88

VOTE CARRIED 10. ADJOURNMENT MOTION TO ADJOURN Moved: Ho Seconded: Elamin The meeting adjourned at 10:14 pm.

89

MINUTES Elections and Referenda Committee Meeting of the University of Toronto Students’ Union Saturday, March 24th, 2012 – St. George Campus In Attendance: Clara Ho Ramya Janandharan Lena Elamin Non-Voting Members: Amir Bashir Guests: Michael Scott Proxy: Ramya Janandharan for Thuwanika Kandasamy 1. CALL TO ORDER The meeting is called to order at 1:08 pm.

2. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA MOTION Moved: Ho Seconded: Janandharan

Be it resolved that the Saturday, March 24th, 2012, Elections and Referenda Committee Meeting be approved as presented.

VOTE CARRIED 3. APPEAL OF CRO RULING 054 Ho states that Team Unity made a private statement to the CRO claiming they were unaffiliated with the group, but never made a public statement addressing the group “UofTathletes4shep”. MOTION Moved: Ho Seconded: Janandharan

Be it resolved that no demerit points will be issued for this appeal, as Team Unity stated they were unaffiliated with the group “UofTathletes4shep”.

VOTE CARRIED

90

4. APPEAL OF CRO RULING 058 Scott, the appellant, states that there were multiple violations of the EPC by Team Unity as there were multiple instances of campaign videos not removed. Scott states that not only the Vote Unity video was not removed, but separate videos for the executive candidates. Scott states that in contrast of board candidates, the executive candidates committed two breaches of the EPC. Scott further states that the executive candidates clearly committed multiple offences whereas board candidates committed single offence and does not make sense that they would be treated the same way, and thus the punishment produced by CRO is manifestly unfair. 5. ADJOURNMENT MOTION TO ADJOURN Moved: Ho Seconded: Janandharan The meeting adjourned at 2:30 pm.

91

MINUTES Elections and Referenda Committee Meeting of the University of Toronto Students’ Union Saturday, March 24th, 2012 – St. George Campus In Attendance: Clara Ho Ramya Janandharan Lena Elamin Non-Voting Members: Amir Bashir Proxy: Ramya Janandharan for Thuwanika Kandasamy 1. CALL TO ORDER The meeting is called to order at 9:00 pm.

2. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA MOTION Moved: Ho Seconded: Elamin

Be it resolved that the Saturday, March 24th, 2012, Elections and Referenda Committee Meeting be approved as presented.

VOTE CARRIED 4. APPEAL OF CRO RULING 058 Elamin states that the increase to the Ontario Student Opportunity Grant was implemented in 2010, which does not fall into the 2011-2012 executive term and thus could not constitute a “victory” for Team Unity this year. She states two websites that contain this information: http://ocufa.on.ca/wordpress/assets/student-assistance-briefing-note-election-2011.pdf http://news.ontario.ca/tcu/en/2010/03/greater-financial-assistance-for-postsecondary-students.html Janandharan states that Team Unity ought to have known about when the OSOG increase occurred and by stating that it was a victory for this year is misleading. MOTION Moved: Elamin Seconded: Janandharan

Be it resolved that 5 demerit points be issued to all members of Team Unity for intentional misrepresentation of fact regarding the statement “Won an increase to the Ontario Student Opportunity Grant”.

VOTE

92

CARRIED 5. ADJOURNMENT MOTION TO ADJOURN Moved: Ho Seconded: Janandharan The meeting adjourned at 10:14 pm.

93

Minutes of the Clubs Committee Meeting

February 10, 2012 March 18, 2012

94

Minutes

Clubs Committee of the University of Toronto Students’ Union Friday, February 10, 2012 • U.T.S.U. St. George Office

Voting members:

Corey Scott, Vice-President Internal Danielle Sandhu, President Amanda Santos, Clubs Community Member Stacey Konidis, Clubs Committee Member 1. CALL TO ORDER

This meeting is called to order at 5:33 pm

2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA

MOTION Moved: Scott Seconded: Santos Be it resolved that February 10, 2012 Clubs Committee Meeting Agenda be approved as presented.

VOTE

CARRIED

3. INDIVIDUAL ACADEMIC ENDEAVOUR GRANTS

Maggie Siu

Sandhu states that the conference she is attending it is the largest student-run medical conference of its kind and she would be an ambassador for the University. She further states that it is a good way to gain exposure for those trying to enter the medical professional. Costs are registration, travel and accommodation. Santos states that the application is clear and receipts are attached. MOTION Moved: Sandhu Seconded: Santos

Be it resolved that Maggie Siu received $100 in Individual Academic Endeavour Grants. VOTE

CARRIED

3.

Long Term Funding: Cognitive Science and Artificial Intelligence Club

DISCUSSION

Scott explains the nature of the club and some of the programs the club runs. He also states the amount being requested, the total expenses, total revenues and the status of funding from previous years. Scott

95

Minutes

Clubs Committee of the University of Toronto Students’ Union Monday October 17, 2011, 210 • U.T.S.U. St. George Office states that the club has outside sponsorship outside of UTSU funding. He further explains that their expenses are fairly small and include movie nights, guest lecturer and academic workshop. He further states that they have an alumni fundraising dinner which is the biggest event and is largely covered by the Faculties. Santos states that as it is their first time, we should give them $250 but we have not seen enough done by the club.

MOTION Moved: Konidis Seconded: Santos Be it resolved that the Cognitive Science and Artificial Intelligence Club receive $250 in UTSU Long-Term clubs funding.

VOTE

CARRIED

4. Long-Term Funding: Nspire Innovation Network

DISCUSSION

Sandhu explains the nature of the club and some of the programs the club runs. She also states the amount being requested, the total expenses, total revenues and the status of funding from previous years. She further states that they are expecting $80 000 in revenue with membership and delegate fees. Scott states that they received funding last year. MOTION Moved: Konidis Seconded: Scott Be it resolved that Nspire Innovation Network Receive $350 in UTSU Long-Term Clubs Funding. VOTE

CARRIED

5. Long-Term Funding: Pakistan Student Federation

DISCUSSION

Sandhu explains the nature of the club and some of the programs the club runs. She also states the amount being requested, the total expenses, total revenues and the status of funding from previous years She further states that the group is concerned with sharing culture and heritage. She states that the club received $1300 in funding last year but only picked up the first installment.

96

Minutes

Clubs Committee of the University of Toronto Students’ Union Friday, February 10, 2012 • U.T.S.U. St. George Office

MOTION Moved: Sandhu Seconded: Konidis Be it resolved that the Pakistan Student Federation receive $1000 in UTSU Long-Term clubs funding.

VOTE

CARRIED

6. Long-Term Funding: UFashion

DISCUSSION

Sandhu explains the nature of the club and some of the programs the club runs. She also states the amount being requested, the total expenses, total revenues and the status of funding from previous years. Sandhu states that the original issue with their application was not attending the clubs training. They have since met with Albi for consultation. She further states that their revenue exceeds their expenses. MOTION Moved: Santos Seconded: Konidis

Be it resolved that UFashion receive $200.00 in UTSU Long-Term clubs funding.

VOTE

CARRIED

7. Long-Term Funding: Bangladeshi students association

DISCUSSION

Sandhu explains the nature of the club and some of the programs the club runs. She also states the amount being requested, the total expenses, total revenues and the status of funding from previous years.

MOTION Moved: Konidis Seconded: Scott Be it resolved that Students Association receive $1000.00 in UTSU Long-Term clubs funding.

VOTE

CARRIED

97

Minutes

Clubs Committee of the University of Toronto Students’ Union Wednesday, October 13, 210 • U.T.S.U. St. George Office

8. Short-Term Funding: U of T Lipdub

DISCUSSION

Sandhu states that the club had not attended training but attended a consultation. She further explains their budget and events. She further states Lipdub had to pay for licensing costs for the songs used. She further states that given that all other campuses were involved, the students union at the other campuses should also be contacted for funding. Scott states that as it is a one time thing, we should give a higher amount.

MOTION Moved: Scott Seconded: Sandhu Be it resolved that the U of T lip dub receive $350 in UTSU Short-Term clubs funding.

VOTE

CARRIED

9. Short-Term Funding: U of T Engineering Kompetition

DISCUSSION

Sandhu explains the nature of the club and some of the programs the club runs. She also states the amount being requested, the total expenses, total revenues and the status of funding from previous years. Scott states that it brings together design based events which we cannot fund separately but can fund through the Engineering Kompetition.

MOTION Moved: Santos Seconded: Konidis Be it resolved that Engineers receive $400.00 in UTSU Short-Term clubs funding.

VOTE

CARRIED

10. Short-Term Funding: Students In Free Enterprise

DISCUSSION

Sandhu explains the nature of the club and their event. She further states that the clubs’ events brings together students from different schools. Scott states that their competition is very popular and the club holds creative events.

98

Minutes

Clubs Committee of the University of Toronto Students’ Union Friday, February 10, 2012 • U.T.S.U. St. George Office

MOTION Moved: Santos Seconded: Konidis Be it resolved that receive $400 in UTSU short term-Term clubs funding.

VOTE

CARRIED

11. Short-Term Funding: United Against Cancer

DISCUSSION

Sandhu explains the nature of the club and some of the programs the club runs. She also states the amount being requested, the total expenses, total revenues and the status of funding from previous years.

MOTION

Moved:

Sandhu

Seconded:

Scott

Be it resolved that United Against Cancer receive $350 in UTSU short term funding

VOTE

CARRIED

12. Short-Term Funding: Korean-Canadian U of T Students Association

DISCUSSION

Sandhu explains the nature of the club and some of the programs the club runs. She also states the amount being requested, the total expenses, total revenues and the status of funding from previous years. Scott states that they applied for long term funding last year.

MOTION Moved: Scott Seconded:Sandhu Be it resolved that receive $200.00 in UTSU Short-Term clubs funding.

VOTE

CARRIED

99

Minutes

Clubs Committee of the University of Toronto Students’ Union Monday, October 17, 2011 • U.T.S.U. St. George Office

13. Short-Term Funding: U of T TV

DISCUSSION

Sandhu explains the nature of the club and some of the programs the club runs. She also states the amount being requested, the total expenses, total revenues and the status of funding from previous years.

MOTION Moved: Scott Seconded: Sandhu Be it resolved that receive $100.00 in UTSU Long-Term clubs funding.

VOTE

CARRIED

14. Short-Term Funding: Volunteers for Intercultural and Definitive Adventures

DISCUSSION

Sandhu explains the nature of the club and some of the programs the club runs. She also states the amount being requested, the total expenses, total revenues and the status of funding from previous years. She further states they have doubled their members in the last year. She further states that their revenue is listed at $7500 and a fundraising goal of $300. She further states that their expenses are fixed.

MOTION

Moved:

Santos

Seconded:

Konidis

Be it resolved that the receive $400.00 in UTSU Long-Term clubs funding.

VOTE

CARRIED

15. Short-Term Funding: U of T Sol music

DISCUSSION

Sandhu explains the nature of the club and some of the programs the club runs. She also states the amount being requested, the total expenses, and total revenues. She further states that they are requesting $500 and as they are a newly formed groups they have not received previous funding. They charge a clubs membership fee of $350.

100

Minutes

Clubs Committee of the University of Toronto Students’ Union Monday, October 17, 2011 • U.T.S.U. St. George Office

MOTION Moved: Santos Seconded: Scott Be it resolved that Unity at UofT receive $500.00 in UTSU Short-Term clubs funding.

VOTE

CARRIED

16. Short-Term Funding: Buddhist Psychology Student Union

DISCUSSION

Sandhu explains the nature of the club. She further states they are looking for funding for a conference which was sold out last year. She further states that they are bringing speakers in from the UK. MOTION Moved: Sandhu Seconded: Scott

Be it resolved that the Buddhist Psychology Student Union receive $250 in UTSU short-term funding.

VOTE

CARRIED

17. Short-Term Funding: Jung Ain Society

DISCUSSION

Sandhu explains the nature of the club and some of the programs the club runs. She also states the amount being requested, the total expenses, and total revenues.

MOTION Moved: Santos Seconded: Konidis Be it resolved that the 250.00 in UTSU short-Term clubs funding.

VOTE

CARRIED

18.

Short-Term Funding: University College Korean club

DISCUSSION

Sandhu explains the nature of the club and some of the programs the club runs. She also states the amount being requested, the total expenses, total revenues and the status of funding from previous years.

101

Minutes

Clubs Committee of the University of Toronto Students’ Union Wednesday, October 13, 210 • U.T.S.U. St. George Office

MOTION Moved: Scott Seconded: Aziz Be it resolved that the UC Korean Club received $345 in UTSU Short-Term clubs funding.

VOTE

CARRIED

19. Short-Term Funding: UN Development Programme

DISCUSSION

Sandhu explains the nature of the club and some of the programs the club runs. She also states the amount being requested, the total expenses, total revenues and the status of funding from previous years.

MOTION Moved: Santos Seconded: Sandhu Be it resolved that the receive $250 in UTSU Short-Term clubs funding.

VOTE

CARRIED

20. Short-Term Funding: U of T Sports and Business Association

DISCUSSION

Sandhu states that the application is not complete.

MOTION Moved: Santos Seconded: Sandhu Be it resolved that the U of T Sports and Business Association application for short-term funding be tabled pending a consultation.

VOTE

CARRIED

21. Short-Term Funding: Engineering Toastmasters

DISCUSSION

Sandhu states that the club has not attended training.

102

Minutes

Clubs Committee of the University of Toronto Students’ Union Wednesday, October 13, 210 • U.T.S.U. St. George Office

MOTION Moved: Santos Seconded: Sandhu

Be it resolved that the Engineering Toastmasters application be tabled pending a consultation

VOTE

CARRIED

22. ADJOURNMENT

MOTION TO ADJOURN Moved: Sandhu Seconded: Scott

VOTE

CARRIED

Meeting adjourned at 7:07 pm.

103

MINUTES Clubs Committee Meeting of the University of Toronto Students' Union Sunday, March 18, 2011 – UTSU Office

In Attendance: Corey Scott Danielle Sandhu Joshua Mandryk Amanda Santos 1. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 5:15 pm. 2. SHORT-TERM FUNDING – TALES OF HARMONIA DISCUSSION Scott provides an overview of the club’s mandate and the event for which they are seeking funding – a performance night at Hart House. He further provides an overview of the club’s funding sources. Santos asks if the club has received UTSU funding in the past. Scott states that the club has not received UTSU funding in the past. MOTION Moved: Santos Seconded: Mandryk

Be it resolved that Tales of Harmonia receive $500.00 in UTSU Short-Term Funding.

VOTE CARRIED 3. SHORT-TERM FUNDING – OXFAM UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO DISCUSSION Scott states that the club is seeking funding for a charity fundraiser. He provides an overview of the club’s financial sources for the event.

Sandhu provides an overview of the mandate of Oxfam as well as the hunger banquet event, including the format and objectives of the event.

104

MINUTES Clubs Committee Meeting of the University of Toronto Students' Union Sunday, March 18, 2011 – UTSU Office

MOTION Moved: Santos Seconded: Scott

Be it resolved that Oxfam University of Toronto receive $500.00 in UTSU Short-Term Funding.

VOTE CARRIED 4. SHORT-TERM FUNDING – ST. MIKES ASSOCIATION OF CHINESE STUDENTS DISCUSSION Scott states that the club has attended training and provided a complete application. He further provides an overview of the club’s financial resources. He provides an overview of the club’s event – a club ski trip. Sandhu states that the committee should consider the expenses incurred per person, as well as how much each attendee contributes. Mandryk states that the event is supporting a celebration of Chinese New Year for a membership largely comprised of international students observing the day for the first time in outside of China. MOTION Moved: Santos Seconded: Sandhu

Be it resolved that St. Mikes Association of Chinese Students receive $100.00 in UTSU Short-Term Funding.

VOTE CARRIED 5. SHORT-TERM FUNDING – ASSOCIATION OF CANADA-CHINA EXCHANGE OF

LEADERSHIP DISCUSSION Scott states that this group aims to develop leadership skills within its membership. He further states the group is hosting a forum to explore China in the future, and provide an opportunity for dialogue. He provides an overview of the expenses related to equipment, food and speaker costs associated with the forum.

105

MINUTES Clubs Committee Meeting of the University of Toronto Students' Union Sunday, March 18, 2011 – UTSU Office

MOTION Moved: Scott Seconded: Santos

Be it resolved that Association of Canada-China Exchange of Leadership receive $200.00 in UTSU Short-Term Funding.

VOTE CARRIED 6. SHORT-TERM FUNDING – NEW SILK ROAD: GLOBAL CHINA CULTURAL

EXCHANGE DISCUSSION Scott provides an overview of the club’s membership and presence on campus. He further provides an overview of the club’s funding sources. He states that the club is hosting a talk-show hosted by a Chinese-American comedian for UofT community members. Santos states some listed costs cannot be covered by the committee. MOTION Moved: Santos Seconded: Scott

Be it resolved that New Silk Road: Global China Cultural Exchange receive $400.00 in UTSU Short-Term Funding.

VOTE CARRIED 7. SHORT-TERM FUNDING – WOMEN’S CANCER AWARENESS CLUB DISCUSSION Scott states that the club works to raise awareness around cancer and has previously hosted a Wear Pink educational day and fundraiser. He further states the club is hosting a cancer awareness conference. He provides an overview of the club’s financial resources and funding eligibility. Santos states that the club’s budget looks reasonable.

106

MINUTES Clubs Committee Meeting of the University of Toronto Students' Union Sunday, March 18, 2011 – UTSU Office

MOTION Moved: Santos Seconded: Scott

Be it resolved that Women’s Cancer Awareness Club receive $200.00 in UTSU Short-Term Funding.

VOTE CARRIED 8. SHORT-TERM FUNDING – KOREAN CHRISTIAN FELLOWSHIP DISCUSSION Scott provides an overview of the club’s funding sources and eligibility. He provides an overview of the community night event to be hosted to bring students together for bible study, socializing and discussing volunteer opportunities. Sandhu states the club should explore additional funding sources. MOTION Moved: Sandhu Seconded: Mandryk

Be it resolved that Korean Christian Fellowship receive $100.00 in UTSU Short-Term Funding.

VOTE CARRIED 9. SHORT-TERM FUNDING – TREK FOR TEENS FOUNDATION DISCUSSION Scott provides an overview of the club’s mandate and proposed event. He further provides information about previous funding allocations. Sandhu states that the club has been visible during the year, tabling in Sid Smith, and has collaborated with other clubs as well. MOTION Moved: Santos Seconded: Mandryk

Be it resolved that Trek for Teens Foundation receive $500.00 in UTSU Short-Term Funding.

VOTE CARRIED

107

MINUTES Clubs Committee Meeting of the University of Toronto Students' Union Sunday, March 18, 2011 – UTSU Office

10. SHORT-TERM FUNDING – IRANIAN ASSOCIATION AT THE UNIVERSITY OF

TORONTO DISCUSSION Scott provides an overview of the club’s mandate and presence across campus. He further provides an overview of the proposed event, a Persian New Year celebration at Hart House. He further provides an overview of the event’s expenses. Santos asks how much funding the club has received in the previous year. Scott states that the club received $750.00 last year.

Santo states that the club has a broad scope and significant size of membership. MOTION Moved: Mandryk Seconded: Santos

Be it resolved that Iranian Association at the University of Toronto receive $400.00 in UTSU Short-Term Funding.

VOTE CARRIED 11. SHORT-TERM FUNDING – WOMEN AND GENDER STUDIES STUDENTS’ UNION DISCUSSION Scott provides an overview of the mandate of the course union and the proposed initiative, Intersections journal production. Scott further provides information about the club’s previous UTSU funding allocation. MOTION Moved: Scott Seconded: Santos

Be it resolved that the Women and Gender Studies Students’ Union receive $310.00 in UTSU Short-Term Funding.

VOTE CARRIED

108

MINUTES Clubs Committee Meeting of the University of Toronto Students' Union Sunday, March 18, 2011 – UTSU Office

12. SHORT-TERM FUNDING – RUSSIAN LANGUAGE ASSOCIATION DISCUSSION Scott provides an overview of the association’s mandate and activities. He further provides an overview of the expenses associated with the proposed general meeting event. Mandryk states that the funding allocation should be pending recognition. Santos suggests that it be recommended to the club to seek additional sources of funding. MOTION Moved: Scott Seconded: Santos

Be it resolved that the Russian Language Association receive $100.00 in UTSU Short-Term Funding.

VOTE CARRIED 13. SHORT-TERM FUNDING – CROSS DISCIPLINE GRADUATE STUDENT DISCUSSION Scott states that this is a graduate student association and therefore not eligible for UTSU funding. MOTION Moved: Scott Seconded: Sandhu

Be it resolved that the Cross Discipline Graduate Student application be rejected.

VOTE CARRIED 14. SHORT-TERM FUNDING – IMMIGRANT SUPPORT AND AWARENESS SOCIETY DISCUSSION Scott states that the club aims to provide training and support for students to develop skills in order to become mentors and provide mentorship opportunities. He further states that the club works with the Centre for Community Partnerships. He further provides an overview of the club’s expenses. Santos said the club provides an important support network.

109

MINUTES Clubs Committee Meeting of the University of Toronto Students' Union Sunday, March 18, 2011 – UTSU Office

Scott states the club has been visible on campus, tabling and engaging with students. MOTION Moved: Santos Seconded: Scott

Be it resolved that Immigrant Support and Awareness Society receive $150.00 in UTSU Short-Term Funding.

VOTE CARRIED 15. SHORT-TERM FUNDING – TUNES. BEATS. AWESOME. ACAPPELLA DISCUSSION Scott provides an overview of the club’s activities. He further provides information about the club’s participation in an international competition, hosted in the United States. Mandryk asks about the club’s eligibility for funding. Scott provides an overview of the club’s revenue sources and expenses. Santos states that the club has provided a very detailed outlined of their expenses. Sandhu states the club has been visible on campus throughout the year. MOTION Moved: Scott Seconded: Sandhu

Be it resolved that Tunes. Beats. Awesome. Acappella receive $300.00 in UTSU Short-Term Funding.

VOTE CARRIED 16. INDIVIDUAL ACADEMIC ENDEAVOUR GRANT – MONICA ESPAILLAT LIZARDO DISCUSSION Scott states that the student is applying to attend a placement in Namibia, a collaborative partnership with the University of Toronto. He provides an overview of the programs aims, goals and curriculum. Scott states that the student has presented ideas about hosting workshops on campus on various topics to bring back the value of their experience abroad to the campus community.

110

MINUTES Clubs Committee Meeting of the University of Toronto Students' Union Sunday, March 18, 2011 – UTSU Office

Santos states the student’s application goes above and beyond the expectations of the guidelines. MOTION Moved: Santos Seconded: Mandryk

Be it resolved that Monica Espaillat Lizardo receive $100.00 in UTSU Individual Academic Endeavour Grant funding.

VOTE CARRIED 17. INDIVIDUAL ACADEMIC ENDEAVOUR GRANT – OLIVIA PASQUARELLI DISCUSSION Scott states a number of members have applied to receive support to attend Destination Imagination, a design competition being hosted in Tennessee. Scott provides an overview of the costs associated with attending and participating in the design challenge. Scott provides an overview of the revenue sources listed by the student. MOTION Moved: Mandryk Seconded: Scott

Be it resolved that Olivia Pasquarelli receive $100.00 in UTSU Individual Academic Endeavour Grant funding.

VOTE CARRIED 18. INDIVIDUAL ACADEMIC ENDEAVOUR GRANT – JESSICA TOMASI DISCUSSION Scott states the costs for the student are similar to the previous student. He further provides an overview of this student’s funding support. MOTION Moved: Mandryk Seconded: Santos

Be it resolved that Jessica Tomasi receive $100.00 in UTSU Individual Academic Endeavour Grant funding.

VOTE CARRIED

111

MINUTES Clubs Committee Meeting of the University of Toronto Students' Union Sunday, March 18, 2011 – UTSU Office

19. INDIVIDUAL ACADEMIC ENDEAVOUR GRANT – AMANDA SILVA DISCUSSION Scott states the costs for the student are similar to the previous student. He further provides an overview of this student’s funding supports. MOTION Moved: Mandryk Seconded: Santos

Be it resolved that Amanda Silva receive $100.00 in UTSU Individual Academic Endeavour Grant funding.

VOTE CARRIED

20. INDIVIDUAL ACADEMIC ENDEAVOUR GRANT – RACHAEL PASCOE DISCUSSION Scott provides an overview of the student’s academic endeavor, participation in her Faculty’s trip to Cuba. He further describes how the student plans to build on their core course studies at the University and abroad, and bring home relevant experience to the campus through their engagement with students.

MOTION Moved: Scott Seconded: Santos

Be it resolved that Rachael Pascoe receive $100.00 in UTSU Individual Academic Endeavour Grants funding.

VOTE CARRIED 21. INDIVIDUAL ACADEMIC ENDEAVOUR GRANT – JIMMY LU DISCUSSION

Scott states that the student is a graduate student and therefore ineligible for the grant.

112

MINUTES Clubs Committee Meeting of the University of Toronto Students' Union Sunday, March 18, 2011 – UTSU Office

MOTION Moved: Scott Seconded: Santos

Be it resolved that Jimmy Lu’s application for UTSU Individual Academic Endeavour Grant funding be rejected.

VOTE CARRIED 22. INDIVIDUAL ACADEMIC ENDEAVOUR GRANT – YIN CHENG NG DISCUSSION Scott states that a few members have applied for a grant to support participation in a global aeronautic engineering competition. The competition allows for students to apply their aerospace engineering discipline skills to building and flying remote controlled aircraft. MOTION Moved: Scott Seconded: Santos

Be it resolved that Yin Cheng Ng receive $100.00 in UTSU Individual Academic Endeavour Grant funding.

VOTE CARRIED 23. INDIVIDUAL ACADEMIC ENDEAVOUR GRANT – MINA MITRY DISCUSSION Scott states the costs for the student are similar to the previous student. He further provides an overview of this student’s funding support. MOTION Moved: Scott Seconded: Santos

Be it resolved that Mina Mitry receive $100.00 in UTSU Individual Academic Endeavour Grant funding.

VOTE CARRIED

113

MINUTES Clubs Committee Meeting of the University of Toronto Students' Union Sunday, March 18, 2011 – UTSU Office

24. INDIVIDUAL ACADEMIC ENDEAVOUR GRANT – RIKKY DUIVENVOORDEN DISCUSSION Scott states the costs for the student are similar to the previous student. He further provides an overview of this student’s funding support. MOTION Moved: Scott Seconded: Santos

Be it resolved that Rikky Duivenvoorden receive $100.00 in UTSU Individual Academic Endeavour Grant funding.

VOTE CARRIED 25. INDIVIDUAL ACADEMIC ENDEAVOUR GRANT – WEN CHENG CHONG DISCUSSION Scott states the costs for the student are similar to the previous student. He further provides an overview of this student’s funding support. MOTION Moved: Scott Seconded: Santos

Be it resolved that Wen Cheng Chong receive $100.00 in UTSU Individual Academic Endeavour Grant funding.

VOTE CARRIED 26. INDIVIDUAL ACADEMIC ENDEAVOUR GRANT – CHANRAMOULI GANESAN DISCUSSION Scott states the costs for the student are similar to the previous student. He further provides an overview of this student’s funding supports.

114

MINUTES Clubs Committee Meeting of the University of Toronto Students' Union Sunday, March 18, 2011 – UTSU Office

MOTION Moved: Scott Seconded: Santos

Be it resolved that Chanramouli Ganesan receive $100.00 in UTSU Individual Academic Endeavour Grant funding.

VOTE CARRIED 27. INDIVIDUAL ACADEMIC ENDEAVOUR GRANT – RACHEL BOKHOUT Scott states that the student is participating in the Namibia placement program similar to a previous applicant. He provides an overview of her costs and revenue sources. Sandhu asks if the student is an undergraduate student.

Scott confirmed she is an undergraduate student. MOTION Moved: Santos Seconded: Scott

Be it resolved that Rachel Bokhout receive $100.00 in UTSU Individual Academic Endeavour Grant funding.

VOTE CARRIED 28. INDIVIDUAL ACADEMIC ENDEAVOUR GRANT – STEPHANE DE VUYST DISCUSSION Scott states that the remainder of IAE applications is for students wanting to participate in an Engineering Conference hosted in London, Ontario for the Canadian Society for Chemical Engineers. He provides an overview of each applicant’s letter of intent, and how the student plans to apply the experience they gained at the conference on campus. MOTION Moved: Mandryk Seconded: Sandhu

Be it resolved that Stephane De Vuyst receive $100.00 in UTSU Individual Academic Endeavour Grant funding.

VOTE CARRIED

115

MINUTES Clubs Committee Meeting of the University of Toronto Students' Union Sunday, March 18, 2011 – UTSU Office

29. INDIVIDUAL ACADEMIC ENDEAVOUR GRANT – JIAJI TAO DISCUSSION Scott states that the student’s expenses are similar to the previous student and describes the individual’s plans to apply their experiences at the conference as well as the individual impact of attending the conference. MOTION Moved: Mandryk Seconded: Sandhu

Be it resolved that Jiaji Tao receive $100.00 in UTSU Individual Academic Endeavour Grant funding.

VOTE CARRIED 30. INDIVIDUAL ACADEMIC ENDEAVOUR GRANT – SEAN SALONGA DISCUSSION Scott states that the student’s expenses are similar to the previous student and describes the individual’s plans to apply their experience from the conference on campus. MOTION Moved: Mandryk Seconded: Sandhu

Be it resolved that Sean Salonga receive $100.00 in UTSU Individual Academic Endeavour Grant funding.

VOTE CARRIED 31. INDIVIDUAL ACADEMIC ENDEAVOUR GRANT – JACQUELINE MURDOCK DISCUSSION Scott states that the student’s expenses are similar to the previous student and describes the individual’s plans to apply their experience at the conference and the individual impact of attending the conference on the student.

116

MINUTES Clubs Committee Meeting of the University of Toronto Students' Union Sunday, March 18, 2011 – UTSU Office

MOTION Moved: Mandryk Seconded: Sandhu

Be it resolved that Jacqueline Murdock receive $100.00 in UTSU Individual Academic Endeavour Grant funding.

VOTE CARRIED 32. INDIVIDUAL ACADEMIC ENDEAVOUR GRANT – LESTER POSADA DISCUSSION Scott states that the student’s expenses are similar to the previous student and describes the individual’s plans to apply their experience at the conference and the individual impact of attending the conference on the student. MOTION Moved: Mandryk Seconded: Sandhu

Be it resolved that Lester Posada receive $100.00 in UTSU Individual Academic Endeavour Grant funding.

VOTE CARRIED 33. INDIVIDUAL ACADEMIC ENDEAVOUR GRANT – BRITON WELLS DISCUSSION Scott states that the student’s expenses are similar to the previous student and describes the individual’s plans to apply their experience at the conference and the individual impact of attending the conference on the student. MOTION Moved: Mandryk Seconded: Sandhu

Be it resolved that Briton Wells receive $100.00 in UTSU Individual Academic Endeavour Grant funding.

VOTE CARRIED

117

MINUTES Clubs Committee Meeting of the University of Toronto Students' Union Sunday, March 18, 2011 – UTSU Office

34. INDIVIDUAL ACADEMIC ENDEAVOUR GRANT – MAHSA NAMI DISCUSSION Scott states that the student’s expenses are similar to the previous student and describes the individual’s plans to apply their experience at the conference and the individual impact of attending the conference on the student. MOTION Moved: Mandryk Seconded: Sandhu

Be it resolved that Mahsa Nami receive $100.00 in UTSU Individual Academic Endeavour Grant funding.

VOTE CARRIED 35. INDIVIDUAL ACADEMIC ENDEAVOUR GRANT – ALEX TRAN DISCUSSION Scott states that the student’s expenses are similar to the previous student and describes the individual’s plans to apply their experience at the conference and the individual impact of attending the conference on the student. MOTION Moved: Mandryk Seconded: Sandhu

Be it resolved that Alex Tran receive $100.00 in UTSU Individual Academic Endeavour Grant funding.

VOTE CARRIED 36. INDIVIDUAL ACADEMIC ENDEAVOUR GRANT – SHIRLEY WU DISCUSSION Scott states that the student’s expenses are similar to the previous student and describes the individual’s plans to apply their experience at the conference and the individual impact of attending the conference on the student.

118

MINUTES Clubs Committee Meeting of the University of Toronto Students' Union Sunday, March 18, 2011 – UTSU Office

MOTION Moved: Mandryk Seconded: Sandhu

Be it resolved that Shirley Wu receive $100.00 in UTSU Individual Academic Endeavour Grant funding.

VOTE CARRIED 37. INDIVIDUAL ACADEMIC ENDEAVOUR GRANT – JESSICA NG DISCUSSION Scott states that the student’s expenses are similar to the previous student and describes the individual’s plans to apply their experience at the conference and the individual impact of attending the conference on the student. MOTION Moved: Mandryk Seconded: Sandhu

Be it resolved that Jessica Ng receive $100.00 in UTSU Individual Academic Endeavour Grants funding.

VOTE CARRIED 38. INDIVIDUAL ACADEMIC ENDEAVOUR GRANT – CHUKWUBUIKEM OZULUMBA DISCUSSION Scott states that the student’s expenses are similar to the previous student and describes the individual’s plans to apply their experience at the conference and the individual impact of attending the conference on the student. MOTION Moved: Mandryk Seconded: Sandhu

Be it resolved that Chukwubuikem Ozulumba receive $100.00 in UTSU Individual Academic Endeavour Grant funding.

VOTE CARRIED

119

MINUTES Clubs Committee Meeting of the University of Toronto Students' Union Sunday, March 18, 2011 – UTSU Office

39. INDIVIDUAL ACADEMIC ENDEAVOUR GRANT – BO ZHANG DISCUSSION Scott states that the student’s expenses are similar to the previous student and describes the individual’s plans to apply their experience at the conference and the individual impact of attending the conference on the student. MOTION Moved: Mandryk Seconded: Sandhu

Be it resolved that Bo Zhang receive $100.00 in UTSU Individual Academic Endeavour Grant funding.

VOTE CARRIED 40. INDIVIDUAL ACADEMIC ENDEAVOUR GRANT – KATHLEEN HENDERSON DISCUSSION Scott states that the student’s expenses are similar to the previous student and describes the individual’s plans to apply their experience at the conference and the individual impact of attending the conference on the student. MOTION Moved: Mandryk Seconded: Sandhu

Be it resolved that Kathleen Henderson receive $100.00 in UTSU Individual Academic Endeavour Grant funding.

VOTE CARRIED 41. INDIVIDUAL ACADEMIC ENDEAVOUR GRANT – PETER ZHAO DISCUSSION Scott states that the student’s expenses are similar to the previous student and describes the individual’s plans to apply their experience at the conference and the individual impact of attending the conference on the student.

120

MINUTES Clubs Committee Meeting of the University of Toronto Students' Union Sunday, March 18, 2011 – UTSU Office

MOTION Moved: Mandryk Seconded: Sandhu

Be it resolved that Peter Zhao receive $100.00 in UTSU Individual Academic Endeavour Grant funding.

VOTE CARRIED 42. INDIVIDUAL ACADEMIC ENDEAVOUR GRANT – WALTER YEUNG DISCUSSION Scott states that the student’s expenses are similar to the previous student and describes the individual’s plans to apply their experience at the conference and the individual impact of attending the conference on the student. MOTION Moved: Mandryk Seconded: Sandhu

Be it resolved that Walter Yeung receive $100.00 in UTSU Individual Academic Endeavour Grant funding.

VOTE CARRIED 43. INDIVIDUAL ACADEMIC ENDEAVOUR GRANT – PRANEET BAGGA DISCUSSION Scott states that the student’s expenses are similar to the previous student and describes the individual’s plans to apply their experience at the conference and the individual impact of attending the conference on the student.

MOTION Moved: Mandryk Seconded: Sandhu

Be it resolved that Praneet Bagga receive $100.00 in UTSU Individual Academic Endeavour Grant funding.

VOTE CARRIED

121

MINUTES Clubs Committee Meeting of the University of Toronto Students' Union Sunday, March 18, 2011 – UTSU Office

44. INDIVIDUAL ACADEMIC ENDEAVOUR GRANT – LARISSA RODO DISCUSSION Scott states that the student’s expenses are similar to the previous student and describes the individual’s plans to apply their experience at the conference and the individual impact of attending the conference on the student. MOTION Moved: Mandryk Seconded: Sandhu

Be it resolved that Larissa Rodo receive $100.00 in UTSU Individual Academic Endeavour Grant funding.

VOTE CARRIED 45. LONG-TERM FUNDING - STUDENTS TAKING ACTION NOW: DARFUR DISCUSSION Scott provides an overview of the club’s mandate and the expenses related to the club’s activities. He further provides an overview of their past funding and current funding eligibility. Mandryk asks about the funding eligibility for the club and types of expenses that cannot be covered by the Union. Scott clarifies the Union clubs policy as related to honoraria.

MOTION Moved: Santos Seconded: Scott

Be it resolved that Students Taking Action Now: Darfur receives $170.00 in UTSU Long-Term funding.

VOTE CARRIED

122

MINUTES Clubs Committee Meeting of the University of Toronto Students' Union Sunday, March 18, 2011 – UTSU Office

46. LONG-TERM FUNDING – ENGINEERING TOASTMASTERS DISCUSSION Sandhu provides an overview of the club’s mandate and activities, and states the club has engaged in a consultation and is thus eligible for funding. MOTION Moved: Santos Seconded: Sandhu

Be it resolved that Engineering Toastmasters receive $300.00 in UTSU Long-Term funding.

VOTE CARRIED 47. LONG-TERM FUNDING – ACTIVE MINDS @ UOFT DISCUSSION Scott states that the club’s application was previously tabled due to a lack of membership list which has been received. He provides an overview of the club’s activities and funding situation. Santos states that the club’s application is clear and reasonable. MOTION Moved: Santos Seconded: Mandryk

Be it resolved that Active Minds @ UofT receive $300.00 in UTSU Long-Term funding.

VOTE CARRIED 48. LONG-TERM FUNDING – BRAZUCA – BRAZILIAN CULTURE IN CANADA DISCUSSION Sandhu states that this club has resubmitted their application following a consultation. She further states the club often collaborates with other clubs on campus, hosting social, cultural and athletic activities across campus. Santos states it’s great to see a young cultural club flourish so quickly.

123

MINUTES Clubs Committee Meeting of the University of Toronto Students' Union Sunday, March 18, 2011 – UTSU Office

MOTION Moved: Scott Seconded: Sandhu

Be it resolved that BRAZUCA receive $200.00 in UTSU Long-Term funding.

VOTE CARRIED 49. LONG-TERM FUNDING – POLISH STUDENTS’ ASSOCIATION DISCUSSION Scott provides an overview of the club’s mandate, activities, and finances. He states that the club has hosted diverse events and supports a charity as well as the Polish language program at the University. MOTION Moved: Mandryk Seconded: Scott

Be it resolved that the Polish Students’ Association receives $400.00 in UTSU Long-Term funding.

VOTE CARRIED 50. LONG-TERM FUNDING – U OF T QUIDDITCH TEAM DISCUSSION Scott provides an overview of the club’s activities and participation in inter-university competitions. He provides an overview of the club’s financial supports and expenses. MOTION Moved: Scott Seconded: Santos

Be it resolved that the UofT Quidditch Team receives $200.00 in UTSU Long-Term funding.

VOTE CARRIED

124

MINUTES Clubs Committee Meeting of the University of Toronto Students' Union Sunday, March 18, 2011 – UTSU Office

51. LONG-TERM FUNDING – SKULE NIGHT DISCUSSION Sandhu provides an overview of Skule Nite – the engineering sketch comedy revue. She states that the Committee should ask for an updated expense sheet to allocate an appropriate level of funding. Santos states that this is a great initiative and extremely well-attended and should be supported adequately if possible. MOTION Moved: Sandhu Seconded: Santos

Be it resolved that the application be tabled until the Committee receives an updated expense sheet to allocate Long-Term funding.

VOTE CARRIED 52. LONG-TERM FUNDING – UNDERGRADUATE WOMEN’S COMPUTER SCIENCE

ASSOCIATION DISCUSSION Scott provides an overview of the club’s activities and the importance of the group’s effort to create a safe space for women and queer–identifying students within the computer science discipline. Santos states that there is insufficient information about the club’s activities contained in the application. MOTION Moved: Santos Seconded: Scott

Be it resolved that the application be tabled until further information is received.

VOTE CARRIED 53. LONG-TERM FUNDING – UNITED NATIONS SOCIETY DISCUSSION Scott provides an overview of the club’s mandate and activities. He further provides an overview of the

125

MINUTES Clubs Committee Meeting of the University of Toronto Students' Union Sunday, March 18, 2011 – UTSU Office

club’s budget proposal, outlining the expenses and revenue sources. Santos states that the club only requires a modest amount of support in terms of funding. MOTION Moved: Santos Seconded: Mandryk

Be it resolved that United Nations Society receive $120.00 in UTSU Long-Term funding.

VOTE CARRIED 54. LONG-TERM FUNDING – UNITED AGAINST CANCER DISCUSSION Scott states that the club had previously not attended training and this has now been resolved. He provides an overview of the club’s Relay for Life initiative hosted on campus. He provides an overview of the club’s financial standing. Santos suggests an allocation similar in size to past years. MOTION Moved: Santos Seconded: Mandryk

Be it resolved that UAC receive $500.00 in UTSU Long-Term funding.

VOTE CARRIED 55. LONG-TERM FUNDING – YOGA AND FITNESS CLUB DISCUSSION Scott states the club has submitted their membership list and expense details but the application lacks event details. He suggests tabling the application until this information is received.

126

MINUTES Clubs Committee Meeting of the University of Toronto Students' Union Sunday, March 18, 2011 – UTSU Office

MOTION Moved: Scott Seconded: Mandryk

Be it resolved the Yoga and Fitness Club application be tabled pending receipt of more information.

VOTE CARRIED 56. LONG-TERM FUNDING – INDUSTRIAL ENGINEERING CLUB DISCUSSION Scott provides an overview of the club’s mandate and activities.

Santos states that we should give this group a similar level of funding as other discipline-based clubs. MOTION Moved: Santos Seconded: Scott

Be it resolved that Industrial Engineering Club receive $400.00 in UTSU Long-Term funding.

VOTE CARRIED 57. LONG-TERM FUNDING – ENGINEERS WITHOUT BORDERS DISCUSSION Scott states that a consultation was done and thus the group is now eligible for funding. He further provides an overview of the club’s mandate and activities. Santos states that the club receives much support from other sources and suggests an amount similar to the previous year. MOTION Moved: Scott Seconded: Santos

Be it resolved that Engineers Without Borders receive $500.00 in UTSU Long-Term funding.

VOTE CARRIED

127

MINUTES Clubs Committee Meeting of the University of Toronto Students' Union Sunday, March 18, 2011 – UTSU Office

58. CLUBS POLICY DISCUSSION Sandhu states that there are no allowances for a post-allocation review of clubs funding. She further states that throughout the clubs funding process there is a conservative allocation mindset to ensure that all clubs have the same access to clubs funding throughout the process. Sandhu suggests creating a provision within the clubs funding policy to allow further funding if there is additional clubs funding once all applications in good standing have been reviewed.

Santos asks if all clubs would be reviewed for additional funds.

Scott states that the clubs committee would identify applications throughout the first round of funding review to be revisited after the initial funding allocations have been carried out. MOTION Moved: Scott Seconded: Mandryk

Be it resolved that the following language be proposed as a policy amendment under Funding Criteria to the Clubs Policy at the next Policy and Procedures Committee meeting: “21. a. Upon reviewing all applications received in good standing as outlined in (19), the Clubs Committee may revisit long term and short term applications from clubs already allocated funding for the purpose of allocating additional funding for the same academic year. b. The distribution of any additional funding as outlined in (a) is contingent upon the club providing 100% of the receipts for their original funding allocation as well as additional receipts in the amount of the second, additional funding allocation.”

VOTE CARRIED 60. ADJOURNMENT MOTION TO ADJOURN Moved: Mandryk Seconded: Santos VOTE CARRIED The meeting adjourned at 7:24 pm.

128

Minutes of the Budget Committee Meeting

March 26, 2012

129

MINUTES Budget Committee Meeting 4 of the University of Toronto Students’ Union Sunday, March 25, 2012 • UTSU office In Attendance: Voting Members: Corey Scott Danielle Sandhu Abigail Cudjoe Andrew Ursel Non-Voting Members: Amir Bashir 1. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 4:28 pm. 2. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA MOTION Moved: Scott, C. Seconded: Cudjoe

Be it resolved that the March 25, 2012 Budget Committee meeting agenda be approved as presented.

VOTE CARRIED 3. REVIEW OF BUDGET DISCUSSION Scott states that the preliminary budget was ratified by the Board of Directors in December. He further states that the Union is now entering the final phase of the budgeting process. He further states that we are revising numbers based on what the Union has received or spent so that we may predict the numbers for the end of the fiscal year. He further states that membership fees are based on enrollment numbers and will be remitted to UTM in part. He further states that the Book Exchange figures account for a small processing fee the Union must pay to have the service online. He further states that the Clubs Directory sponsorship numbers have decreased as the Union relies less on corporate sponsors, and just on campus ones. He further states that handbook sponsorship has decreased a bit, and varies from year to year. He further states that the Health and Dental fees collected from the levy are for promotion and staffing. He further states that the membership mailer is going up in revenue as we have received more sponsorship for that. He further states that we collect one percent on every sale of TTC but the money simply covers the costs of administering the program. He further states that the orientation sponsorship has decreased as one of our major sponsors this year dropped out at the last moment. He further states that the cost of the Book Exchange has gone up as we have implemented an online service this year. He further states that it was a one-time set up fee and will actually be cheaper to operate in the long term. He further states that Dollars for Day Care bursaries expenses have increased as the Union was able to roll over some funds from the previous fiscal year which were

130

MINUTES Budget Committee Meeting 4 of the University of Toronto Students’ Union Sunday, March 25, 2012 • UTSU office passed on to students. He further states that the convocation rental service has been off our books for about a year but has to stay as a line item for two years before we can eliminate it. He further states that Food Bank costs have decreased but use of the service has actually increased. He further states that we were able to secure a work-study student which saves the union money in terms of human resources. Bashir states that on days when the Union is unable to keep the Food Bank open, such as holidays and university closures, we have purchased gift certificates to Metro. He further states that we have not had to do that very much this year. Scott further states that we have invested more funds in promoting the Health and Dental plan, hence the increase in expenses. He further states that the Income Tax Clinic program is only getting started this month so the numbers will likely change a bit. He further states that we were able to send out a membership mailer this year. He further states that as our outreach capacity to our member increases, costs will go up a little. He further states that we have been able to reduce the costs of the Teaching Awards significantly and the program has been more successful than in past years. He further states that the TTC student program has changed around since last year and the numbers will reflect that as we no longer provide the VIP Program. He further states that we have seen an increase in the use of our TTC Program and were able to secure Data Card to come to campus a few more times than last year which contributes to the expenses shown. He further states that the Clubs Committee is still meeting to do a few allocations so expect to utilize the full $180,000 allocated. He further states that we have seen a decrease in spending in Orientation Kits as we have purchased less of them this year. He further states that the Union was able to reduce the costs of the Concert yet get a bigger artist. He further states that we incurred some greater costs in terms of operations and supplies as we have split the programming into two days this year. He further states that ultimately the cost of Orientation has decreased but has been the most successful thanks to the changes made. He further states that the Campus Life Commission budget has almost doubled as we have been increasing and improving our programming which we hope to make UTSU traditions, such as the Winter week of welcome and UofT’s got talent. He further states that we have seen decreases in the Social Justice and Equity Commission as there have been many more collaborative events. He further states that the Executive Committee’s expenses have stayed the same and this year the focus was to increase outreach and advertising of services. He further states that the Community Action Commission will stay at $7500. He further states that the Academic and Student Rights Commission line item will decrease as we cost shared on some campaign materials by collaborating with other locals through the Canadian Federation of Students. He further states that Elections and Referenda expense are still coming but we estimate it will remain about the same. He further states that the computer equipment, leases and rentals is usually based on one-time purchases. He further states that we are seeing an increase in legal costs which are related to the Student Commons negotiations as we are very close to reaching a final operating agreement. He further states that we have had to consult the Union’s legal team to implement changes to comply with amendments to the Canada Corporations Act. He further states that as we are in an old building, we needed to do some maintenance this year and maintenance costs are somewhat higher. He further states that the UTSU meeting costs have decreased from past years. He further states that Human Resources line will stay about the same as we have fixed commitments and have been utilizing our resources well through expanded office hours. Ursel asks if the Union anticipates any legal fees involved with the Access Copyright decision. Sandhu states that we are not anticipating any legal costs on that issue at this time.

131

MINUTES Budget Committee Meeting 4 of the University of Toronto Students’ Union Sunday, March 25, 2012 • UTSU office 4. MOTION TO RECOMMEND ADOPTION OF REVISED BUDGET MOTION Moved: Scott, C. Seconded: Ursel

Be it resolved that the Budget Committee recommend the adoption of the 2011-2012 Revised Budget as presented to the Board of Directors.

VOTE CARRIED 5. ADJOURNMENT MOTION TO ADJOURN Moved: Cudjoe Seconded: Ursel VOTE CARRIED The meeting was adjourned at 5:01 pm.

132

Minutes of the Policy Committee Meeting

March 25, 2012

133

MINUTES Policy and Procedures Committee Meeting of the University of Toronto Students’ Union Sunday, March 25, 2012 – UTSU Office In attendance: Sana Rokhsefat Munib Sajjad Danielle Sandhu Midhat Siddiqui

1. CALL TO ORDER Meeting is called to order at 6:35 pm.

2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION Moved: Sandhu Seconded: Sajjad

Be it resolved that the agenda for the March 25, 2012 U.T.S.U. Policy and Procedures Committee meeting be approved as presented.

VOTE CARRIED

3. UNION CLUBS POLICY

MOTION Moved: Sandhu Seconded: Siddiqui

Be it resolved that the following be added as an amendment to the Union Clubs Policy, under Funding Criteria:

“21. a. Upon reviewing all applications received in good standing as outlined in (19), the Clubs Committee may revisit long term and short term applications from clubs already allocated funding for the purpose of allocating additional funding for the same academic year. b. The distribution of any additional funding as outlined in (a) is contingent upon the club providing 100% of the receipts for their original funding allocation as well as additional receipts in the amount of the second, additional funding allocation.”

Be it further resolved that the following be added as an amendment to the Union Clubs Policy, under Recognition Guidelines: “15. Clubs must obtain recognition by the Office of Student Life (Ulife recognition). Be it further resolved that section 19, f) of the Union Clubs Policy be amended to read:

“The deadline for long-term funding and short term funding applications will be the third last Friday of October and first Friday of March respectively. For clubs who have submitted completed long-term applications, best efforts will be made to notify the club of any funding decision by mid-November.”

134

MINUTES Policy and Procedures Committee Meeting of the University of Toronto Students’ Union Sunday, March 25, 2012 – UTSU Office DISCUSSION Sandhu states that the first recommendation comes from the Clubs Committee. She further states that the clubs funding process is a year-round process and that the Union often makes conservative allocations to ensure that all clubs have an opportunity to receive both long and short term funding. She further states that the Clubs Committee should be able to review funding applications and re-allocate additional funding to clubs that initially asked for more money than received. She further states that the Union should adequately disburse all funding allocated for clubs. She further states that applications will only be reviewed if they have previously met the criteria for funding in order to allocate additional funding. She further states that all receipts would have to be received from the Club as well as proof that the club requires the additional funding. Rokhsefat states that this policy change makes sense. Sandhu states that one of the pre-requisites for becoming a UTSU recognized club has been ULife recognition. She states that no club is granted UTSU recognition without first obtaining recognition by Ulife. She further states that this language is being added to the policies in order to have a clear directive. Siddiqui states that it is good to have this stated clearly in the policy. Sandhu states that currently long term and short term funding applications are due on October 30 and March 1 respectively, which do not always fall on days which the UTSU office is open. She states that all funding applications are submitted in hard copy to the UTSU office which cannot be done on weekends or holidays. She further states that the amendment being proposed keeps the deadlines within a similar time line but will ensure that the UTSU office will be open to receive the funding applications. She further states that on a year to year basis, the UTSU will advertise the submission dates clearly and the policy change allows room for flexibility. She further states the policy is amended so that responses for long-term applications will be returned by mid-November as opposed to an exact date. She further states that as short-term applications are submitted until March, the language now clarifies that this response timeline applies only to long-term applications. VOTE CARRIED

4. ADJOURNMENT MOTION TO ADJOURN Moved: Sajjad Seconded: Rokhsefat VOTE CARRIED Meeting is adjourned at 6:47 pm.

135

Minutes of the Election and Referenda Appeals

Committee Meeting

February 29, 2012

March 8, 2012 March 26, 2012

136

MINUTES Elections & Referenda Appeals Committee Meeting Wednesday, February 29, 2012 • U.T.S.U. St. George Office

In Attendance Members: Daniel Vandervoort Casey Chu Cheong Katherine Ball Non-Voting Members: Clara Ho (chair) Amir Bashir, Executive Director Daniel Lo, Chief Returning Officer 1. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 1:30 pm. 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION Moved: Vandervoort Seconded: Chu Cheong

Be it resolved that the Elections and Referenda Appeals Committee agenda for Wednesday, February 29, 2012 be adopted as presented.

VOTE CARRIED 3. APPEAL OF ERC RULING 001 Daniel Lo, Chief Returning Officer entered the meeting.

Ho provides overview of the responsibilities of the Elections & Referenda Appeals Committee.

Lo provided background on Ruling 001. He states that Moinul Delwar did not appear on the voters list because he is a Professional Experience Year (PEY) student. He further states that in 2010 the ERC voted to deem PEY students as eligible candidates. He further states that in 2010, the ERC instructed the CRO to put forth a recommendation to amend the EPC to deem PEY students as eligible candidates. Lo further states that in the 2011 Spring Elections, PEY students were eligible to stand for election and to vote.

Ho states that the amendment of the EPC was never put forth and as such PEY students should not be considered as eligible candidates. She further states that the Governing Council voted against allowing PEY students to be eligible to run for Full-Time Student Governing Council Representatives. Vandervoort states that basing Union decisions on Governing Council practices is very problematic. Daniel Lo, Chief Returning Office left the meeting.

Bashir states that the committee should make a decision as to whether to charge Mr. Delwar the $50.00 deposit.

137

MINUTES Elections & Referenda Appeals Committee Meeting Wednesday, February 29, 2012 • U.T.S.U. St. George Office

Vandervoort states that the committee should waive the deposit as the appeal does not seem to be frivolous. MOTION Moved: Vandervoort Seconded: Chu Cheong

Be it resolved that the ERAC wave the $50.00 deposit for Delwar’s appeal to the ERC ruling 001.

VOTE CARRIED

Ho states that the committee should only allow Delwar to present his case. Vandervoort states that the committee should allow Mr. Delwar to have representation at the meeting. He further states that these meetings can be somewhat stressful and that even in court individuals are allowed representation. Moinul Delwar and Danielle Sandhu entered the meeting. Delwar thanks the committee for coming together to hear his appeal. He states that students in the Engineering Faculty have the ability to take PEY in their third year as part of their curriculum. He further states that the PEY program is overseen by the Engineering Faculty, as all placements are approved by the faculty. He further states that the PEY placement has a maximum term of 16 months after which the students must return as a full time student in the faculty. He further states that PEY students are considered to be full-time students and members of the Union. He further states there is currently no PEY representative on APUS and as such PEY students are not represented by APUS. He further states that in past UTSU elections, PEY students were allowed to be candidates and hold positions on the UTSU Board of Directors while on PEY term. Sandhu states that this is an opportunity for PEY students to be represented by the UTSU. She further stated that if the UTSU does not allow Mr. Delwar to be a candidate for the General Elections, a large portion of engineering students will be disenfranchised. Vandervoort asks if fourth year engineering students are able to run for office. Delwar states that since the PEY term starts in their third year of studies and lasts 16 months, PEY students are not back in class until September. He further states that since the nomination process occurs during the PEY term, if the ERAC would exclude PEY students from running, fourth year engineering students would not be able to hold office. Ball asks what the level of campus involvement is for students that are currently on PEY terms. Delwar states that the level of campus involvement would depend on the student’s PEY placement. He further states that there are some PEY students that have placements outside of Canada. Delwar stated that his placement is in Toronto and that he spends a lot of time on campus. He further states that campus involvement would depend on a student making the commitment, as with any other potential candidate. Moinul Delwar and Danielle Sandhu left the meeting. Ball states that the committee should deem PEY students to be eligible to run in the UTSU elections. She further stated that the Committee should not base its decision on Governing Council elections.

138

MINUTES Elections & Referenda Appeals Committee Meeting Wednesday, February 29, 2012 • U.T.S.U. St. George Office

Ho stated that the UTSU By-Laws are clear on its definition of membership and that this does not include PEY students. She further states that the precedent that was set in 2010 to allow PEY students was based on false information. She further states that deeming PEY students as eligible would open up the flood gates to other groups that may not qualify traditionally under the definition of membership stated in the by-laws. Bashir stated that the 2011 Spring elections voters list included PEY students and as such they were allowed to run and vote in the elections. He further states that the CRO would need to have specifically requested PEY students to be on the voters list. He further states that the CRO in the 2010 General Elections recommended that the Election Procedure Code (EPC) be amended to deem PEY students eligible to participate in the elections. Vandervoort states that the Union should not disenfranchise students, particularly those that will be returning to full time studies in the fall. Chu Cheong states that since Delwar has shown enthusiasm and persistence in these matters as a candidate for the Board director, it is reasonable to assume that Delwar will take an active role in the Board of Directors if elected. Bashir states that this is not a violation of the by-laws and EPC because it is supplemented by the decisions of the CRO, ERC and ERAC. He further states that when viewing the decision as a whole, PEY students are eligible to participate in the elections. MOTION Moved: Chu Cheong Seconded: Vandervoort

Be it resolved that the ERC Ruling 001 be overturned. Be it further resolved that PEY students are deemed to be eligible to participate in the UTSU General Elections

VOTE CARRIED MOTION Moved: Ball Seconded: Vandervoort

Be it resolved that the ERAC recommend that the EPC be amended to modify the candidate eligibility to include PEY students.

VOTE CARRIED

139

MINUTES Elections & Referenda Appeals Committee Meeting Wednesday, February 29, 2012 • U.T.S.U. St. George Office

4. ADJOURNMENT MOTION TO ADJOURN Moved: Vandervoort Seconded: Ball VOTE CARRIED The meeting adjourned at 2:20 pm.

140

MINUTES Elections & Referenda Appeals Committee Meeting Wednesday, March 8, 2012 • U.T.S.U. St. George Office In Attendance Members: Daniel Vandervoort Casey Chu Cheong Non-Voting Members: Clara Ho (chair) Amir Bashir, Executive Director (Minutes) Daniel Lo, Chief Returning Officer Vita Carlino, Clubs and Events Coordinator 1. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 1:47 pm. 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION Moved: Chu Cheong Seconded: Vandervoort

Be it resolved that the Elections and Referenda Appeals Committee agenda for Wednesday, March 8, 2012 be adopted as presented.

VOTE CARRIED 3. APPEAL OF ERC RULING 002 Bashir states that there is a representative from Team Unity to speak to the appeals. Danielle Sandhu enters meeting. Sandhu thanks the ERAC for taking the time to hear the appeal. She states that the victories stated on the Team Unity platform, are in fact true. She presents documents brought with her, including a press release issued by the Faculty of Physical Education and Health in regards to the agreement that was negotiated by the UTSU, including representatives from Team Unity. She states that there are two things that should be considered: whether there is proof that the service for UTSU clubs was negotiated by members of Team Unity, and secondly proof that UTSU-recognized groups benefited from these discussions. She states that the press release is clear about the role played by Corey Scott, one of the candidates from Team Unity. She further states that recognition by the Office of Student Life (OSL) is a prerequisite for all UTSU clubs. She further states that there is no history of UTSU clubs not being recognized by OSL first. Thus, all UTSU recognised clubs are OSL-recognised. She further states that in order for UTSU clubs to access UofT facilities, they must be recognized by the OSL because the UTSU does not govern University facilities and therefore must coordinate efforts. Chu Cheong asks whether all campus groups had to pay for Varsity space prior to the initiative.

141

MINUTES Elections & Referenda Appeals Committee Meeting Wednesday, March 8, 2012 • U.T.S.U. St. George Office Sandhu states that clubs were incurring great costs in regards to booking space on campus. She further states that UTSU representatives responded by exploring ways of securing space for use free of charge. She further states that UTSU representatives, including the candidate from Team Unity, negotiated for access to space free of charge with the Faculty of Physical Education and Health for UTSU clubs. 4. APPEAL OF ERC RULING 004 Sandhu provides the context for the appeal. She states that the newly introduced grant system is in part due to the efforts of members of Team Unity and many others. She further states that it was originally part of provincial elections campaign organized by members of the UTSU executive (including Shaun Shepherd) and student unions across the province. She states the provincial campaign called on political parties to prioritize education in their platforms, specifically calling for reduction of tuition fees and increased grants. She states that after the government was elected, from statements issued by representatives of the Liberal party, including the Ministry, it became clear that many groups of students, such as mature and part time students, international students and professional students, were being excluded from the grant – some of whom are still excluded. Thus, she states that the statement in the Liberal platform could not be used to suggest that professional students were included. She further states that there are many documents from the Canadian Federation of Students-Ontario (CFS-O) which discuss the ineligibility of professional students. She further states that UTSU executives sought clarification for the eligibility for the grant, including Shaun Shepherd, who sat on the CFS-Ontario executive and was pivotal in the lobby towards the inclusion of first-entry professional students. She states that representatives from the CFS-O were having conversations with the Ministry on the definition of professional students, and about grant eligibility. She further states that representatives from Team Unity engaged in lobbying work to include all students, through a petition to call on the government to remove the exclusionary criteria. She states that this petition was submitted to and read in, the Legislature. She further states that in December, they were told that first-entry professional students would be eligible for the grant, which was subsequently confirmed by press releases that were issued. She states that she is not sure why the ERC relied on documents from OUSA and CSA, considering UTSU members are not members of those organizations and thus we cannot speak to their position. She further states that it should be noted those organizations have often taken positions on issues that differ than the position of UTSU members, or the CFS-Ontario. She states that executives did outreach and lobby work on this issue throughout the fall semester, all of which is outlined in board reports submitted to the Board of Directors and states that there was a victory obtained for first-entry professional students. 5. APPEAL OF ERC RULING 005 Sandhu presents a copy of the Union budget and Audited Financial statements as available on the Union website. She refers to the preliminary budget 2011-2012, specifically to the second page displaying the Union’s expenses, highlighting the line item for “Clubs and project subsidies”. She indicates that in reviewing the allocations from the previous year’s budget, and the budget from the 2011-2012 year, it is clear that there has been an increase in clubs funding. She states that from the 2010-2011 year, there has been the addition of a new line item for the Union’s Clubs Directory, which is a service for clubs and individual members. She states that in the previous year, there was $180, 000 allocated towards the line item that included clubs funding and the clubs directory. She states that in 2011-2012, the clubs directory was itemized into its own line item of $10,000 and Clubs Funding was increased by $10,000 to a total of $180,000 making the total allocation under “Clubs and project subsidies” equal to $190,000. She further refers to the Audited Financial Statements and speaks to the line item for “Clubs and other subsidies”. She states that the categorization under the Audited Financial Statements does not correspond directly to Union Clubs funding. She states that it includes clubs funding, but includes other Union

142

MINUTES Elections & Referenda Appeals Committee Meeting Wednesday, March 8, 2012 • U.T.S.U. St. George Office spending as well. Thus, she states that the preliminary and operating budgets of the Union are more accurate. Ho states that the ERC looked at how much funding was provided for clubs in 2010-2011, and found that the value was approximately $120,000. She states that in 2011-2012, there seemed to be approximately $131,000 allocated. She states that it was then discovered that two major clubs were excluded from the 2010-2011 total allocation, the Tamil Students Association and French Club, and in adding their allocations to the 2010-2011 year, it looks like clubs funding has decreased this year. Sandhu states the funding released to date this year is irrelevant; UTSU recognized clubs have access to this funding until the end of the year, and thus we won’t have access to actuals until the Union’s books are closed. She states that clubs often do not pick up their funding installments until April, but this behavior does not mean that the funding was not allocated to those groups. She states it remains allocated to them and Union representatives work with clubs to transfer all allocated funds. She states that what matters is the total amount of clubs funding that has been made available has increased – and this has increased by $10,000, rendering the Team Unity platform statement true. 6. APPEAL OF ERC RULING 007 Sandhu states that from her understanding of the ERC ruling, there is contention as to whether or not Team Unity can claim the interest-free period on OSAP as a victory, as Shaun Shepherd was not on the Union’s executive prior to the 2011-2012 year. She states that while Shepherd was not on the executive, Corey Scott, who was involved with the Union at the time was involved in the lobby work done to win this victory. She states that Scott was an Associate to the Executive in 2010-2011 and participated in the lobbying efforts of the Union through the provincial students union calling for an interest-free period of relief for students on OSAP. Ho states that the ERC was aware that the work was done by representatives of Team Unity, and that the concern is that it was insinuated that this was an accomplishment for this year. She states the contention is with the language. She states that students in their first year could be misled to think that the victory was had this year. Sandhu states that it was not intentional to present this as a victory for this year, as it is clear that the victory occurred in 2010. She states that it was listed under the Team Unity website tab for “Past Victories”, though she recognizes that below the tab it does say “Victories this year” which was an unintentional error. She states that a first-year student would not be swayed to believe this victory was had in 2012, as it is clear that it occurred in 2010. She states that she would be concerned if candidates from Team Unity were misrepresenting their involvement in securing this victory, as that experience is what makes this a campaign point, not the timing of the victory. She states that it is not a misrepresentation to claim that this was a victory as candidates from Team Unity did in fact actively lobby for the interest free grace period, making the statement true. She thanks members of the ERAC for their time. Sandhu exits the meeting. 7. ERC RULING 002 MOTION Moved: Vandervoort Seconded: Chu Cheong Be it resolved that the ERAC overturn ERC Ruling 002.

143

MINUTES Elections & Referenda Appeals Committee Meeting Wednesday, March 8, 2012 • U.T.S.U. St. George Office DISCUSSION Bashir states that the UTSU Clubs and Events Coordinator is available to provide the committee with information about the clubs recognition and clubs funding processes. . Carlino enters the meeting. Chu Cheong asks Carlino to clarify the clubs recognition process for UTSU-recognition, specifically the need for recognition by Office of Student Life. Carlino states that all UTSU clubs must be recognised by the Office of Student Life prior to obtaining UTSU-recognition. She further states that many applications for UTSU-recognition are tabled until those clubs receive the Ulife recognition. She further states that there are no exceptions to this rule. Carlino exits the meeting. Chu Cheong states that she understands that the UTSU did lobby for access for UTSU clubs which makes the Team Unity platform point a true statement. Vandervoort confirms the lobbying work done to negotiate access to space. Chu Cheong states that there was indeed lobbying for this initiative and a clear benefit to UTSU clubs and as such, there is no misrepresentation. VOTE CARRIED 8. ERC RULING 004 MOTION Moved: Vandervoort Seconded: Chu Cheong

Be it resolved that the ERAC overturn ERC Ruling 004. DISCUSSION Chu Cheong states that she knows that the Team Unity platform point is a true statement personally because she has worked with student unions and is familiar with the lobbying work that gets done. She states that she is aware that first-entry professional students were not eligible for the tuition fee reduction grant. She states that she knows that this was the case prior to the lobbying done by the CFS and individual students’ unions. Ho states that OUSA issued a blog post on Sept 5th, ten days after the Liberal party platform was released, stating that the proposed grant would include first-entry students. She further states that the ERC questioned if OUSA was already aware that first-entry professional students would be eligible, how the expansion would have occurred. Vandervoort states that the government’s position on the grant changed over time, especially since the original platform was issued. He states that there was a difficulty defining “professional students”, as the definition of professional programs differs across institutions. He states that the Ministry was vague about the definition, and over time made apparent various categories of students that would not be considered. He further states even if programs like Nursing and

144

MINUTES Elections & Referenda Appeals Committee Meeting Wednesday, March 8, 2012 • U.T.S.U. St. George Office Engineering were always intended under the blanket promise, what about other groups? Thus he states it is clear that professional students were not included. VOTE CARRIED 9. ERC RULING 005 MOTION Moved: Chu Cheong Seconded: Vandervoort

Be it resolved that the ERAC overturn ERC Ruling 005. DISCUSSION Carlino enters the meeting. Vandervoort asks Carlino to provide insight into the total funding allocated to clubs last year and this year, and whether or not there has been an increase. Carlino states that based on what was allocated last year and what currently has been allocated including what is anticipated will still be allocated, there has been an increase in funding. She further states that the Union has trained more clubs for eligibility, and as a result of training more clubs, there is a need to fund more clubs. She further states that the numbers used by the ERC were rough numbers based on her projections to-date and that there is a general increase of funding for clubs this year. Carlino exits the meeting. Chu-Cheong states that regardless of whether the clubs actually got their money, it was allocated. She states that the numbers are very clear and not ambiguous at all. She further states that she finds it disturbing that 10 demerit points were issued to all candidates for something as simple as that. VOTE CARRIED 10. ERC RULING 007 MOTION Moved: Chu Cheong Seconded: Vandervoort

Be it resolved that the ERAC overturn ERC Ruling 007 and uphold CRO ruling 013. DISCUSSION Vandervoort states that it the error seemed unintentional, as evident in the way in which it was made.

145

MINUTES Elections & Referenda Appeals Committee Meeting Wednesday, March 8, 2012 • U.T.S.U. St. George Office Chu Cheong states that the subject of the appeal was definitely unintentional. She further states that if we are pushing for demerit points, she would recommend two demerit points. However, she does not think the subject of the complaint is much of an issue or worthy of demerit points. Vandervoort states that he agrees with Chu Cheong. VOTE CARRIED 11. ADJOURNMENT MOTION TO ADJOURN Moved: Chu Cheong Seconded: Vandervoort VOTE CARRIED Meeting is adjourned at 3:58 pm.

146

MINUTES Elections & Referenda Appeals Committee Meeting Monday, March 26, 2012 • U.T.S.U. St. George Office

In Attendance: Members: Daniel Vandervoort Casey Chu Cheong Katharine Ball Non-Voting Members: Clara Ho (Chair) Amir Bashir, Executive Director Daniel Lo (Chief Returning Officer) Guests: Craig Maniscalco Corey Scott

1. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 2:09 pm.

2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA

MOTION Moved: Chu Cheong Seconded: Ball

Be it resolved that the Elections and Referenda Appeals Committee agenda for Monday, March 26, 2012 be adopted as presented.

VOTE CARRIED

3. DEPOSIT FOR APPEALS MOTION Moved: Ball Seconded: Vandervoort Be it resolved that the $50 deposit for appeals be waived. DISCUSSION Chu Cheong states that as the appeals to not appear to be frivolous they should be waived as that is quite a large sum for student to be paying. VOTE CARRIED

147

MINUTES Elections & Referenda Appeals Committee Meeting Monday, March 26, 2012 • U.T.S.U. St. George Office

4. APPEAL OF ERC RULING 014 Ho explains the CRO’s ruling 028 and ERC ruling 014. Maniscalco enters the meeting Maniscalco states that he submitted a complaint the morning that voting began. He further states that he requested that the CRO handle each complain separately. He further states that multiple violations in the same building are to receive four demerit points. He further states that he does not believe there is room for interpretation and he does not think that the term “multiple” only applies for a gross number of violations, as per the CRO email to him. He further states that the spirit of the particular rule of posting near residence is meant to protect students from solicitation near their homes. He further states that the violations violate the letter and spirit of the rule. He further states that his complaints were amalgamated with another complaint which was filed over four hours before. He further states that overturning the ERC ruling would allow candidates to simply buy violations as they will simply take penalty points and violate the rules regardless. Ball asks to clarify the perceived violations. Maniscalco states that he submitted different photos of posters at three different locations at Wilson Hall. He further states that he does not see it as fair to apply one violation to all three when the locations are clearly different. He further states that in future elections, candidates can simply put up posters where they wish in residences if they only receive demerit points for one offence. He further states that the timelines of complaints is important as they were served apart and at different times. Ball asks if the response time was also an issue. Maniscalco states that though Garrett’s complaint was submitted separately it as amalgamated and thus he never received a clear response to his complaint. Maniscalco exists the meeting. Lo enters the meeting Ho states that Lo had told her there might have been oversight in terms of the Wilson and Chestnut pictures. Lo states that it was his belief that the photos actually came from the same location. He further states that his rationale behind the ruling and awarding five demerit points was thinking it was the same location. He further states that if he had known they were different locations, he would not have awarded five demerit points. He further states that he would have investigated further had it not been during voting days and he was unable to reach it. He further states that it does not change his ruling on the matter. Lo exits the meeting Scott. C enters the meeting Scott, C. states that through the entire elections campaign, the Unity team has shown much diligence in following the election rules. He further states that though demerit points are fair, a disqualification would be unnecessary. He further states that he does not think that the poster violations were so great to hugely affect the number of votes Ball asks if there anything in the EPC specifically around elevators and what qualifies as an entrance as it is currently vauge.

148

MINUTES Elections & Referenda Appeals Committee Meeting Monday, March 26, 2012 • U.T.S.U. St. George Office Scott, C. states that this rule was made for residences which are solely residences. He further states that Wilson Hall is also a commuter space which sees high traffic from non-residence students. He further states that Wilson Hall was plastered in posters from all teams and the team was not aware that the elevator was off limits. He further states that ultimately, the posters were six metres away from the polling station. Scott, C. exits.

5. APPEAL OF ERC RULING 015 Ho explains that Team Unity had a table within the double doors of the Sid Smith entrance and there were some materials which were deemed too close to the polling station by the CRO. She further states that the ERC upheld the ruling Scott, C. enters meeting Scott, C. states that the error was rectified as soon as it was pointed out by the CRO. He further states that storing boxes underneath a table is not a form of advertising. He further states that the offence was not intentional. He further states that something that is so easily rectified does not merit that many demerit points Chu Cheong asks to clarify the location of the box. Scott, C. explains that it is a box under the table with a sample of the flyers on the top of the box. Scott, C. exists the meeting

6. APPEAL OF ERC RULING 017 Ho states the appeal is regarding a statement made by Shaun Shepherd that the Unity lobbying efforts led to the inclusion of first entry professional students in the provincial grant. Ho reads Michael Scott’s written statement.

7. APPEAL OF ERC RULING 021 Ho states that this appeal pertains to a statement Unity made under Victories this year to do with OSOG increases. She further states that she has two documents stating they were increasing in 2010. Scott, C. enters the meeting Scott, C. states that this was not an intentional misrepresentation. He further states that though the date was off, it was regardless a victory members of the team worked on. He further states that he spoke about OSOG at lobby week personally during his time as an associate and Vice-President, Campus Life. Scott, C. exits meeting

8. ERC RULING 014

MOTION Moved: Chu Cheong Seconded: Vandervoort

Be it resolved that ERC ruling 014 be overturned

149

MINUTES Elections & Referenda Appeals Committee Meeting Monday, March 26, 2012 • U.T.S.U. St. George Office

Be it further resolved that two (2) demerit points issues to Ali Mustafa Bello, Baliqis Hashiru and Khalid Khan for a poster violation in Wilson Hall

Be it further resolved that two (2) demerit points for multiple violations in Wilson Hall to Ali Mustafa Bello, Baliqis Hashiru and Khalid Khan

Be it further resolved that two (2) demerit points for multiple violations in Chestnut Residence to Ali Mustafa Bello, Baliqis Hashiru and Khalid Khan

DISCUSSION Bashir states that the complaints should not have been amalgamated. Chu Cheong states that as they were different buildings and complaints they should have been dealt with separately. Ball explains that Wilson Hall is not just a residence but also has offices, classrooms, a library, etc. Chu Cheong asks if Chestnut residence is also the same. Ball states Chestnut is solely a residence. Ho states that from a procedural point of view, the ruling is strange as it was amalgamated after the fact. Chu Cheong suggests that Chestnut is a poster violation as it is solely a residence and as such be awarded two demerits point. She further states that the guidelines in the EPC are maximums which can be given out. She further states that this should be treated as a poster violation.  Ball states that the Wilson Hall demerits should be take away but the full 5 awarded for Chestnut. She further states that the Wilson Hall posters can be in any hallway in a multipurpose building. Ho states that you require a residence key in order to access the elevator making it a residence entrance. Chu Cheong states that though this is a violation, it does not deserve the maximum penalty at all. She further states that though it is a residence entrance, it is not clearly indicated as such and was not completely intentional. She further states that for Wilson Hall, as it is in three different places, 4 demerits should be given out, 2 for the initial violation and 2 for multiple locations. She further states that for Chestnut, the team received demerits but was not aware as the CRO amalgamated the complaints. She further states that they should receive 2 demerits. VOTE CARRIED

9. ERC RULING 015 MOTION Moved: Vandervoort Seconded: Ball

Be it resolved that ERC ruling 015 be overturned.

150

MINUTES Elections & Referenda Appeals Committee Meeting Monday, March 26, 2012 • U.T.S.U. St. George Office DISCUSSION Chu Cheong states that this deserved a warning and the three demerit points are unnecessary and excessive as the team showed a willingness to rectify the situation. VOTE CARRIED

10. ERC RULING 017 MOTION Moved: Chu Cheong Seconded: Vandervoort

Be it resolved that ERC ruling 017 be overturned and CRO ruling 56 be upheld. DISCUSSION Bashir states that the ERAC already ruled on a similar complaint which pertained to the website. Chu Chong agrees. Bashir states that lobbying efforts began when Liberal party came out with the elections platform. He further states that following the election, the Liberal party announced that first-entry professional students would be included as eligible for the grant. Chu Cheong states that the last ruling regarding the same statement on the website was that the statement could be included under “Victories”. Ball asks if any information is different in the appeal Ho states the appeal is virtually the same with exception to the venue in which the statement is made. She further states that the ERC ruled that there is not enough evidence to say that members of Team Unity did not contribute to the new grant system. Vandervoort states that the statement that members of the team fought to expand the grant rings true. He further states that Unity, did in fact fight to expand the eligibility of the grant, regardless of whether first-entry professional students were intended to be included. VOTE CARRIED

11. ERC RULING 021 MOTION Moved: Vandervoort Seconded: Chu Cheong

Be it resolved that ERC Ruling 021 be overturned.

Be it further resolved that CRO ruling 057 be upheld.

151

MINUTES Elections & Referenda Appeals Committee Meeting Monday, March 26, 2012 • U.T.S.U. St. George Office DISCUSSION Chu Cheong states that the ERAC has already dealt with a similar complaint and that the ERAC has already ruled on it by giving it a warning. Vandervoort states that a one year time line does not make that much of a difference and did not significantly affect the elections outcomes. VOTE CARRIED

12. ADJOURNMENT MOTION TO ADJOURN Moved: Ball Seconded: Vandervoort VOTE CARRIED Meeting is adjourned at 3:24 pm.

152

Minutes of the Sustainability Commission Meeting

February 28, 2012

153

MINUTES Sustainability Commission Meeting of the University of Toronto Students’ Union Tuesday, February 28, 2012 • Robarts Meeting Room #5 In Attendance Voting Members: Juliet Shao Monika Oviedo Ryan Franks Andy Ying Yong Non-Voting Members: Paul Tasovac 1. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 5:14 pm. 2. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA MOTION Moved: Shao Seconded: Ying Yong

Be it resolved that the February 28, 2012 Sustainability Commission meeting agenda be approved as presented

VOTE CARRIED 3. REPORT-BACKS Franks asks Shao whether all the food for the sustainability dinner should be from local groups. Shao states that it would be preferred, or food could be obtained from local farmers. Franks states he will get in contact with a few.

Shao asks whether Harvest Noon can cook cage free eggs. Franks states that he will inquire as Harvest Noon only cooks vegan. Shao states that cage free eggs will be an optional choice when people purchase dinner tickets.

Shao asks when she should book the kitchen. Franks states that the CIE kitchen should be booked for the whole day. He further states that they should obtain more trolleys on the day.

Shao asks members at what the price of the dinner should be set. Oviedo suggests $4.

154

MINUTES Sustainability Commission Meeting of the University of Toronto Students’ Union Tuesday, February 28, 2012 • Robarts Meeting Room #5 Shao asks everyone to send email suggestions of food to her. Tasovac suggests making a menu based on what is available in the market. Franks offers to ask local farmers for fresh flowers to be used to decorate dishes and tables. He further states that Harvest Noon has utensils, knives and plates. Ying Yong and Oviedo offer to make posters by March 12, stating posters will be put up in Rotman, Hart House, SS, Engineering, MS and Athletic Centre.

Shao states that the dress code of the dinner is semiformal: dress shirts, black pants/skirts and black shoes.

Franks will get back to Shao with playlist, stating he will ask Willy for jazz and classical music. Tasovac suggests Andrew Cash, a local politician band. 4. ADJOURNMENT MOTION TO ADJOURN Moved: Shao Seconded: Franks VOTE CARRIED The meeting adjourned at 6:30 pm.

155

FINAL REPORT OF THE CHIEF RETURNING OFFICER University of Toronto Students’ Union Spring 2011 Elections Submitted by: Daniel Lo, Chief Returning Officer Friday March 30, 2012

1

Introduction

This report accounts the events of the U.T.S.U. Spring 2012 Elections period. It

also provides recommendations for consideration by the Board of Directors and

the Elections and Referenda Committee to improve processes and policies in

order to facilitate future elections.

The Spring 2012 Election period held elections for UTSU Executive Committee

and Board of Directors positions for the 2012/2013 term. No referenda were held

during this period.

Throughout the elections, the Elections and Referenda Committee provided

valuable consultation and recommendations to the Chief Returning Officer (CRO)

in regards to matters dealing with the Elections and Procedure Code and past

practice. The Committee’s main duties are to oversee the elections, review the

rules governing elections, schedule election dates subject to Board approval, and

hire elections officials.

Activities before Voting Period

In preparation for the nomination and campaign period, and in accordance with

the U.T.S.U. Elections Procedure Code, a number of tasks were completed prior

to the start of the nomination and campaign periods:

1. Reviewing all relevant U.T.S.U. governing documents.

2. Preparing nomination- and election-related publicity materials for campus

newspapers, including posters to be distributed on campus and on the

U.T.S.U. website.

3. Preparing nomination packages for Executive and Board of Director

candidates.

4. Hiring three Deputy Returning Officers (DROs) for logistical support at the

St. George Campus and Mississauga Campus.

156

FINAL REPORT OF THE CHIEF RETURNING OFFICER University of Toronto Students’ Union Spring 2011 Elections Submitted by: Daniel Lo, Chief Returning Officer Friday March 30, 2012

2

5. Site inspections, selection and booking of potential polling locations.

6. Obtaining an up-to-date voters list from the University of Toronto Office of

the Vice-Provost, Students.

7. Arranging the renewal of the Online Voter Eligibility Verification System with

the University of Toronto Computing Services.

8. Scheduling and logistical preparation for the All-Candidates’ Meeting.

9. Planning and booking space for the U.T.S.U. Election Candidates forum.

10. Ordering ballot boxes, voting screens and seals from Elections Canada.

11. Hiring poll clerks, scheduling and planning poll-clerk training sessions.

12. Preparing polling location kits.

13. Updating the U.T.S.U. website with relevant election material.

14. Designing ballots and determining ballot quantities and distribution.

15. Arranging for the rental of additional laptops.

Nominations

Nominations for the U.T.S.U. elections opened Monday February 13, 2012 at

09:00 and closed Wednesday February 22, 2012 at 18:00. Fourteen (14)

Executive nomination packages were signed out (Six (6) President, Two (2) Vice-

President Equity, Two (2) Vice-President External, Two (2) Vice-President

Internal & Services, Two (2) Vice-President University Affairs), 42 Director

nomination packages were signed out. When the nomination period closed, a

total of 11 Executive nomination packages were returned and 38 nomination

packages were returned for the Director positions. Director packages were

submitted for 17 of the 18 constituencies available. All of the submitted

nomination packages were ultimately approved except for a nominee for the

Toronto School of Theology Representative, Christian Persaud, who was found

to have an insufficient number of nominators. Additionally there was some initial

uncertainty regarding the eligibility of a nominee for the Faculty of Engineering

position, Mo Delwar. It was initially ruled that Mr. Delwar was not eligible to run

157

FINAL REPORT OF THE CHIEF RETURNING OFFICER University of Toronto Students’ Union Spring 2011 Elections Submitted by: Daniel Lo, Chief Returning Officer Friday March 30, 2012

3

as a candidate, but this ruling was overturned on appeal and Mr. Delwar was

permitted to stand as a candidate.

A number of elections staff worked over a total of 40 hours verifying signatures

from nomination packages. The number of candidates equaled the number of

available positions for Victoria College, University College, Innis College,

Woodsworth College, the Faculty of Music, the Faculty of Dentistry, the Faculty

of Nursing, the Faculty of Pharmacy, the Faculty of Medicine, the Faculty of

Physical Education & Health and the Professional Faculty At-large. As a result,

16 candidates were acclaimed, pending ratification. In addition, as per Bylaw

V.3.c, one of the three Arts & Science candidates was acclaimed as the

remaining two candidates were from the same constituency. Eleven (11)

candidates sought Five (5) Executive positions, while 20 candidates prepared to

vie for 11 available director positions.

All-Candidates Meeting

The All-Candidates’ Meeting was held on Saturday February 25, 2012 at 17:00 in

the Hart House South Sitting Room. Attendance was limited to candidates and

candidates’ authorized representatives, and all-candidates packages were

distributed to all attendees. The meeting lasted approximately 1.5 hours, as the

DROs reviewed the relevant sections of the Elections Procedure Code,

University of Toronto and University of Toronto at Mississauga policies and the

U.T.S.U. By-Laws, and discussed the role of the elections staff.

Campaigning

The campaign period opened on Monday February 27, 2012 at 08:00 and closed

on the last day of voting on Thursday March 8, 2012 at 18:00.

158

FINAL REPORT OF THE CHIEF RETURNING OFFICER University of Toronto Students’ Union Spring 2011 Elections Submitted by: Daniel Lo, Chief Returning Officer Friday March 30, 2012

4

Campaign materials, including posters, flyers, rave cards, buttons, stickers, t-

shirts, websites, Facebook content and candidate videos were submitted and

approved by the CRO throughout the campaign period. Most candidates

adhered to the rule that materials must be submitted for approval 24 hours prior

to planned distribution.

During the campaign period, complaints were submitted to the

Elections Office alleging violations of the Elections Procedure Code. All the

complaints submitted to the Elections Office were through email, some with

accompanying photographic evidence. Fifty-seven (57) CRO rulings were made

regarding complaints submitted during the campaign period and one CRO rulings

was made prior to the campaign period regarding to pre-campaigning. The

complaints varied, encompassing allegations of misrepresentation of fact,

postering, campaign materials/campaigning in a library, libel, fair play and

responsibility of campaigners/supporters. All CRO rulings are appended to this

report.

Executive Candidate’s Forum

The CRO arranged an All-Candidates Forum executive candidates could present

a statement to, and answer questions from, the UTSU membership. The forum

was held on February 29, 2012 at the Hart House Debates Room from 16:00 –

20:00.

The forum was also streamed live online to allow students who could not attend

to watch and listen. The event was well-attended and filled with students who

were eager to participate.

159

FINAL REPORT OF THE CHIEF RETURNING OFFICER University of Toronto Students’ Union Spring 2011 Elections Submitted by: Daniel Lo, Chief Returning Officer Friday March 30, 2012

5

The CRO arranged for Richard Chambers, Director at the Multi-Faith Centre to

moderate this year’s forum. Speaking in a predetermined order (VP Internal and

Services, VP External, VP Equity, VP University Affairs, and President), Vice-

President candidates were given 4 minutes for an opening statement, 15 minutes

of open questions from the floor, and 3 minutes for closing remarks. Presidential

candidates were allotted 5 minutes for an opening statement and 4 minutes for

closing remarks. Approximately 70 people attended the forum, while a significant

number of individuals watched via the live online streaming. During the Vice-

President Equity candidate speeches, there were some technical difficulties and

as a result, that part could not be streamed or recorded.

At this meeting, there were a number of individuals in the audience who were

disruptive with the intent to heckle a number of candidates. The moderator along

with the CRO made a number of warnings. Several students were asked to leave

near the close of the forum.

U.T.S.U. Elections at St. George Campus

Poll Locations

As a large campus spread out across downtown Toronto, the University of

Toronto St. George campus presents some challenges in ensuring

representative distribution of poll stations. The Election and Referenda

Committee (ERC) is required to consider a number of factors in allocating poll

stations, including but not limited to: cost, wireless access, proximity to other poll

stations, accessibility for residence and commuter students, and student traffic.

There were some last minute changes made to the polling stations. The OISE

building where it has been a regular polling location in the past, was unavailable.

Therefore, it was moved from the OISE building to the Faculty of Social Work,

160

FINAL REPORT OF THE CHIEF RETURNING OFFICER University of Toronto Students’ Union Spring 2011 Elections Submitted by: Daniel Lo, Chief Returning Officer Friday March 30, 2012

6

located right next door. In addition, the ERC was made aware of a new

Instructional Building at the University of Toronto Mississauga campus, a building

with a lecture hall that seats over 800 students. In order to increase participation

and access to potential voters, it was decided that an additional poll be added

there along with the three designated locations already at UTM.

Poll Clerk Training

Poll Clerk training sessions were held at the Hart House Chapel, on March 1 and

2, 2012. The training sessions were two hours long and consisted of a brief

introduction to the roles and responsibilities of the CRO and DROs, poll clerk

duties and responsibilities, polling station setup and closing, trouble-shooting and

scenario role-play. During the training sessions, poll clerks were given the

opportunity to complete any missing paperwork (tax forms, confidentiality

agreement, etc). Both UTM and St. George poll clerks were trained together.

Polling location specifics such as expected voter turnout and considerations were

expressed to both UTM and St. George poll clerks.

Voting

Voting took place on Tuesday March 6, Wednesday March 7 and Thursday,

March 8, 2012. Poll stations were open from 09:00 to 18:00, with the exception

of Isabel Bader Theatre polling location that was opened between 09:00 to 16:00.

Seventy (70) poll clerks worked in shifts from 08:00 to 12:00, 12:00 to 15:00 and

15:00 to 18:30. Poll clerks used the Online Voter Eligibility Verification System

(OVEV) to confirm voters’ eligibility by scanning their T-cards. Other than some

occasional delays due to slow internet connections, the OVEV system functioned

smoothly. Voters were asked to sign in and provide their name, student number,

faculty/college and signature. Poll clerks were instructed to each initial every

ballot as they were given out to students upon confirmation of their eligibility as

161

FINAL REPORT OF THE CHIEF RETURNING OFFICER University of Toronto Students’ Union Spring 2011 Elections Submitted by: Daniel Lo, Chief Returning Officer Friday March 30, 2012

7

voters. Poll clerks were provided with a sheet indicating which ballots to give to

each voter.

If prospective voters did not have their T-Card (but knew their student number

and had other photo ID) or if the prospective voter’s status came up as ‘ineligible’

but the prospective voter believed that she/he was a full-time undergraduate

student and/or a U.T.S.U. member, poll clerks were instructed to use the double

envelope system.

St. George poll clerks met each morning at 08:00 at the U.T.S.U. office to collect

the necessary equipment and materials from the CRO and DRO. UTM Poll clerks

also met each morning at 08:00 with the UTM DRO at the campus police office to

collect equipment and materials. Ballot boxes were assembled at the polling

locations using Elections Canada seals, clearly marked.

Poll stations were closed each day at 18:00 and ballot boxes were sealed and

signed by poll clerks. On March 8, poll clerks transported ballot boxes,

accompanied by the CRO and DROs, from the Ombudsperson office to the

U.T.S.U. office. Ballot boxes from March 8 were brought directly to the U.T.S.U.

office for the count.

All the ballots had been designed in house and the ballots were printed at All

Solutions Printing. The ballots were delivered on Monday, March 6 where they

were locked and stored in the Elections Office. The ballots were then sorted to

the appropriate designated polling location box along with all the other election

items.

Storage and Transportation of Ballot Boxes

At the close of each voting day, poll clerks transported the sealed ballot boxes to

the University of Toronto Ombudsperson Office, where it was to be kept for

162

FINAL REPORT OF THE CHIEF RETURNING OFFICER University of Toronto Students’ Union Spring 2011 Elections Submitted by: Daniel Lo, Chief Returning Officer Friday March 30, 2012

8

safekeeping. The Ombudsperson along with another staff facilitated access to

the room through a secured key process. Only the Ombudsperson, CRO and

DROs had access to the office.

U.T.S.U. Elections at UTM

This section details the following: (1) poll station materials shared with UTM; (2)

poster locations allotted for UTSU candidates; (3) poll location and voter

eligibility; and (4) the storage and transportation of ballot boxes.

Poll Station Materials at UTM:

The following materials were used at UTM:

Voting screens Ballot boxes Laptops T-card scanners Extension cords Envelopes Ballots for UTSU executives Pens and markers Scissors

The UTMSU Elections Office provided tables and chairs. The materials listed

above were transported by the DRO via a car.

Poster Locations at UTM:

Several poster locations were allotted for UTSU candidates. The locations were

spread out between the CCIT Building, South Building, and North Building. In

contrast with St. George campus practices, postering boundaries were clearly

delineated on the UTM campus through the DRO’s guidance. Candidates faced

demerit point assessments if they violated poster boundaries. There were some

issues with the designated space for the U.T.S.U. elections used up by

Governing Council elections posters.

163

FINAL REPORT OF THE CHIEF RETURNING OFFICER University of Toronto Students’ Union Spring 2011 Elections Submitted by: Daniel Lo, Chief Returning Officer Friday March 30, 2012

9

Polling Locations and Voter Eligibility

Voting took place at UTM from Tuesday, March 6 to Thursday, March 8. The

following poll stations were set up at UTM:

CCIT – 9:00 to 18:00 South Building – 9:00 to 18:00 North Building – 9:00 to 18:00 Instructional Building – 9:00 to 18:00

These locations were pre-registered with and subsequently approved by the

UTM Student Affairs Council.

All full-time UTM and St. George students were eligible to cast ballots for UTSU

executives at any UTM poll location. UTM students were not, however, eligible to

vote for Director candidates.

Storage and Transportation of Ballot Boxes

UTSU ballot boxes were transported to UTM Campus Police Office, located at

the South Building as voting concluded on each day. When voting concluded on

the last day of voting, all ballot boxes and polling station materials were

transported via the UTM shuttle bus by two DROs, poll clerks and scrutineers.

Issues at Polling Stations

Polling stations operated smoothly aside from a few minor wifi connection issues

at Bahen. In addition, there were a few attempted disruptions at Sid Smith from

certain individuals. There were instances where individuals were caught trying to

vote twice, at each Sid Smith polling station. In addition, one individual, identified

as Brett Chang, repeatedly harassed candidates and volunteers and attempted

to videotape and disrupt voters. His actions resulted in a police report being filed

against him.

164

FINAL REPORT OF THE CHIEF RETURNING OFFICER University of Toronto Students’ Union Spring 2011 Elections Submitted by: Daniel Lo, Chief Returning Officer Friday March 30, 2012

10

Master List Verification

Each day at the close of polls, sign-in sheets were gathered and voters were

verified on a master list. This was used to produce the master list for double

envelope verification.

Ballot Counting

At 19:30 after the close of voting on Thursday March 8, 2012, the CRO oversaw

the vote count at the U.T.S.U. office. The count was concluded at 06:00 on

Friday March 9, 2012.

Each candidate was allowed one scrutineer to be present for the count.

Scrutineers were instructed to request any contested ballots to be put aside and

ruled on by the CRO. Scrutineers were not allowed to touch ballots or disrupt the

count. There were a total of 12 scrutineers that signed in for the ballot count.

Present for the vote count was the CRO as supervisor, three DROs, the Chair of

the Elections and Referenda Committee, and U.T.S.U. administrative support

staff. In the basement, ballot boxes were opened and 10-12 poll clerks sorted

the different colour-coded ballots. Teams of three counters were set up in the

rest of the office, there were eight (8) teams overall. In each team of three, one

person read the ballot result aloud while the other two recorded the result on a

tally sheet. After each pile of ballots, the two recorders verified they had identical

numbers to each other and then the team moved on to the next pile of ballots.

Spoiled Ballots

Ballots were considered spoiled if:

No voter intent was indicated on the ballot;

Only one poll clerk initialed the ballot;

No poll clerks initialed the ballot;

165

FINAL REPORT OF THE CHIEF RETURNING OFFICER University of Toronto Students’ Union Spring 2011 Elections Submitted by: Daniel Lo, Chief Returning Officer Friday March 30, 2012

11

Too many candidates were selected on the ballot

Double Envelope Ballots

Elections staff verified the eligibility of voters who had used the double envelope

system. Double envelopes were checked against the master voters list to

determine if (a) the voter was eligible; and (b) the student had not already voted

using their T-Card. Eligible voters’ ballots remained in the second, interior un-

marked envelope and were sorted and counted normally in order to maintain the

anonymity of the voters’ choices. All ineligible ballots were separated and not

counted. .

Announcement of Results and Recount

At the conclusion of ballot counting on March 9, 2012, unofficial election results

were posted on the UTSU website. On March 13, 2012, a recount was conducted

for the New College Director positions with scrutineers present. During the

recount, it was discovered that the columns containing the vote totals from a few

polling stations had been inadvertently excluded from the autosum formula in the

excel spreadsheet used to tally the final results. This exclusion was limited to

Board of Directors positions only and was limited to the Athletic Centre polling

station on March 6, 7 and 8, 2012, and the Sid Smith 1 polling station on March

8, 2012.

The update to the vote tallies resulted in one change in the individuals elected as

New College Directors – Laurel Chester was deemed to have garnered the third

highest number of votes as opposed to Baliqis Hashiru, as originally reported.

Elections for the other Board of Director positions remained unchanged.

As a precautionary step, a recount for the Engineering and St. Michael’s College

positions (the other two positions that could have been affected by the autosum

166

FINAL REPORT OF THE CHIEF RETURNING OFFICER University of Toronto Students’ Union Spring 2011 Elections Submitted by: Daniel Lo, Chief Returning Officer Friday March 30, 2012

12

error) was conducted on Tuesday, March 20, 2012. Candidates for those

positions were contacted and afforded an opportunity to provide scrutineers for

the recount. The individuals deemed elected as Engineering and St. Michael’s

College representatives remained unchanged after the recounts.

Appeals

A number of appeals were made throughout the elections, challenging both CRO

and ERC rulings (see Appendix B and C). While the CRO and all committees

endeavoured to respond to complaints and appeals in a timely manner, the high

volume of complaints and appeals caused some minor and unavoidable delays.

However, all complaints and appeals were ultimately dealt with.

Results: Acclamations and Election

Acclamations: Arts & Science At-Large: Nimalan Ulaganathan Victoria College: Shadrak Gobért and Gowthaman Kurusamy University College: Farhia Farah and Virginia Lomax Innis College: Wing Yan So Woodsworth College: Fazia Ackbarali, Yasmeen Emadi and Fatema Pardhan Faculty of Music: Stephanie Gamponia Faculty of Nursing: Alessia Gallipoli Faculty of Dentistry: Anthony Staibano Faculty of Pharmacy: Seann Peter Seto Faculty of Medicine: Jonathan Ding Faculty of Physical Education & Health: Gregory Easterbrook Professional Faculty At-Large: Helen Phan and Vijay Unnithan

167

FINAL REPORT OF THE CHIEF RETURNING OFFICER University of Toronto Students’ Union Spring 2011 Elections Submitted by: Daniel Lo, Chief Returning Officer Friday March 30, 2012

13

Election Results: The total for the elections results are for all polling locations. U.T.S.U. EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE President Schmidt, Brent: 755 (15.93%) *Shepherd, Shaun: 2723 (57.46%) Tanoli, Rohail: 1020 (21.52%) Spoiled: 241 (5.09%) Vice President, Equity *Baig, Noor: 3056 (64.55%) Chin, Karthy: 1297 (27.40%) Spoiled: 381 (8.05%) Vice President External *Cudjoe, Abigail: 2994 (63.61%) Ripley, Alexander: 1334 (28.34%) Spoiled: 379 (8.05%) Vice President Internal and Services Moore, Dylan: 1453 (30.78%) *Scott, Corey: 2945 (62.38%) Spoiled: 323 (6.84%) Vice President University Affairs Reilly, Carmen: 1431 (30.31) *Sajjad, Munib: 2936 (62.19%) Spoiled: 354 (7.50%) U.T.S.U. BOARD OF DIRECTORS Arts & Science At-Large *Lunianga, Kevin: 1285 (53.25%) Ossowski, Paul: 789 (32.70%) Spoiled: 339 (14.05%) Faculty of Applied Science and Engineering *Delwar, Mo: 193 (19.67%) Radebe, Dimpho: 179 (18.25%) *Sanchit, Mathur: 268 (27.32%)

168

FINAL REPORT OF THE CHIEF RETURNING OFFICER University of Toronto Students’ Union Spring 2011 Elections Submitted by: Daniel Lo, Chief Returning Officer Friday March 30, 2012

14

*Zhang, Will: 307 (31.29%) Spoiled: 34 (3.47%) New College *Bello, Ali Mustafa: 200 (19.65%) Charlick, Justin: 140 (13.75%) *Chester, Laurel: 184 (18.07%) Hashiru, Baliqis: 177 (17.39%) *Khan, Khalid: 191 (18.76%) Maniscalco, Craig: 98 (9.63%) Spoiled: 28 (2.75%) St. Michael’s College *Brown, Cullen: 234 (22.76%) *Choksi, Madiha: 169 (16.44%) Durrani, Mohammad Ali: 117 (11.38%) Khan, Hilal: 114 (11.09%) Khan, Vere-Marie: 153 (14.88%) *Qu, Kathleen: 198 (19.26%) Spoiled: 43 (4.18%) Trinity College Bhatt, Kriti: 81(24.77%) *Mitchell, Calvin: 230 (70.34%) Spoiled: 16 (4.90%) *Successful candidates Voter turnout During these 2012 elections, the voter turnout was approximately 10%. Recommendations

1. For the purposes of post-campaigning, it should be clarified whether the

EPC wants to include all forms of campaigning and campaign materials, or

whether it should be limited to those in print only.

2. The definition of “candidate” within the interpretation section of the EPC

needs to be updated.

169

FINAL REPORT OF THE CHIEF RETURNING OFFICER University of Toronto Students’ Union Spring 2011 Elections Submitted by: Daniel Lo, Chief Returning Officer Friday March 30, 2012

15

3. There should be a differentiation between a “nominee” and a “candidate”

in the EPC. This is a recurring issue and should be addressed.

4. The Instructional Building at the University of Toronto Mississauga

campus should replace the North Building polling station as there is more

student traffic and voter turnout at the former location.

5. Article I of the EPC should have a clearer definition of what non-arm’s-

length party means to ensure that candidates are responsible for the

actions of supporters.

6. Article III of the Elections Procedure Code should state that candidates

who sign out a nomination package, must clearly indicate at the start the

position that they are seeking.

7. Ensure that more advertising and notice is done prior to the Executive

Candidates Forum.

8. Establish a guideline on the conduct and behavior expected at the

Executive Candidates Forum to ensure that it is a safe and positive space.

9. Article VI, section 1(n) should clearly define what is not allowed for

candidates or campaigners within the six (6) metres mark of a designated

polling station during election days.

Acknowledgements

The CRO would like to thank the DROs, poll clerks, and U.T.S.U. staff who

provided logistical support for the elections.

170

FINAL REPORT OF THE CHIEF RETURNING OFFICER University of Toronto Students’ Union Spring 2011 Elections Submitted by: Daniel Lo, Chief Returning Officer Friday March 30, 2012

16

Appendix A – CRO Rulings 001-058 CRO Ruling 001 A complaint was filed on Feb 18, 2011, alleging that Mr. Rohail Tanoli (nominee for Vice-President, External) violated Article VI (1)(a) of the EPC by engaging in pre-campaigning. In addition, an allegation regarding a breach of fair play under Article VI (1)(d) misrepresentation of facts was submitted. The C.R.O. has investigated and determined that Mr. Rohail Tanoli did violate both Article VI (1)(a) and VI (1)(d) of the EPC. However, it is noted that Mr. Rohail Tanoli took the initiative to clarify the meaning of pre-campaigning and misrepresentation after the fact. 5 demerit points will be issued for this complaint, upon candidacy eligibility Date: February 24, 2010 Time: 10:49 CRO Ruling 001 A complaint was filed on Feb 14, 2012, alleging that Mr. Brent Schmidt (nominee for President) violated Article VI (1)(a) of the EPC by engaging in pre-campaigning. The C.R.O. has investigated and determined that Mr. Brent Schmidt did not violate Article VI (1)(a) of the EPC. The online content in question was merely a statement of fact, basically of Mr. Brent Schmidt’s candidacy. No demerit points will be issued for this complaint. Date: February 15, 2012 Time: 3:20PM CRO Ruling 002 A complaint was filed on February 28, 2012, alleging that members of the Unity slate committed an intentional misrepresentation of fact as written in Article VI (3)(j) of the EPC. The complaint alleges the statement “Successfully lobbied to expand tuition grant eligibility to include first-entry professional students” is untrue. The claim revolves around the Ontario Liberal Party platform and a publication released by the Ontario Undergraduate Student Alliance and the College Student Alliance, which the complainant claims had already considered first-entry professional students into the tuition grant scheme.

171

FINAL REPORT OF THE CHIEF RETURNING OFFICER University of Toronto Students’ Union Spring 2011 Elections Submitted by: Daniel Lo, Chief Returning Officer Friday March 30, 2012

17

The C.R.O. has investigated and determined that the statement is not a misrepresentation of fact as the Unity slate provided evidence contrary to the complainant’s allegations. No demerit points will be issued in response to this complaint. Date: March 1, 2012 Time: 3:57PM CRO Ruling 003 A complaint was filed on February 28, 2012, alleging that members of the Unity slate committed an intentional misrepresentation of fact as written in Article VI (3)(j) of the EPC. The complaint alleges the statement “Successfully lobbied for free access to Varsity and Athletic Centre space for UTSU-recognized clubs” is untrue. First, that student groups can only access these facilities at specified times, and secondly, that these privileges are afforded to clubs recognized by the Office of Student Life, and not the UTSU. The C.R.O. has investigated and determined that the statement is merely vague, not inaccurate or misleading, and secondly, all clubs recognized by UTSU have to be recognized by the Office of Student Life as well. In essence all UTSU-recognized clubs are also OSL-recognized clubs. Without further evidence, it cannot be said that there was an intentional misrepresentation of fact. Insufficient evidence to allege a breach of Article VI (1)(i)(vii) of the EPC by the accused candidate. However, candidates are reminded that this sort of conduct will not be tolerated. An email has been sent out to all candidates reminding them of the postering policies outlined by the EPC. No demerit points will be issued in response to this complaint Date: February 29, 2012 Time: 2:20pm CRO Ruling 004 A complaint was filed on February 28, 2012, alleging that members of the Unity slate committed an intentional misrepresentation of fact as written in Article VI (3)(j) of the EPC. The complaint alleges the statement “increased clubs funding” is untrue. The complainant refers to the audited financial statements of the UTSU from 2010 to current.

172

FINAL REPORT OF THE CHIEF RETURNING OFFICER University of Toronto Students’ Union Spring 2011 Elections Submitted by: Daniel Lo, Chief Returning Officer Friday March 30, 2012

18

The C.R.O. has investigated and determined that this year, the Union had the most number of clubs eligible for funding based on numbers during Executive Clubs training, a necessary requirement for funding eligibility. Furthermore, it was the case, as evident in Executive board reports and preliminary draft of the Union's operating budget that cite that this year the U.T.S.U. has increased the overall clubs funding budget. Also, the clubs directory line item is normally in the clubs funding, it has been removed since last year, so it may appear as if clubs funding has not increased. No demerit points will be issued in response to this complaint Date: March 1, 2012 Time: 4:00PM CRO Ruling 005 A complaint was filed on February 28, 2012, alleging that Ms. Karthy Chin, violated Article VI (1)(i)(vii) of the EPC that states that “each candidates poster may not overlap another candidate’s poster.” The C.R.O. has investigated and determined that there is insufficient evidence to allege a breach of Article VI (1)(i)(vii) of the EPC by the accused candidate. However, candidates are reminded that this sort of conduct will not be tolerated. An email has been sent out to all candidates reminding them of the postering policies outlined by the EPC. No demerit points will be issued in response to this complaint Date: February 29, 2012 Time: 2:30pm CRO Ruling 006 A complaint was filed on February 28, 2012, alleging that a non-arm’s-length party of the Students First slate violated Article VI (1)(c) and Article VI (1)(d) of the EPC that surrounds, respectively, the responsibility of candidates (in regards to non-arm’s-length parties) and fair play. The C.R.O. has investigated and determined that there is insufficient evidence to allege a breach of Article VI (1)(c) and Article VI (1)(d) of the EPC by the accused candidates within the Students First slate. No demerit points will be issued in response to this complaint

173

FINAL REPORT OF THE CHIEF RETURNING OFFICER University of Toronto Students’ Union Spring 2011 Elections Submitted by: Daniel Lo, Chief Returning Officer Friday March 30, 2012

19

Date: February 28, 2012 Time: 2:00PM CRO Ruling 007 A complaint was filed on February 28, 2012, alleging that members of the Unity slate committed an intentional misrepresentation of fact as written in Article VI (3)(j) of the EPC. The complaint alleges the statement “Hosted an affordable Unity Ball Semi-Formal” is untrue. The complainant refers to the interpretation of “this year”. The C.R.O. has investigated and determined that there is insufficient evidence to allege a breach of Article VI (1)(i)(vii) of the EPC by the accused candidate. The Unity slate clarified that they included that statement under the “Past Victories” section of their website, which would indicate that they are referring to the last Unity Ball and not the current one. There may be ambiguity when read in conjunction with their statement of “able to provide for students this year”, however read in whole there is no real grounds for misrepresentation. No demerit points will be issued in response to this complaint Date: March 1, 2012 Time: 4:00PM CRO Ruling 008 A complaint was filed on February 28, 2012, alleging that members of the Unity slate committed numerous intentional misrepresentation of fact as written in Article VI (3)(j) of the EPC. The complaint alleges a host of statements on the Unity slate website. The C.R.O. has investigated and determined that there is insufficient evidence to allege a breach of Article VI (1)(3)(j) of the EPC by the accused candidate. Unity slate did not state that the promises represented all the candidates on the slate. At most the statements are vague and clarification is in order. No demerit points will be issued in response to this complaint Date: February 29, 2012 Time: 3:17PM CRO Ruling 009 A complaint was filed on February 28, 2012, alleging that members of the

174

FINAL REPORT OF THE CHIEF RETURNING OFFICER University of Toronto Students’ Union Spring 2011 Elections Submitted by: Daniel Lo, Chief Returning Officer Friday March 30, 2012

20

Students First slate violated Article VI (3)(j) and Article VI 1 (1)(f) of the EPC. The C.R.O. has investigated and determined that there is sufficient evidence to allege a breach of Article VI (3)(j) and Article VI 1 (1)(f) of the EPC. Each executive candidate within the Students First slate is hereby issued 5 demerit points each. Brent Schmidt (Presidential candidate) - 5 demerit points Karthy Chin (VP Equity candidate) – 5 demerit points Alex Ripley (VP External candidate) – 5 demerit points Dylan Moore (VP Internal candidate) – 5 demerit points Carmen Reilly (VP University Affairs candidate) – 5 demerit points Date: February 29, 2012 Time: 2:45PM CRO Ruling 010 A complaint was filed on February 28, 2012, alleging that members of the Unity slate committed an intentional misrepresentation of fact as written in Article VI (3)(j) of the EPC. The complaint alleges the statement “Hosted Winter Clubs Day as a part of Winter Clubs Week 2011” is untrue. The complainant refers to the interpretation of “this year”. The nature of this complaint is similar to that of CRO Ruling 007, therefore the rationale from that ruling will be applied here. The C.R.O. has investigated and determined that there is insufficient evidence to allege a breach of Article VI (3)(j) of the EPC. The Unity slate clarified that they included that statement under the “Past Victories” section of their website, which would indicate that they are referring to the last Winter Clubs Week 2011 and not the current one. There may be ambiguity when read in conjunction with their statement of “able to provide for students this year”, however read in whole there is no real grounds for misrepresentation. No demerit points will be issued in response to this complaint Date: March 2, 2012 Time: 12:50PM

175

FINAL REPORT OF THE CHIEF RETURNING OFFICER University of Toronto Students’ Union Spring 2011 Elections Submitted by: Daniel Lo, Chief Returning Officer Friday March 30, 2012

21

CRO Ruling 011 A complaint was filed on February 28, 2012, alleging that members of the Unity slate committed an intentional misrepresentation of fact as written in Article VI (3)(j) of the EPC. The complaint alleges the statement “Hosted the largest UTSU Orientation Week to-date featuring a clubs fair, Sam Robert’s band and the largest after-party in Canada at Guvernment Entertainment Complex” and “Hosted the first ever Carbon Neutral Orientation in Canada” is untrue. The complainant refers to the interpretation of “orientation week”, “largest to date”, and “carbon neutral”. The nature of this complaint is similar to that of CRO Ruling 007, therefore the rationale from that ruling will be applied here. The C.R.O. has investigated and determined that there is insufficient evidence to allege a breach of Article VI (3)(j) of the EPC. The issue in these complaints narrow down to the interpretation of vocabulary and syntax employed by the Unity slate. Once again, these statements are merely vague, an allegation of misrepresentation would necessitate a higher threshold. No demerit points will be issued in response to this complaint Date: March 2, 2012 Time: 1:02PM CRO Ruling 012 A complaint was filed on February 28, 2012, alleging that members of the Unity slate committed an intentional misrepresentation of fact as written in Article VI (3)(j) of the EPC. The complaint alleges the statement “Take a look at what working together has won for students in this year alone: Won a review of the implementation of flat fees by Governing Council to take place in 2013” is untrue. The C.R.O. has investigated and determined that there is insufficient evidence to allege a breach of Article VI (3)(j) of the EPC. Unity slate provided evidence that counteracted the allegations. No demerit points will be issued in response to this complaint Date: March 2, 2012 Time: 1:06PM

176

FINAL REPORT OF THE CHIEF RETURNING OFFICER University of Toronto Students’ Union Spring 2011 Elections Submitted by: Daniel Lo, Chief Returning Officer Friday March 30, 2012

22

CRO Ruling 013 A complaint was filed on February 28, 2012, alleging that members of the Unity slate committed an intentional misrepresentation of fact as written in Article VI (3)(j) of the EPC. The complaint alleges the statement “Here’s what we’ve been working on this year… Won an interest-free period on OSAP for 6 months after graduation” is untrue. The C.R.O. has investigated and determined that there is insufficient evidence to allege a breach of Article VI (3)(j) of the EPC. Unity slate is continually working on the interest-free period on OSAP scheme even after its introduction. Once again, the issue also comes down to interpretation of words such as “this year”. No demerit points will be issued in response to this complaint Date: March 2, 2012 Time: 1:16PM CRO Ruling 014 A complaint was filed on March 1, 2012, alleging that non-arm’s length party supporters of the Students First slate under Article VI Section 1(c), breached Article VI Section 1(d) of the EPC by tearing down and destroying team Unity campaign materials. The C.R.O. has investigated and determined that there is insufficient evidence to allege a breach of Article VI Section 1(d) of the EPC by the accused candidates. The fact that only team Unity posters are being removed does not qualify as sufficient evidence against a specific candidate or slate. An email reminding candidates of the postering policies for the elections has been sent out. As a result, no demerit points will be issued in response to this complaint Date: March 1, 2012 Time: 3:00pm CRO Ruling 015 A complaint was filed on March 1, 2012, alleging that non-arm’s length party supporters under Article VI Section 1(c) of the Students First slate, and independent presidential candidate Rohail Tanoli, violated Article VI Section 1(f) by utilizing unapproved campaign materials at the All-Candidates Debate on February 29, 2012.

177

FINAL REPORT OF THE CHIEF RETURNING OFFICER University of Toronto Students’ Union Spring 2011 Elections Submitted by: Daniel Lo, Chief Returning Officer Friday March 30, 2012

23

Under the Article I, “Interpretation,” the EPC describes campaign material as “any item, design, sound, symbol or mark that is created or copied in any form in order to and/or likely to influence at least one voter to cast a ballot of not to cast a ballot, in favour or in opposition to a candidate.” The C.R.O. has investigated and determined that there is sufficient evidence to allege a breach of Article VI Section 1(f) of the EPC. Each executive candidate within the Students First slate and independent candidate Rohail Tanoli is hereby issued 3 demerit points each. Brent Schmidt (Presidential candidate) - 3 demerit points Karthy Chin (VP Equity candidate) – 3 demerit points Alex Ripley (VP External candidate) – 3 demerit points Dylan Moore (VP Internal candidate) – 3 demerit points Carmen Reilly (VP University Affairs candidate) – 3 demerit points Rohail Tanoli (Presidential candidate) – 3 demerit points Date: March 2, 2012 Time: 3:20pm

CRO Ruling 016 A complaint was filed on March 1, 2012, alleging that non-arm’s length party supporters under Article VI Section 1(c) of the Students First slate, violated Article VI Section 1(d) by breaking the rules of “Fair Play” by creating and/or endorsing a poster created to mock the team Unity slate. The C.R.O. has investigated and determined that there is sufficient evidence to allege a breach of Article VI Section 1(d) of the EPC. Each executive candidate within the Students First slate is hereby issued 3 demerit points each. Brent Schmidt (Presidential candidate) - 3 demerit points Karthy Chin (VP Equity candidate) – 3 demerit points Alex Ripley (VP External candidate) – 3 demerit points Dylan Moore (VP Internal candidate) – 3 demerit points Carmen Reilly (VP University Affairs candidate) – 3 demerit points Date: March 2, 2012 Time: 4:45pm CRO Ruling 017 A complaint was filed on March 1, 2012, alleging that non-arm’s length party supporters under Article VI Section 1(c) of the Students First slate, as well as

178

FINAL REPORT OF THE CHIEF RETURNING OFFICER University of Toronto Students’ Union Spring 2011 Elections Submitted by: Daniel Lo, Chief Returning Officer Friday March 30, 2012

24

presidential candidate Rohail Tanoli, violated Article VI Section 1(d) by breaking the rules of “Fair Play.” These parties conducting in behaviour described as heckling, and interrupting members of the team Unity slate during the All-Candidates Debate on February 29, 2012. The C.R.O. has investigated and determined that there is sufficient evidence to allege a breach of Article VI Section 1(d) of the EPC. Each executive candidate within the Students First slate, as well as presidential candidate Rohail Tanoli, are hereby issued 5 demerit points each. Rohail Tanoli (Presidential candidate) – 5 demerit points Brent Schmidt (Presidential candidate) - 5 demerit points Karthy Chin (VP Equity candidate) – 5 demerit points Alex Ripley (VP External candidate) – 5 demerit points Dylan Moore (VP Internal candidate) – 5 demerit points Carmen Reilly (VP University Affairs candidate) – 5 demerit points Date: March 2, 2012 Time: 5:00pm CRO Ruling 018 A complaint was filed on March 1, 2012, alleging that Robert Boissonneault, who is a non-arm’s length party supporter of the Students First slate under Article VI Section 1(c) violated Article VI Section 1(d) entitled “Fair Play.” The complaint alleges the non-arm’s length party broke the rules of “Fair Play” by implicating that the Canadian Federation of Students (CFS) are responsible for the twitter scandal regarding a Students First supporter, Brett Chang. The C.R.O. has investigated and determined that there is sufficient evidence to allege a breach of Article VI Section 1(d) of the EPC. Each executive candidate within the Students First slate are hereby issued 3 demerit points each. Brent Schmidt (Presidential candidate) - 3 demerit points Karthy Chin (VP Equity candidate) – 3 demerit points Alex Ripley (VP External candidate) – 3 demerit points Dylan Moore (VP Internal candidate) – 3 demerit points Carmen Reilly (VP University Affairs candidate) – 3 demerit points Date: March 2, 2012 Time: 5:10pm

179

FINAL REPORT OF THE CHIEF RETURNING OFFICER University of Toronto Students’ Union Spring 2011 Elections Submitted by: Daniel Lo, Chief Returning Officer Friday March 30, 2012

25

CRO Ruling 019 A complaint was filed on March 2, 2012, alleging that members of the Unity slate committed an intentional misrepresentation of fact as written in Article VI (3)(j) of the EPC. The complaint alleges the statement “Won an increase to the Ontario Student Opportunity Grant” on the team Unity website is untrue.��The C.R.O. has investigated and determined that the increase to the Ontario Student Opportunity Grant (OSOG) actually refers to a lump sum contribution to the OSOG, and not to the individual limits as described in the complaint. Once again, this issue comes down to the interpretation of the wording of the statement.��No demerit points will be issued in response to this complaint�� Date: March 2, 2012� Time: 5:20PM CRO Ruling 020 A complaint was filed on March 2, 2012, alleging that members of the Unity slate committed an intentional misrepresentation of fact as written in Article VI (3)(j) of the EPC. The complaint alleges the statement “So like I think the wage that currently exists right now is a fair one, it’s below the actual poverty line” made by Mr. Corey Scott at the All-Candidates Debate on February 29, 2012. The C.R.O. has investigated and determined that the executive net salary is $23,786.36 per year which is $1,149.36 above the Low Income Cut-Off. 5 demerit points will be issued in response to this complaint to Mr. Corey Scott. Date: March 5, 2012 Time: 2:01PM CRO Ruling 021 A complaint was filed on March 2, 2012, alleging that the Mr. Shaun Shephard has breached Article VI (1)(d) “fair play” and Article VI (3)(j)(iii) “spirit of the elections” of the EPC.

The C.R.O. has investigated and determined that Mr. Shaun Shephard has not breached Article VI (1)(d) “fair play” and Article VI (3)(j)(iii) “spirit of the elections” of the EPC. At the debate, presidential candidate Shaun Shepherd was not referring to any Students First candidate when he referenced "tokenization". When asked a question about representation, Mr. Shepherd stated that he worked hard to make his slate representative, and that he recognizes that it’s problematic to engage in tokenization. He was assuring the audience that team Unity did not engage in tokenization, and that team Unity representatives were

180

FINAL REPORT OF THE CHIEF RETURNING OFFICER University of Toronto Students’ Union Spring 2011 Elections Submitted by: Daniel Lo, Chief Returning Officer Friday March 30, 2012

26

experienced and well-respected members of their various communities.

When someone approached Mr. Shepherd at the debate and stated that his comment was interpreted as a comment about a member of the Students First slate, Mr. Shepherd approached Ms. Karthy Chin directly, apologized if she received it that way, and made it clear that he was not referring to her.

No demerit points will be issued in response to this complaint.

Date: March 8, 2012 Time: 12:24PM CRO Ruling 022 A complaint was filed on March 2, 2012, alleging that a non-arm’s-length member, Danielle Sandhu, of the Unity slate breached the rules of “fair play” when she made statements towards another non-arm’s length party, Robert Boissonneault, at the All-Candidates Debate on February 29, 2012. The C.R.O. has investigated and determined that statements were made from both sides. Ms. Danielle Sandhu made the statement in response to a statement from Mr. Robert Boissonneault. The C.R.O. would insist that all candidates and their non-arm’s-length parties respect the electoral process, in particular that of Article VI (1)(d) of the EPC which outlines “fair play”. No demerit points will be issued in response to this complaint. Both the Unity and Students First slates have been sent a warning regarding this issue. Date: March 5, 2012 Time: 2:26PM CRO Ruling 023 A complaint was filed on March 4, 2012, alleging that the Unity slate has breached Article VI (iii) “abuse of position or status” and “unsanctioned use of Union resources”, and Article VI (ii) “unsolicited campaigning” of the EPC. The C.R.O. has investigated and determined that there is insufficient evidence to allege “abuse of position or status” and “unsanctioned use of Union resources”. In regards to the allegation regarding “unsolicited campaigning”, it has been revealed that constituents were provided with both a written and verbal notification regarding their acceptance in receiving Unity emails when they

181

FINAL REPORT OF THE CHIEF RETURNING OFFICER University of Toronto Students’ Union Spring 2011 Elections Submitted by: Daniel Lo, Chief Returning Officer Friday March 30, 2012

27

signed either a Unity slate member’s nomination package or a separate information signup sheet. No demerit points will be issued in response to this complaint. Date: March 5, 2012 Time: 2:51PM CRO Ruling 024 A complaint was filed on March 4, 2012, alleging that the Unity slate has breached Article VI (ii) “unsolicited campaigning” of the EPC. The C.R.O. has investigated and determined that constituents were provided with both a written and verbal notification regarding their acceptance in receiving Unity emails when they signed either a Unity slate member’s nomination package or a separate information signup sheet. No demerit points will be issued in response to this complaint. Date: March 5, 2012 Time: 2:53PM CRO Ruling 025 A complaint was filed on March 5, 2012, alleging that the Mr. Shaun Shephard has breached Article VI (1)(f) “approval of campaign methods” of the EPC. The C.R.O. has investigated and determined that Mr. Shaun Shephard has breached Article VI (1)(f) of the EPC through his endorsement by the Varsity in the March 5, 2012 edition. 5 demerit points will be issued in response to this complaint. Date: March 5, 2012 Time: 3:30PM CRO Ruling 026 The C.R.O. is making a general notice against frivolous complaints. Frivolous complaints not only impede the electoral process by taking up the time of the elections staff, but also serve no real purpose to the general constituency. Any further frivolous complaints will be disregarded.

182

FINAL REPORT OF THE CHIEF RETURNING OFFICER University of Toronto Students’ Union Spring 2011 Elections Submitted by: Daniel Lo, Chief Returning Officer Friday March 30, 2012

28

Date: March 5, 2012 Time: 3:30PM CRO Ruling 027 A complaint was filed on March 6, 2012, alleging that Ali Mustafa Bello, Baliqis Hashiru, and Khalid Khan of the Unity slate has breached Article VI (1)(s)(ii) of the EPC “campaigning and campaign materials are not allowed within six (6) metres of a Library”. The C.R.O. has investigated and determined that there is sufficient evidence to allege a violation of Article VI (1)(s)(ii) of the EPC. Posters from the aforementioned candidates were found within 6 metres of the Donald Glen Ivey Library. 5 demerit points will be issued to Ali Mustafa Bello, Baliqis Hashiru, and Khalid Khan in response to this complaint. Date: March 7, 2012 Time: 11:46AM CRO Ruling 028 A complaint was filed on March 6, 2012, alleging that Ali Mustafa Bello, Baliqis Hashiru, and Khalid Khan of the Unity slate has breached Article VI (1)(s)(i) of the EPC “Campaigning is not allowed within six (6) metres of a Student Residence”. The C.R.O. has investigated and determined that there is sufficient evidence to Article VI (1)(s)(i) of the EPC “campaign materials – displayed in an unauthorized area”. Posters from the above mentioned candidates were found within 6 metres of the New College residence (from the elevators onwards). 5 demerit points will be issued to Ali Mustafa Bello, Baliqis Hashiru, and Khalid Khan in response to this complaint. Date: March 7, 2012 Time: 11:55AM CRO Ruling 029 A complaint was filed on March 6, 2012, alleging that Khalid Khan of the Unity

183

FINAL REPORT OF THE CHIEF RETURNING OFFICER University of Toronto Students’ Union Spring 2011 Elections Submitted by: Daniel Lo, Chief Returning Officer Friday March 30, 2012

29

slate has breached Article VI (1)(s)(ii) of the EPC “Campaigning During Voting Period - Campaigning and campaign materials are not allowed within six (6) metres of a Library” for tweeting about his campaign within Robarts Library. The C.R.O. has investigated and determined that there was no violation. The statements made by Khalid were on March 5, 2012, falling outside of the voting period which started on March 6, 2012 No demerit points will be issued in response to this complaint. Date: March 7, 2012 Time: 12:18PM CRO Ruling 030 A complaint was filed on March 6, 2012, alleging that Khalid Khan of the Unity slate has breached Article VI (1)(s)(ii) of the EPC “Campaigning During Voting Period - Campaigning and campaign materials are not allowed within six (6) metres of a Library” for tweeting about his campaign within Robarts Library. The C.R.O. has investigated and determined that there was no violation. The statements made by Khalid were on March 2, 2012, falling outside of the voting period which started on March 6, 2012 No demerit points will be issued in response to this complaint. Date: March 7, 2012 Time: 12:18PM CRO Ruling 031 A complaint was filed on March 6, 2012, alleging that Shaun Shephard, Corey Scott, Noor Baig, Abigail Cudjoe and Munib Sajjad of the Unity slate has breached Article VI (1)(n)(ii) of the EPC: “No campaign materials shall be placed within six (6) metres or clearly visible to an assigned polling station during voting days. The infraction allegedly took place at Sidney Smith. The C.R.O. has investigated and determined that there is sufficient evidence to find a violation of Article VI (1)(n)(ii) of the EPC. Campaign materials containing the aforementioned candidates were in plain sight of one of the Sidney Smith polling stations. The candidates rectified the situation immediately. 3 demerit points will be issued to Shaun Shephard, Corey Scott, Noor Baig, Abigail Cudjoe and Munib Sajjad in response to this complaint.

184

FINAL REPORT OF THE CHIEF RETURNING OFFICER University of Toronto Students’ Union Spring 2011 Elections Submitted by: Daniel Lo, Chief Returning Officer Friday March 30, 2012

30

Date: March 7, 2012 Time: 12:43PM CRO Ruling 032 A complaint was filed on March 6, 2012, alleging that the Unity slate has breached Article VI (1)(d) “fair play” and Article VI (1)(n)(ii) of the EPC: “No campaign materials shall be placed within six (6) metres or clearly visible to an assigned polling station during voting days. The infraction allegedly took place at Sidney Smith. The C.R.O. has investigated and determined that there is insufficient evidence to find a violation of Article VI (1)(d) or Article VI (1)(n)(ii) of the EPC. Though the C.R.O. acknowledges that there were campaign materials at the polling station, there was insufficient evidence to show that the campaign materials were left by the candidates or their non-arm’s length party. The election staff endeavour to remove all campaign materials from the stations continuously throughout the voting period. This is a difficult task as stations are often overwhelmed with voters. Candidates have been made aware that they should assist in removing their own campaign materials that are found within 6 metres of the voting areas. Date: March 7, 2012 Time: 1:07PM CRO Ruling 033 A complaint was filed on March 6, 2012, alleging that the Unity slate has breached Article VI (1)(n)(ii) of the EPC: “No campaign materials shall be placed within six (6) metres or clearly visible to an assigned polling station during voting days. The infraction allegedly took place at Gerstein Library. The C.R.O. has investigated and determined that there was no violation of Article VI (1)(n)(ii) of the EPC. Campaigners did not have any hold out any campaign materials directly in view of the polling stations, and they were campaigning behind the 6 metre mark. Date: March 7, 2012 Time: 1:14PM

CRO Ruling 034 A complaint was filed on March 6, 2012, alleging that the Unity slate has breached Article VI (1)(d) “fair play” of the EPC for having a picture of the complainant in a photo that was uploaded to Unity’s Facebook group.

185

FINAL REPORT OF THE CHIEF RETURNING OFFICER University of Toronto Students’ Union Spring 2011 Elections Submitted by: Daniel Lo, Chief Returning Officer Friday March 30, 2012

31

The C.R.O. has investigated and determined that this is not a violation of Article VI (1)(d) “fair play” of the EPC. Unity removed the picture in question within 24 hours and has spoken to the complainant directly regarding this incident. No demerit points will be issued in response to this complaint. Date: March 7, 2012 Time: 12:43PM CRO Ruling 035 A complaint was filed on March 7, 2012, alleging that Noor Baig, Corey Scott and Abigail Cudjoe of the Unity slate has breached Article VI (1)(s)(i) of the EPC. “Campaigning is not allowed within six (6) metres of a Student Residence.”

The C.R.O. has investigated and determined that there is sufficient evidence to Article VI (1)(s)(i) of the EPC “campaign materials – displayed in an unauthorized area”. Posters from the above mentioned candidates were found within 6 metres of the New College residence (from the elevators onwards)

5 demerit points will be issued to Noor Baig, Corey Scott, and Abigail Cudjoe in response to this complaint.�� Date: March 7, 2012� Time: 9:54PM CRO Ruling 036 A complaint was filed on March 7, 2012, alleging that Shaun Shephard of the Unity slate has breached Article VI (1)(s)(i) of the EPC “Campaigning is not allowed within six (6) metres of a Student Residence”. The C.R.O. has investigated and determined that there is insufficient evidence to allege an Article VI (1)(s)(i) violation. There is no evidence of the source of this flyer, mainly of who placed it at the location. No demerit points will be issued in response to this complaint. Date: March 7, 2012 Time: 10:03PM CRO Ruling 037 A complaint was filed on March 6, 2012, alleging that the Unity slate has

186

FINAL REPORT OF THE CHIEF RETURNING OFFICER University of Toronto Students’ Union Spring 2011 Elections Submitted by: Daniel Lo, Chief Returning Officer Friday March 30, 2012

32

breached Article VI (1)(s)(ii) of the EPC “Campaigning During Voting Period - Campaigning and campaign materials are not allowed within six (6) metres of a Library” for flyers found in Graham Library, Trinity College. The C.R.O. has investigated and determined that there is insufficient evidence to allege an Article VI (1)(s)(ii) violation. There is no evidence of the source of this flyer, mainly of who placed it at the location. No demerit points will be issued in response to this complaint. Date: March 7, 2012 Time: 10:08PM CRO Ruling 038 A complaint was filed on March 8, 2012, alleging that the Unity slate has breached Article VI (1)(c) and Article VI (1)(d) of the EPC for flyers found at the polling station in Alumni Hall at St. Michael’s College.

�The C.R.O. has investigated and determined that there is insufficient evidence to find a violation of Article VI (1)(c) and Article VI (1)(d) of the EPC. Though the C.R.O. acknowledges that there were campaign materials at the polling station, there was insufficient evidence to show that the campaign materials were left by the candidates or their non-arm’s length party. The election staff endeavour to remove all campaign materials from the stations continuously throughout the voting period. This is a difficult task as stations are often overwhelmed with voters. Voters are reminded by candidates and elections staff to not leave flyers lying around.

No demerit points will be issued in response to this complaint.�

Date: March 10, 2012 Time: 3:46PM CRO Ruling 039 A complaint was filed on March 8, 2012, alleging that Mr. Corey Scott committed a misrepresentation of fact as written in Article VI (3)(j) of the EPC at the All-Candidates Debate on February 29, 2012. The complaint alleges that the statement made by Mr. Corey Scott about a $200 student levy in order to build a bar on campus is untrue.

�The C.R.O. has investigated and determined that there is sufficient evidence to allege a breach of Article VI (3)(j) of the EPC.

187

FINAL REPORT OF THE CHIEF RETURNING OFFICER University of Toronto Students’ Union Spring 2011 Elections Submitted by: Daniel Lo, Chief Returning Officer Friday March 30, 2012

33

5 demerit points will be issued in response to this complaint. Date: March 10, 2012 Time: 3:21PM CRO Ruling 040 A complaint was filed on March 8, 2012, alleging that Mr. Munib Sajjad committed a postering violation as written in Article VI (1)(i)(vii) of the EPC. The complaint alleges Mr. Munib Sajjad’s poster overlapped a Students First candidate’s poster on St. George Street.

�The C.R.O. has investigated and determined that there is sufficient evidence to allege a breach of Article VI (1)(i)(vii) of the EPC.� 3 demerit points will be issued to Mr. Munib Sajjad in response to this complaint. Date: March 10, 2012 Time: 3:28PM CRO Ruling 041 A complaint was filed on March 8, 2012, alleging that Mr. Shaun Shepherd committed a postering violation as written in Article VI (1)(i)(vii) of the EPC. The complaint alleges Mr. Shaun Shepherd’s poster overlapped a Students First candidate’s poster on St. George Street.

�The C.R.O. has investigated and determined that there is sufficient evidence to allege a breach of Article VI (1)(i)(vii) of the EPC. 3 demerit points will be issued to Mr. Shaun Shepherd in response to this complaint �� Date: March 10, 2012� Time: 3:30PM CRO Ruling 042 A complaint was filed on March 8, 2012, alleging that Ms. Noor Baig committed a postering violation as written in Article VI (1)(i)(vii) of the EPC. The complaint alleges Ms. Noor Baig’s poster overlapped a Students First candidate’s poster on St. George Street.

�The C.R.O. has investigated and determined that there is sufficient evidence to allege a breach of Article VI (1)(i)(vii) of the EPC.��

188

FINAL REPORT OF THE CHIEF RETURNING OFFICER University of Toronto Students’ Union Spring 2011 Elections Submitted by: Daniel Lo, Chief Returning Officer Friday March 30, 2012

34

3 demerit points will be issued to Ms. Noor Baig in response to this complaint. Date: March 10, 2012� Time: 3:31PM CRO Ruling 043 A complaint was filed on March 8, 2012, alleging that Mr. Shaun Shepherd committed a postering violation as written in Article VI (1)(i)(vii) of the EPC. The complaint alleges Mr. Shaun Shepherd’s poster overlapped a Students First candidate’s poster on St. George Street.

�The C.R.O. has investigated and determined that there is insufficient evidence to allege a breach of Article VI (1)(i)(vii) of the EPC. Upon further investigation, it appears that similar postering violations may be linked to a string of malicious and intentional attacks at Mr. Shaun Shepherd by unknown parties. These incidences will be noted in future postering violation allegations. �

No demerit points will be issued to Mr. Shaun Shepherd in response to this complaint.��

Date: March 10, 2012 Time: 3:39PM CRO Ruling 044 A complaint was filed on March 8, 2012, alleging that members of team Unity committed a violation of Article VI (3)(i) and Article VI (1)(N)(ii) of the EPC. The complaint revolves around team Unity campaign materials found within 6 metres of the polling stations. �The C.R.O. has investigated and determined that there is insufficient evidence to find a violation of Article VI (3)(i) and Article VI (1)(N)(ii) of the EPC. Though the C.R.O. acknowledges that there were campaign materials at the polling station, there was insufficient evidence to show that the campaign materials were left by the candidates or their non-arm’s length party. The election staff endeavour to remove all campaign materials from the stations continuously throughout the voting period. This is a difficult task as stations are often overwhelmed with voters. Voters are reminded by candidates and elections staff to not leave flyers lying around. No demerit points will be issued in response to this complaint.�� Date: March 10, 2012� Time: 3:48PM

189

FINAL REPORT OF THE CHIEF RETURNING OFFICER University of Toronto Students’ Union Spring 2011 Elections Submitted by: Daniel Lo, Chief Returning Officer Friday March 30, 2012

35

CRO Ruling 045 A complaint was filed on March 8, 2012, alleging that Mr. Shaun Shepherd committed a violation of Article VI (3)(i)(viii) and Article VI (3)(i) of the EPC. The complaint alleges Mr. Shaun Shepherd’s posters were posted within 1 foot of another one of his own posters.

�The C.R.O. has investigated and determined that there is insufficient evidence to allege a breach of Article VI (3)(i)(viii) and Article VI (3)(i) of the EPC. Upon further investigation, it appears that similar postering violations may be linked to a string of malicious and intentional attacks at Mr. Shaun Shepherd by unknown parties. These incidences will be noted in future postering violation allegations. �

No demerit points will be issued to in response to this complaint.�� Date: March 10, 2012 Time: 3:53PM CRO Ruling 046 A complaint was filed on March 8, 2012, alleging that members of team Unity committed a violation of Article VI (3)(i) and Article VI (1)(s)(ii) of the EPC. The complaint revolves around certain team Unity flyers within Gerstein Library.

�The C.R.O. has investigated and determined that there is insufficient evidence to find a violation of Article VI (3)(i) and Article VI (1)(s)(ii) of the EPC. Though the C.R.O. acknowledges that there were campaign materials at the library, there was insufficient evidence to show that the campaign materials were left by the candidates or their non-arm’s length party. The election staff endeavour to remove all campaign materials from the unauthorized areas continuously throughout the voting period. Voters are reminded by candidates and elections staff to not leave flyers lying around.

No demerit points will be issued to in response to this complaint.� Date: March 10, 2012 Time: 3:57PM CRO Ruling 047 A complaint was filed on March 8, 2012, alleging that members of team Unity committed a violation of Article VI (3)(i) and Article VI (1)(s)(i) of the EPC. The complaint revolves around certain team Unity flyers within Trinity Residences.

�The C.R.O. has investigated and determined that there is insufficient evidence to find a violation of Article VI (3)(i) and Article VI (1)(s)(i) of the EPC. Though the

190

FINAL REPORT OF THE CHIEF RETURNING OFFICER University of Toronto Students’ Union Spring 2011 Elections Submitted by: Daniel Lo, Chief Returning Officer Friday March 30, 2012

36

C.R.O. acknowledges that there were campaign materials at the library, there was insufficient evidence to show that the campaign materials were left by the candidates or their non-arm’s length party. Voters are reminded by candidates and elections staff to not leave flyers lying around. Upon further investigation, it appears that similar EPC violations may be linked to a string of malicious and intentional attacks at Mr. Shaun Shepherd by unknown parties. These incidences will be noted in future EPC violation allegations. �

No demerit points will be issued to in response to this complaint.� Date: March 10, 2012 Time: 4:00PM CRO Ruling 048 A complaint was filed on March 8, 2012, alleging that members of team Unity violated of Article VI (1)(l)(ii) of the EPC. The complaint alleges that executive candidates of Team Unity wrote a blackboard announcement in a class without the permission of the professor/lecturer. �The C.R.O. has investigated and determined that there is sufficient evidence to find a violation of Article VI (1)(l)(ii) of the EPC. Despite obtaining the requisite consent from certain professors/lecturers of the classroom in question, the material on the blackboard should have been moderated for classes at later times, where consent was not obtained from other professors/lecturers. � 2 demerit points will be issued to the following candidates in response to this complaint: Shaun Shepherd, Presidential candidate Noor Baig, VP Equity candidate Munib Sajjad, VP University Affairs candidate Abigail Cudjoe, VP External candidate Corey Scott, VP Internal and Services candidate Date: March 10, 2012 Time: 4:30PM CRO Ruling 049 A complaint was filed on March 8, 2012, alleging that Ms. Kriti Bhatt and members of team Unity violated Article VI(1)(d), Article VI (1)(j)(i) and Article VI (1)(j)(ii) of the EPC. The complaint alleges that Ms. Kriti Bhatt declared that she was not a part of the Unity slate, however she continued to be on team Unity literature.

�The C.R.O. has investigated and determined that there is insufficient evidence

191

FINAL REPORT OF THE CHIEF RETURNING OFFICER University of Toronto Students’ Union Spring 2011 Elections Submitted by: Daniel Lo, Chief Returning Officer Friday March 30, 2012

37

to find a violation of Article VI(1)(d), Article VI (1)(j)(i) and Article VI (1)(j)(ii) of the EPC. Ms. Kriti Bhatt confirmed that she was a part of team Unity.

No demerit points will be issued in response to this complaint.

Date: March 10, 2012 Time: 4:40PM CRO Ruling 050 A complaint was filed on March 8, 2012, alleging that members of team Unity committed a violation of Article VI (1)(n)(ii) of the EPC. The complaint alleges that Team Unity placed campaign material within 6 meters of a polling station.

�The C.R.O. has investigated and determined that there is insufficient evidence to find a violation of Article VI (1)(n)(ii) of the EPC. Though the C.R.O. acknowledges that there were campaign materials around the polling station, there was insufficient evidence to show that the campaign materials were left by the candidates or their non-arm’s length party. The election staff endeavoured to remove all campaign materials from the unauthorized areas continuously throughout the voting period. Voters are reminded by candidates and elections staff to not leave flyers lying around.

No demerit points will be issued to in response to this complaint. Date: March 10, 2012 Time: 4:45PM CRO Ruling 051 A complaint was filed on March 8, 2012, alleging that members of team Unity committed a violation of Article VI (1)(s) of the EPC. The complaint alleges that Team Unity distributed campaign material within 6 meters of a student residence.

�The C.R.O. has investigated and determined that there is insufficient evidence to find a violation of Article VI (1)(s) of the EPC. Though the C.R.O. acknowledges that there were campaign materials inside student residences, there is insufficient evidence to show that the campaign materials were left by the candidates or their non-arm’s length party. The election staff endeavoured to remove all campaign materials from the unauthorized areas continuously throughout the voting period.

No demerit points will be issued to in response to this complaint.� Date: March 10, 2012 Time: 4:55PM

192

FINAL REPORT OF THE CHIEF RETURNING OFFICER University of Toronto Students’ Union Spring 2011 Elections Submitted by: Daniel Lo, Chief Returning Officer Friday March 30, 2012

38

CRO Ruling 052 A complaint was filed on March 8, 2012, alleging that members of team Unity committed a violation of Article VI (1)(n)(ii) of the EPC. The complaint alleges that Team Unity placed campaign material within 6 meters of a polling station.

�The C.R.O. has investigated and determined that there is insufficient evidence to find a violation of Article VI (1)(n)(ii) of the EPC. Though the C.R.O. acknowledges that there were campaign materials around the polling station, there was insufficient evidence to show that the campaign materials were left by the candidates or their non-arm’s length party. The election staff endeavoured to remove all campaign materials from the unauthorized areas continuously throughout the voting period. Voters are reminded by candidates and elections staff to not leave flyers lying around.

No demerit points will be issued to in response to this complaint.�

Date: March 10, 2012� Time: 4:40PM CRO Ruling 053 A complaint was filed on March 8th 2012, alleging that members of Team Unity violated Article VI (1)i) of the EPC by displaying campaign materials that overlap other campaign materials. The complaint alleges that a banner hung outside of the Sidney Smith building overlaps Students First posters, as well as other Team unity posters.

The C.R.O. has investigated and determined that the banner is not in violation of the EPC in regards to its obstruction of other Team Unity campaign materials as its placement was authorized by Team Unity. However, based on evidence provided and the D.R.O.’s observations, the banner was in violation of the EPC as it overlapped, and obstructed the view of other candidates campaign materials.

As a result, 5 demerit points will be issued to all Team Unity members featured on the banner in response to this complaint.

Kevin Lunianga – 5 points Sanchit Mathur – 5 points Mo Delwar – 5 points Dimpho Radebe – 5 points Ali Mustafa Bello – 5 points Baliqis Hashiru – 5 points Khalid Khan – 5 points Madiha Choksi – 5 points

193

FINAL REPORT OF THE CHIEF RETURNING OFFICER University of Toronto Students’ Union Spring 2011 Elections Submitted by: Daniel Lo, Chief Returning Officer Friday March 30, 2012

39

Kathleen Qu – 5 points Vere-Marie Khan – 5 points Kriti Bhatt – 5 points �Date: March 10, 2012 �Time: 4:30PM CRO Ruling 054

A complaint was filed on March 8th 2012, alleging that a non-arm’s length party to Mr. Shaun Shepherd displayed campaign material in an unauthorized area on campus. Specifically, Sammy’s Student Exchange located in Hart House, an establishment that serves alcohol, which contravenes Article VI (1)(l)(iii) of the EPC.

The C.R.O. has investigated and determined that the group “UofTathletes4shep” and their twitter account @athletes4shep along with their “I love the blues” campaign can be classified as a non-arm’s length party. Under Article VI (1)(c) candidates have the responsibility of the actions and violations stemming from such actions, of any non-arm’s length party, however occurring.

�As a result, 5 demerit points will be issued to presidential candidate Mr. Shaun Shepherd in response to this complaint.�� Date: March 10, 2012� Time: 3:45PM CRO Ruling 055 A complaint was filed on March 2nd, 2012, alleging that Mr. Shaun Shepherd committed an intentional misrepresentation of fact as written in Article VI(3)(j)(i). The appellant the statement “I want to acknowledge that we are actually settlers on unceded territories of the Mississaugas of the New Credit First Nation.” made by Mr. Shaun Shepherd at the All Candidates Debate on February 29, 2012 was false and misleading, because the land was indeed ceded by the Mississaugas of New Credit First Nation.�The CRO has investigated and determined that there are no grounds to allege a breach of Article VI(3)(j)(i). The statement was made merely out of respect for the Mississaugas of New Credit First Nation, it was not a campaign tactic or method by Mr. Shaun Shepherd. �� No demerit points will be issued for this complaint �� Date: Tuesday, March 13, 2012 � Time: 5:30PM

194

FINAL REPORT OF THE CHIEF RETURNING OFFICER University of Toronto Students’ Union Spring 2011 Elections Submitted by: Daniel Lo, Chief Returning Officer Friday March 30, 2012

40

CRO Ruling 056 A complaint was filed on March 10th 2012, alleging that Shaun Shepherd committed an intentional misrepresentation of fact as written in Article VI (3)(j) of the EPC. The complaint alleges that in Mr. Shepherd’s opening statement, his claim that “we have… secured a new provincial grant system for students.” is untrue. The claim revolves around the Ontario Liberal Party platform and a publication released by the Ontario Undergraduate Student Alliance and the College Student Alliance, which the complainant claims had already considered first-entry professional students into the tuition grant scheme. ��The C.R.O. has investigated and determined that the statement is not a misrepresentation of fact as the Unity slate provided evidence contrary to the complainant’s allegations. Futhermore additional evidence was provided to prove that members of Team Unity did in fact successfully lobby the provincial government with other students’ unions across Ontario to extend the tuition grant to first-entry professional students. ��As a result, no demerit points will be issued in response to this complaint.

��Date: March 10, 2012� Time: 3:30PM CRO Ruling 057 A complaint was filed on March 10th, 2012, alleging that members of the Unity slate committed an intentional misrepresentation of fact as written in Article VI(3)(j)(i). The appellant alleges that under “Victories This Year” on a page of the Vote Unity website, the Unity slate states, “Won an increase to the Ontario Student Opportunity Grant (OSOG)”. The appellant alleges that this claim was false and misleading, because the individual portion of the OSOG has not increased from 2010-2011 to 2011-2012.��The CRO has investigated and determined that there is insufficient evidence to allege a breach of Article VI(3)(j)(i). ��

No demerit points will be issued for this complaint.��

Date: Saturday, March 10th, 2012� Time: 3:15 PM CRO Ruling 058 A complaint was filed on March 14th, 2012, alleging that members of the Unity slate violated Article VI(1)(i)(ix) of the EPC. The appellant alleges that under campaign materials in the form of Youtube campaign videos have not been removed within 48 hours after the close of the voting period.

�The CRO has investigated and determined that there is sufficient evidence to

195

FINAL REPORT OF THE CHIEF RETURNING OFFICER University of Toronto Students’ Union Spring 2011 Elections Submitted by: Daniel Lo, Chief Returning Officer Friday March 30, 2012

41

allege a breach of Article VI(1)(i)(ix) of the EPC��.

1 demerit point will be issued to all members of the Unity slate for this complaint.

Date: Friday, March 23rd, 2012 �Time: 9:00 AM

196

FINAL REPORT OF THE CHIEF RETURNING OFFICER University of Toronto Students’ Union Spring 2011 Elections Submitted by: Daniel Lo, Chief Returning Officer Friday March 30, 2012

42

Appendix B – ERC Rulings 001-021

ERC Ruling 001 A “request to review” was filed by Mo Delwar, on February 26th, 2012 at 5:49 PM, regarding his ineligibility to run as a candidate for the Engineering Board of Director position in the 2012 U.T.S.U. General Elections. Mr. Delwar was initially deemed ineligible to run as a candidate, because, as a Professional Experience Year student in the Faculty of Applied Science and Engineering, he was not a current member of the Union during the nomination period. The Elections and Referenda Committee (ERC) have reviewed his “request to review” and have found Mo Delwar ineligible to run as a candidate in the 2012 U.T.S.U. General Elections. Based on the financial information submitted by the candidate, regarding incidental fee payments, the ERC found he did not pay full-time membership fees to the U.T.S.U. for 2011-2012. The candidate was not a full-time undergraduate student, and thus not a member of the Union, during the nomination period (February 13th - 22nd, 2012) of this election. The Elections Procedure Code clearly states in Article III, Section 2, b. under "Candidate Eligibility" that "All candidates in the Spring Election must be members of the Union during the nomination period". Furthermore, membership of the U.T.S.U is explicitly defined in the Union's bylaws, under Bylaw II, Section 1, "Members". Since Mr. Delwar was not a member of the Union during the nomination period, the ERC has found him ineligible to run as a candidate in this election. Furthermore, in response to the candidate’s allegations that a precedent was set where Professional Experience Year (PEY) students were granted the eligibility to run as candidates in U.T.S.U. Elections, the ERC referred to the past ERC minutes of its Thursday, March 4th, 2010 meeting and found that a motion was carried to permit PEY students to run in the 2010 U.T.S.U. General Elections. The ERC found that a main justification for the motion was based on the assumption that the University of Toronto had deemed PEY students as full-time undergraduate students who could run as eligible candidates in the 2010 Governing Council elections. However, upon further investigation, the ERC found that the Governing Council "Election Guidelines 2010" did not state anywhere the consideration of PEY students as full-time undergraduate students, and thus did not recognize PEY students as eligible candidates for that constituency. With regards to the evidence presented above, the ERC determined that the

197

FINAL REPORT OF THE CHIEF RETURNING OFFICER University of Toronto Students’ Union Spring 2011 Elections Submitted by: Daniel Lo, Chief Returning Officer Friday March 30, 2012

43

precedent set by the March 4th, 2010, ERC Meeting motion on "PEY Students" could not be considered valid, because the decision was based on false information. For reference purposes: Governing Council Meeting, Dec 10th, 2009 (pg. 8 – 11): http://www.governingcouncil.utoronto.ca/Assets/Governing+Council+Digital+Assets/Boards+and+Committees/Governing+Council/2009-2010+Academic+Year/r1210.pdf Governing Council Election Guidelines 2010: http://www.governingcouncil.utoronto.ca/AssetFactory.aspx?did=6495 Date: Sunday, February 26th, 2012 Time: 9:46 PM

ERC Ruling 002 An appeal of CRO Ruling 003 was filed on March 2, 2012, alleging that members of the Unity slate committed an intentional misrepresentation of fact as written in Article VI(3)(j)(i). The appellant alleges that under “Victories This Year” on a page of the Vote Unity website, the Unity slate states “Successfully lobbied for free access to Varsity and Athletic Centre space for UTSU-recognized clubs”, and that this claim was false and misleading, because access to student space is not afforded to UTSU-recognized clubs, but afforded to clubs recognized by the Office of Student Life. The ERC has investigated this appeal and determined that there is sufficient evidence to allege a breach of Article VI(3)(j)(i) of the EPC. The statement “Successfully lobbied for free access to Varsity and Athletic Centre space for UTSU-recognized clubs” suggests that UTSU-recognized clubs can freely access the Varsity and Athletic Centre space. However, campus groups must apply through a separate process for recognition from the Office of Student Life (OSL), in order to access such facilities. In short, one must primarily be an OSL-recognized club, not an UTSU-recognized club, in order to receive privileged access to booking Varsity and Athletic Centre space. The statement is misleading because it implies that having only UTSU-recognition can afford those student clubs special booking privileges to the Varsity and Athletic Centre, when booking the space is regulated by the University and granted through the Office of Student Life. Furthermore, the current U.T.S.U. Clubs Policy does not require student groups

198

FINAL REPORT OF THE CHIEF RETURNING OFFICER University of Toronto Students’ Union Spring 2011 Elections Submitted by: Daniel Lo, Chief Returning Officer Friday March 30, 2012

44

to be OSL-recognized in order to be eligible for UTSU clubs recognition, although it is an internal practice to recommended clubs to be OSL-recognized before seeking UTSUrecognition. Thus, the statement is an unintentional misrepresentation of fact. 3 demerit points will be issued to all candidates of Team Unity for unintentional misrepresentation of fact, as all members are featured on the Team Unity website and would thus collectively benefit from the website’s content as campaign material for their position. Date: Monday, March 5th, 2012 Time: 11:35 PM

ERC Ruling 003 An appeal of CRO Ruling 007 was filed on March 2nd, 2012, alleging that members of the Unity slate committed an intentional misrepresentation of fact as written in Article VI(3)(j)(i). The appellant alleges that under “Victories This Year” on a page of the Vote Unity website, the Unity slate states, “Hosted an affordable Unity Ball Semi-Formal”. Scott alleges that this claim was false and misleading, because a Unity Ball had not yet been held when the statement was released on February 27th, 2012. The Unity Ball event was held on March 1st, 2012, of the 2011 – 2012 executive term. The ERC has investigated and determined there is insufficient evidence to allege a breach of Article VI(3)(j)(i). The ERC upholds the CRO Ruling 007. No demerit points will be issued for this appeal. Date: Monday, March 5th, 2012 Time: 11:35 PM ERC Ruling 004 An appeal of CRO Ruling 002 was filed on March 2nd, 2012, alleging that members of the Unity slate committed an intentional misrepresentation of fact as written in Article VI(1)(i)(vii). The appellant alleges that under “Victories This Year” on a page of the Vote Unity website, the Unity slate states, “Successfully lobbied to expand tuition grant eligibility to include first-entry professional students”, and that this claim was false and misleading, because the Ontario Liberal Party had not indicted that the tuition grant would not be applicable to first-entry professional students, when they launched their platform on September 5th, 2011, for the provincial elections.

199

FINAL REPORT OF THE CHIEF RETURNING OFFICER University of Toronto Students’ Union Spring 2011 Elections Submitted by: Daniel Lo, Chief Returning Officer Friday March 30, 2012

45

The ERC has investigated this appeal and determined that there is sufficient evidence to allege a breach of Article VI (1)(i)(i) of the EPC. The statement “Successfully lobbied to expand tuition grant eligibility to include first-entry professional students” suggests that candidates running as part of Team Unity, were able to expand the tuition grant eligibility to include first-entry professional students, because of their successful lobbying efforts. However, this is under the assumption that first-entry professional students were not initially eligible for the grant. In evidence presented by the appellant, student organizations such as Ontario Undergraduate Students’ Alliance (OUSA) and the College Students’ Alliance (CSA) had issued a post on September 15th, 2011, advertising that the proposed grant would include first-entry professional students (http://www.ousa.ca/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/Blog-Everything-you- wanted-to-know-about-tuition-and-financial-aid.pdf). As well, evidence was presented that Tanya Blazine, a spokesperson for the Ministry of Training, Colleges, and Universities, stated “The intention has always been that students enrolled in first entry professional programs such as nursing or engineering would qualify for an Ontario Tuition Grant if they meet the other eligibility criteria as well, such as being four years or less out of high school and their family income being less that[sic] $160,000 a year” (http://theeyeopener.com/2011/11/setting-the-record-straight/). In conclusion, it appears that the statement “Successfully lobbied to expand tuition grant eligibility to include first-entry professional students” is a misrepresentation of fact, because first-entry professional students were not initially excluded from being eligible for the tuition grant, and thus, the grant could not be “expanded” to include first-entry professional students as eligible applicants. 3 demerit points will be issued to all candidates of Team Unity for unintentional misrepresentation of fact, as all members are featured on the Team Unity website and would thus collectively benefit from the website’s content as campaign material for their position. Date: Monday, March 5th, 2012 Time: 11:35 PM

ERC Ruling 005

An appeal of CRO Ruling 004 was filed on March 2nd, 2012, alleging that members of the Unity slate committed an intentional misrepresentation of fact as written in Article VI(3)(j)(i). The appellant alleges that under “Victories This Year” on a page of the Vote Unity website, the Unity slate states, “Increased clubs funding”. The appellant alleges that this claim is false and misleading, because of

200

FINAL REPORT OF THE CHIEF RETURNING OFFICER University of Toronto Students’ Union Spring 2011 Elections Submitted by: Daniel Lo, Chief Returning Officer Friday March 30, 2012

46

discrepancies between the line items in the Audited Financial Statements and the Operating Budget, that would suggest a decrease in clubs funding. Through an investigation of past club cheques written in 2010-2011, emails provided by former club executives confirming receipt of allocated clubs funding in 2010-2011, and an internal clubs funding document provided by the Union office (showing breakdowns and totals of summer funding, long term funding, short term funding for 2010-2011/2011-2012), the evidence shows that $137,004.50 was allocated in clubs funding in 2010 – 2011, and $131,233.33 has been allocated in clubs funding in 2011-2012. The difference in clubs funding is a difference of $5771.17, a decrease from 2010-2011 to 2011-2012. In light of this information, the ERC has determined there is sufficient evidence to allege a breach of Article VI(3)(j)(i). Since members of Team Unity were and are involved extensively in the operations of the Union, the Unity slate knew or ought reasonably to have known that the statement is false and misleading. Thus, the statement constitutes a severe intentional misrepresentation of fact. 10 demerit points will be issued to all candidates of Team Unity for intentional misrepresentation of fact, as all members are featured on the Team Unity website and would thus collectively benefit from the website’s content as campaign material for their positions sought. Date: Thursday, March 8th, 2012 Time: 12:30 AM

ERC Ruling 006 An appeal of CRO Ruling 010 was filed on March 4th, 2012, alleging that members of the Unity slate committed an intentional misrepresentation of fact as written in Article VI(3)(j)(i). The appellant alleges that under “Victories This Year” on a page of the Vote Unity website, the Unity slate states, “Hosted Winter Clubs Day as a part of Winter Clubs Week 2011”. The appellant alleges that this claim was false and misleading, because there is no year (academic, calendar, or solar) which incorporates both Winter Clubs Day, which occurred in January 2011 and the U.T.S.U. campaigning period in the 2012 elections. The ERC has investigated this appeal and determined there is insufficient evidence to allege a breach of Article VI(3)(j)(i). The ERC upholds CRO Ruling 010. No demerit points will be issued for this appeal.

201

FINAL REPORT OF THE CHIEF RETURNING OFFICER University of Toronto Students’ Union Spring 2011 Elections Submitted by: Daniel Lo, Chief Returning Officer Friday March 30, 2012

47

Date: Thursday, March 8th, 2012 Time: 12:30 AM ERC Ruling 007 An appeal of CRO Ruling 013 was filed on March 4th, 2012, alleging that members of the Unity slate committed an intentional misrepresentation of fact as written in Article VI(3)(j)(i). The appellant alleges that under “Victories This Year” on a page of the Vote Unity website, the Unity slate states, “Won an interest-free period on OSAP for 6 months after graduation”. The appellant alleges that this claim is false and misleading, because the interest-free period was introduced on August 1, 2010, and thus is not a “victory this year”. The ERC has investigated this appeal and determined there is sufficient evidence to allege a breach of Article VI(3)(j)(i). On the OSAP website, it states “If you complete your studies on or after August 1, 2010, your Ontario Student Loan will be payment and interest-free during your 6-month grace period.” (https://osap.gov.ca/OSAPPortal/en/PlanYourEducation/ConsiderRepaymentObligations/index.htm) Since the interest-free period on OSAP for 6 months after graduation was introduced on August 1, 2010, before the 2011-2012 U.T.S.U. executive term, the statement could not constitute a “victory” for Team Unity this year. Since members of Team Unity were and are involved extensively in the operations of the Union, the Unity slate knew or ought reasonably to have known that the statement is false and misleading. Thus, the statement constitutes an intentional misrepresentation of fact. 5 demerit points will be issued to all candidates of Team Unity for intentional misrepresentation of fact, as all members are featured on the Team Unity website and would thus collectively benefit from the website’s content as campaign material for their positions sought. Date: Thursday, March 8th, 2012 Time: 12:30 AM ERC Ruling 008 An appeal of CRO Ruling 019 was filed on March 4th, 2012, alleging that members of the Unity slate committed an intentional misrepresentation of fact as written in Article VI(3)(j)(i). The appellant alleges that under “Victories This Year” on a page of the Vote Unity website, the Unity slate states, “Won an increase to the Ontario Student Opportunity Grant (OSOG)”. The appellant alleges that this claim was false and misleading, because the individual portion of the OSOG has

202

FINAL REPORT OF THE CHIEF RETURNING OFFICER University of Toronto Students’ Union Spring 2011 Elections Submitted by: Daniel Lo, Chief Returning Officer Friday March 30, 2012

48

not increased from 2010-2011 to 2011-2012. The ERC has investigated this appeal and determined there is insufficient evidence to allege a breach of Article VI(3)(j)(i). The ERC upholds CRO Ruling 019. No demerit points will be issued for this appeal. Date: Thursday, March 8th, 2012 Time: 12:30 AM ERC Ruling 009 An appeal of CRO Ruling 020 was filed on March 6th, 2012, alleging that the number of demerit points against Mr. Corey Scott should be increased for committing an intentional misrepresentation of fact as written in Article VI(3)(j). The appellant alleges the statement “So like I think the wage that currently exists right now is a fair one, it’s below the actual poverty line” made by Mr. Scott at the All-Candidates Debate on February 29th, 2012, is false and misleading. The appellant also alleges that for the CRO to use the comparison of executive net salary (2012) to the Low-Income Cut Off (LICO) for gross income in 2010, understates the actual difference between the U.T.S.U. executive salary (2012) and the LICO (2012), is thus, a factually inaccurate ruling. The ERC has investigated this appeal and determined there is insufficient evidence to allege a more severe breach of Article VI(3)(j). The ERC upholds the CRO Ruling 020. Date: Thursday, March 8th, 2012 Time: 12:30 AM ERC Ruling 010 Appeals of CRO Ruling 015 were filed on March 4th, 2012. The appellants alleged that CRO Ruling 015 was unwarranted, because individuals who were holding signs at the All-Candidates Debate could not be verified as non-arm’s length supporters of Students First or independent candidate, Rohail Tanoli, and that Students First could not be responsible for the actions of every party on campus. Students First expressed that they were not supportive of many of the sentiments expressed by such individuals. Students First has also publically stated that they are unaffiliated with the signs that were displayed at the All-Candidates Meeting on February 29th, 2012.

The ERC has investigated this appeal and determined there is insufficient

203

FINAL REPORT OF THE CHIEF RETURNING OFFICER University of Toronto Students’ Union Spring 2011 Elections Submitted by: Daniel Lo, Chief Returning Officer Friday March 30, 2012

49

evidence for Students First and independent candidate, Rohail Tanoli, to allege a breach of Article VI(1)(f). The ERC overturns CRO Ruling 015.

No demerit points will be issued for this appeal.

Date: Thursday, March 8th, 2012

Time: 12:30 AM

ERC Ruling 011 An appeal of CRO Ruling 016 was filed on March 4th, 2012. The appellants alleged that Students First was not responsible for the poster created and posted on the “Students for Democracy at U of T” Facebook page, and that the creators of the poster are unknown. The appellants alleged that members of Students First disavowed the poster, because they found it offensive. The ERC has investigated this appeal and determined there is insufficient evidence for Students First to allege a breach of Article VI(1)(d). The ERC overturns CRO Ruling 016. No demerit points will be issued for this appeal. Date: Thursday, March 8th, 2012 Time: 12:30 AM ERC Ruling 012 Appeals of CRO Ruling 017 were filed on March 4th, 2012. The appellants alleged that members of Students First had requested that individuals at the All-Candidates Debate to “quiet down” and respect the speakers. Independent candidate, Rohail Tanoli, also requested the audience be more respectful of speakers.

The ERC has investigated this appeal and determined there is insufficient evidence for Students First and independent candidate, Rohail Tanoli, to allege a breach of Article VI(1)(d). The ERC overturns CRO Ruling 017.

No demerit points will be issued for this appeal. Date: Thursday, March 8th, 2012 Time: 12:30 AM ERC Ruling 013 An appeal of CRO Ruling 018 was filed on March 4th, 2012. Under Article VI(1)(d)

204

FINAL REPORT OF THE CHIEF RETURNING OFFICER University of Toronto Students’ Union Spring 2011 Elections Submitted by: Daniel Lo, Chief Returning Officer Friday March 30, 2012

50

deals with rules of fair play concerning candidates and the authority of the CRO and/or Elections Committee. The appellants alleged that Mr. Boissoneault’s (non-arms’ length party supporter of Students First) comments concerning the Canadian Federation of Students, which is neither a slate of candidates in this election, nor key to the maintenance of the authority of the CRO or the Elections Committee, cannot be considered a violation of fair play. The ERC has investigated this appeal and determined there is insufficient evidence for Students First to allege a breach of Article VI(1)(d). A non-arms’ length party supporter’s implications that an external organization was responsible for the Twitter scandal involving Mr. Brett Chang is not relevant to nor does it violate the rules of fair play in these elections. The ERC overturns CRO Ruling 018. No demerit points will be issued for this appeal. Date: Thursday, March 8th, 2012

Time: 12:30 AM ERC Ruling 014

An appeal of CRO Ruling 028 was filed on March 9th, 2012, alleging that Baliqis Hashiru, Khalid Khan, and Ali Mustafa Bello committed multiple violations in the same building as written in Article VI(3)(j)(i). The appellant alleges that Baliqis Hashiru, Khalid Khan, and Ali Mustafa Bello each had posters up within 6 metres of three separate entrances to the Wilson Hall Residence; the 2nd floor West entrance, the 2nd floor East entrance, and the 1st floor East entrance, which constitutes multiple violations of Article VI(1)(s)(i) within the same building. Furthermore, the appellant alleges that another complaint of Baliqis Hashiru, Khalid Khan, and Ali Mustafa Bello having posters up within six (6) metres of the Chestnut Residence entrance, should not have been amalgamated into CRO Ruling 28 after the ruling had been posted and since the violation occurred in a separate building. The ERC has investigated this appeal and determined there is sufficient evidence to allege a breach of Article VI(1)(s)(i) and committing Article VI(3)(j)(i) for “Multiple violations in the same building” and “Displaying campaign materials in an unauthorized area”. Baliqis Hashiru, Khalid Khan, and Ali Mustafa Bello are found to have committed multiple violations within the same building by putting posters in three (3) unauthorized areas, that is within six (6) metres of three (3) separate entrances to the Wilson Hall residence as per Article VI(1)(s)(i) “Campaigning is not allowed within six (6) metres of a Student Residence”.

205

FINAL REPORT OF THE CHIEF RETURNING OFFICER University of Toronto Students’ Union Spring 2011 Elections Submitted by: Daniel Lo, Chief Returning Officer Friday March 30, 2012

51

Furthermore, Baliqis Hashiru, Khalid Khan, and Ali Mustafa Bello displayed campaign materials in an unauthorized area of a different building (within six (6) metres of Chestnut Residence entrance), and this violation warrants being addressed separately rather than amalgamated with a complaint regarding violations in Wilson Hall Residence in CRO Ruling 028. Hence, Baliqis Hashiru, Khalid Khan, and Ali Mustafa Bello are found to have violated Article VI(1)(s)(i) of the EPC “Campaigning is not allowed within six (6) metres of a Student Residence”. 4 demerit points will be issued to Baliqis Hashiru, Khalid Khan, and Ali Mustafa Bello for committing multiple violations of Article VI(3)(j)(i)(iv) within the same building (Wilson Hall Residence). 5 points will be issued to Baliqis Hashiru, Khalid Khan, and Ali Mustafa Bello for displaying campaign materials in an unauthorized area by having posters within six (6) metres of the Chestnut student residence. Date: Friday, March 23rd, 2012 Time: 10:14 PM

ERC Ruling 015

An appeal of CRO Ruling 031 was filed on March 7th, 2012, alleging that members of Team Unity did not breach Article VI(1)(n)(ii) of the EPC: “No campaign materials shall be placed within six (6) metres or clearly visible to an assigned polling station during voting days”. This infraction allegedly took place at Sidney Smith, whereby a poster attached to a side of a flyer box underneath a table was clearly visible to a polling station during voting days. The appellants allege that this incident was a minor oversight and would have been difficult to catch early on because the box was hidden underneath the table. The ERC has investigated this appeal and determined there is sufficient evidence to find a violation of Article VI(1)(n)(ii) of the EPC. The ERC upholds CRO Ruling 31. Date: Friday, March 23rd, 2012 Time: 10:14 PM

ERC Ruling 016

An appeal of CRO Ruling 055 was filed on March 15th, 2012, alleging that Shaun Shepherd made a claim that was false and misleading, and constituted an intentional misrepresentation of fact. The appellant alleges that in Mr. Shepherd’s opening statement, during the 2012 UTSU Executive All-Candidates Debate, he

206

FINAL REPORT OF THE CHIEF RETURNING OFFICER University of Toronto Students’ Union Spring 2011 Elections Submitted by: Daniel Lo, Chief Returning Officer Friday March 30, 2012

52

said, “I want to acknowledge that we are actually settlers on unceded territories of the Mississaugas of the New Credit First Nation,” which is a false and thus misleading statement, because a settlement was reached in 2010. Furthermore, the appellant alleges that the statement constitutes campaign material of the Team Unity Campaign. The ERC has investigated this appeal and determined there is insufficient evidence to find a breach of Article VI(3)(j). The ERC finds that Mr. Shepherd made the statement in respect and thus, upholds CRO Ruling 055. Date: Friday, March 23rd, 2012 Time: 10:14 PM

ERC Ruling 017

An appeal of CRO Ruling 056 was filed on March 12th, 2012, alleging that Mr. Shaun Shepherd made claims that were false and misleading and constituted an intentional misrepresentation of fact. The appellant alleges that during the 2012 UTSU Executive All-Candidates Debate, Mr. Shepherd said, “We have… secured a new provincial grant system for students,” and that elsewhere in the debate, Mr. Shepherd alleged that the grant would not have included first entry professional students as originally proposed and that members of Unity successfully lobbied to expand the grant eligibility to include first entry professional students. The appellant alleges that the members of Unity slate had no significant impact on the development of the tuition grant, because it was constructed in a series of consultations before the “Take It Over” campaign. Further, the appellant alleges that Mr. Shepherd’s claim that members of Unity successfully lobbied and expanded the grant eligibility to include first entry professional students is false, as supported by evidence. The ERC has investigated this appeal and determined there is insufficient evidence to find a breach of Article VI(3)(j). The ERC overturns CRO Ruling 056 due to insufficient evidence that the Unity slate expanded the grant eligibility to include first entry professional students, as a result of successful lobbying efforts. However, no demerit points will be assigned due to lack of evidence for the allegation that Unity did not take any part in contributing towards the development of the grant and lack of video evidence for Shaun’s statement regarding successfully lobbying to include first-entry professional students in the tuition grant. Date: Friday, March 23rd, 2012 Time: 10:14 PM

207

FINAL REPORT OF THE CHIEF RETURNING OFFICER University of Toronto Students’ Union Spring 2011 Elections Submitted by: Daniel Lo, Chief Returning Officer Friday March 30, 2012

53

ERC Ruling 018

An appeal of CRO Ruling 037 was filed on March 19th, 2012, alleging that there is sufficient evidence to find the Unity slate in violation of Article VI(1)(s)(ii) of the EPC. The appellant alleges that there were campaign materials placed in Graham Library, which is in contravention of “campaigning and campaign materials are not allowed within six (6) metres of a Library”. The appellant alleges that the standard established by the ruling is prohibitively high, as it requires complainants to have photographic evidence of the flyers as they are being distributed. The ERC has investigated this appeal and determined that there is insufficient evidence to find a breach of Article VI(1)(s)(ii) of the EPC. The ERC upholds CRO Ruling 037. Date: Friday, March 23rd, 2012 Time: 10:14 PM

ERC Ruling 019

An appeal of CRO Rulings 43, 45, 46, 47, and 51 was submitted on March 11th, 2012, alleging that there is sufficient evidence demonstrating that Mr. Shaun Shepherd has breached Article VI(1)(i)(vii), Article(3)(i)(vii), Article VI(3)(i), Article VI(1)(s)(ii), and Article VI(1)(s)(i). The ERC has investigated this appeal and determined there is insufficient evidence to find a breach of Article VI(1)(i)(vii), Article(3)(i)(vii), Article VI(3)(i), Article VI(1)(s)(ii), and Article VI(1)(s)(i) by Mr. Shepherd. There is insufficient evidence to show that the campaign materials were left by Team Unity candidates or their non-arm’s length parties. The ERC upholds CRO Rulings 43, 45, 46, 47, and 51. Date: Friday, March 23rd, 2012 Time: 10:14 PM

ERC Ruling 020

An appeal of CRO Ruling 054 was submitted on March 11th, 2012, alleging that the materials distributed by “UofTAthletes4Shep”, a non-arms length party of Mr. Shepherd, constitute a violation of Article VI(1)(f) “All campaign materials need approval by the CRO in advance of posting or distribution”. The ERC has investigated this appeal and determined there is insufficient evidence to find a breach of Article(1)(f). Team Unity made a statement to the

208

FINAL REPORT OF THE CHIEF RETURNING OFFICER University of Toronto Students’ Union Spring 2011 Elections Submitted by: Daniel Lo, Chief Returning Officer Friday March 30, 2012

54

CRO that they were unaffiliated with UofTAthletes4Shep, and that any material produced by the aforementioned group was not authorized or distributed by any member of Team Unity. No demerit points will be assigned in response to this appeal. Date: Friday, March 23rd, 2012 Time: 10:14 PM

ERC Ruling 02

An appeal of CRO Ruling 057 was submitted on March 12th, 2012, alleging that members of Team Unity had committed an intentional misrepresentation of fact as written in Article VI(3)(j)(i). The appellant alleges that under “Victories This Year” on a page of the Vote Unity website, the Unity slate states, “Won an increase to the Ontario Student Opportunity Grant (OSOG)”. The appellant alleges that this claim is false and misleading because the OSOG was introduced in 2010, and thus was not a “victory this year”. The ERC has investigated this appeal and determined there is sufficient evidence to allege a breach of Article VI(3)(j)(i). On the Ministry of Training, Colleges and Universities website, a press release dated “March 29th, 2010; 9:50AM” states that “The Ontario Student Opportunity Grant threshold, which caps annual student debt, will increase from $7,000 to $7,300 for a two-term academic year”. (http://news.ontario.ca/tcu/en/2010/03/greater financial-assistance-for-postsecondary- students.html) Furthermore, in briefing note from the Ontario Council of University Faculty Associations, it states, “Changes introduced in 2010 include... increases to the Ontario Student Opportunity Grant cap on annual student debt and to student loan maximums”. (http://ocufa.on.ca/wordpress/assets/student-assistance briefing-note- election-2011.pdf) Since the increase to OSOG was introduced in 2010, before the 2011-2012 U.T.S.U. executive term, the statement could not constitute a “victory” for Team Unity this year. Since members of Team Unity were and are involved extensively in the operations of the Union, the Unity slate knew or ought reasonably to have known that the statement is false and misleading. Thus, the statement constitutes an intentional misrepresentation of fact. 5 demerit points will be issued to all candidates of Team Unity for intentional misrepresentation of fact, as all members are featured on the Team Unity website and would thus collectively benefit from the website’s content as campaign material for their positions sought.

209

FINAL REPORT OF THE CHIEF RETURNING OFFICER University of Toronto Students’ Union Spring 2011 Elections Submitted by: Daniel Lo, Chief Returning Officer Friday March 30, 2012

55

Date: Saturday, March 24th, 2012 Time: 2:30 PM

ERC Ruling 022

An appeal of CRO Ruling 058 was submitted on March 12th, 2012, alleging that Executive candidates of Team Unity ought to have received more demerit points for individual executive campaign videos that constituted post-campaigning, versus the demerit point which was assigned to all members of Team Unity for the individual executive videos and the collective Team Unity video. The ERC has investigated this appeal and determined there is insufficient evidence to increase demerit points for executive Team Unity candidates for violation of Article VI(1)(i)(ix). The ERC upholds CRO Ruling 058. Date: Saturday, March 24th, 2012 Time: 2:30 PM

210

FINAL REPORT OF THE CHIEF RETURNING OFFICER University of Toronto Students’ Union Spring 2011 Elections Submitted by: Daniel Lo, Chief Returning Officer Friday March 30, 2012

56

Appendix C – ERAC Ruling 001-005

ERAC Ruling 001

An appeal was filed on February 27, 2012 challenging the Elections and Referenda Committee (ERC) ruling on the eligibility status of Faculty of Engineering nominee, Moinul Delwar. The Elections and Referenda Appeals Committee (ERAC) ruled that based on past precedent set in the spring 2010 U.T.S.U. elections regarding the eligibility status of PEY students, Moinul Delwar is deemed an eligible candidate. Date: Wednesday, February 29, 2012 Time: 2:30pm The ERAC recommends that, in addition to the ERC recommendation on historical practice of the Union, the EPC language be revised pertaining to posting of rulings and on the attendance of complainants at meetings of the ERC. Date: March 25, 2011 Time: 15:56

ERAC Ruling 002

An appeal was filed on March 7, 2012 by the Unity slate challenging the Elections and Referenda Committee (ERC) Ruling 002 regarding the statement “Successfully lobbied for free access to Varsity Athletic Centre space for UTSU-recognized club” under “Victories this Year” on the page of the Vote Unity website.

The Elections and Referenda Appeals Committee (ERAC) voted to overturn ERC Ruling 002 on the grounds that sufficient evidence, a press release, was provided to prove that members of Team Unity did in fact successfully lobbied for access for UTSU clubs. It was decided by the Elections and Referenda Appeals Committee that there was no find of unintentional misrepresentation of facts.

The ERAC has investigated this appeal and determined that there is sufficient evidence to overturn ERC Ruling 002. The ERAC overturns the 3 demerit points assigned to all candidates of Team Unity.

Date: Thursday, March 8, 2012� Time: 3:30pm

211

FINAL REPORT OF THE CHIEF RETURNING OFFICER University of Toronto Students’ Union Spring 2011 Elections Submitted by: Daniel Lo, Chief Returning Officer Friday March 30, 2012

57

ERAC Ruling 003

An appeal was filed on March 7, 2012 by the Unity slate challenging the Elections and Referenda Committee (ERC) Ruling 004 regarding the statement “Successfully lobbied to expand tuition grant eligibility to include first-entry professional students” under “Victories this Year” on the page of the Vote Unity website.

The Elections and Referenda Appeals Committee (ERAC) voted to overturn ERC Ruling 004 on the grounds that sufficient evidence was provided that the tuition grant originally did not include first-entry professional students. Furthermore, additional evidence was provided to prove that members of Team Unity did in fact successfully lobby the provincial government with other students’ unions across Ontario to extend the tuition grant to first-entry professional students. It was decided by the Elections and Referenda Appeals Committee that there was no find of unintentional misrepresentation of facts.

The ERAC has investigated this appeal and determined that there is sufficient evidence to overturn ERC Ruling 004. The ERAC overturns the 3 demerit points assigned to all candidates of Team Unity.

Date: Thursday, March 8, 2012 Time: 3:30pm

ERAC Ruling 004

An appeal was filed on March 8, 2012 by the Unity slate challenging the Elections and Referenda Committee (ERC) Ruling 005 regarding the statement “Increased clubs funding” under “Victories this Year” on the page of the Vote Unity website. The Elections and Referenda Appeals Committee (ERAC) voted to overturn ERC Ruling 005 on the grounds that sufficient evidence such as the U.T.S.U. 2010-2011audited financial statement and the preliminary operating budget were provided to prove that members of Team Unity did in fact increase clubs funding. It was decided by the Elections and Referenda Appeals Committee that the evidence provided proves that more funding was allocated than in the previous year and that the evidence provided is very clear and not ambiguous. The ERAC has investigated this appeal and determined that there is sufficient evidence to overturn ERC Ruling 005. The ERAC overturns the 10 demerit points assigned to all candidates of Team Unity.

212

FINAL REPORT OF THE CHIEF RETURNING OFFICER University of Toronto Students’ Union Spring 2011 Elections Submitted by: Daniel Lo, Chief Returning Officer Friday March 30, 2012

58

Date: Thursday, March 8, 2012� Time: 3:30pm ERAC Ruling 005

An appeal was filed on March 8, 2012 by the Unity slate challenging the Elections and Referenda Committee (ERC) Ruling 007 regarding the statement “Won an interest-free period on OSAP for 6 months after graduation” under “Victories this Year” on the page of the Vote Unity website. The Elections and Referenda Appeals Committee (ERAC) voted to overturn ERC Ruling 007 on the grounds that members of Team Unity did in fact actively lobby for the interest-free grace period, but is not a victory in this year. The ERAC decided that while it may be an unintentional misrepresentation of facts, it is not an intentional misrepresentation of facts. The ERAC has investigated this appeal and decided to overturn ERC Ruling 007. The ERAC overturns the 5 demerit points assigned to all candidates of Team Unity. Date: Thursday, March 8, 2012� Time: 3:30pm

ERAC Ruling 006

An appeal was filed on March 24, 2012 challenging the Elections and Referenda Committee (ERC) Ruling 014 regarding the postering violations in Wilson Hall Residence and Chestnut Residence. The ERAC has investigated this appeal and has concluded that there were in fact postering violation in Chestnut Residence and multiple postering violations in Wilson Hall Residence but that the extent of the violations did not match the penalties assigned. The ERAC overturns the 5 demerit points assigned to Baliquis Hashiru, Khalid Khan and Ali Mustafa Bello for the postering violation in Wilson Hall Residence. The ERAC overturns the 4 demerit points for multiple violations within Wilson Hall assigned to Baliquis Hashiru, Khalid Khan and Ali Mustafa Bello. The ERAC also overturns the 5 demerit points assigned for postering violation in Chestnut Residence. The ERAC instead issues 2 demerit points to Baliquis Hashiru, Khalid Khan and Ali Mustafa Bello for the postering violation in Wilson Hall Residence. The ERAC also issues 2 demerit points for multiple violations within Wilson Hall. The ERAC

213

FINAL REPORT OF THE CHIEF RETURNING OFFICER University of Toronto Students’ Union Spring 2011 Elections Submitted by: Daniel Lo, Chief Returning Officer Friday March 30, 2012

59

also decided to issue 2 demerit points for postering violation in Chestnut Residence. Date: Monday, March 26, 2012 Time: 2:30pm

ERAC Ruling 007

An appeal was filed on March 24, 2012 challenging the Elections and Referenda Committee (ERC) Ruling 015 regarding the campaign materials being clearly visible to an assigned polling station during voting days. The ERAC has investigated this appeal and decided to overturn ERC Ruling 015. The ERAC concluded that though the sample leaflet that was attached on the box under the table was visible it did not merit demerit points as the issue was rectified right away. The ERAC overturns the 3 demerit points assigned to Shaun Shepherd, Corey Scott, Noor Baig, Munib Sajjad and Abigail Cudjoe. Date: Monday, March 26, 2012 Time: 2:30pm

ERAC Ruling 008

An appeal was filed on March 24, 2012 challenging the Elections and Referenda Committee (ERC) Ruling 017 regarding the statement “Successfully lobbied to expand tuition grant eligibility to include first-entry professional students” by Shaun Shepherd at the All Candidates Debate. The Elections and Referenda Appeals Committee (ERAC) voted to overturn ERC Ruling 017 on the grounds that sufficient evidence was provided that the tuition grant originally did not include first-entry professional students. Furthermore, additional evidence was provided to prove that members of Team Unity did in fact successfully lobby the provincial government with other students’ unions across Ontario to extend the tuition grant to first-entry professional students. It was decided by the Elections and Referenda Appeals Committee that there was no find of unintentional misrepresentation of facts. Date: Monday, March 26, 2012 Time: 2:30pm

214

FINAL REPORT OF THE CHIEF RETURNING OFFICER University of Toronto Students’ Union Spring 2011 Elections Submitted by: Daniel Lo, Chief Returning Officer Friday March 30, 2012

60

ERAC Ruling 009

An appeal was filed on March 24, 2012 challenging the Elections and Referenda Committee (ERC) Ruling 017 regarding the statement “Won an increase to the Ontario Student Opportunity Grant (OSOG)” under “Victories this Year” on the page of the Vote Unity website. The Elections and Referenda Appeals Committee (ERAC) voted to overturn ERC Ruling 017 on the grounds that members of Team Unity did in fact actively lobby for the an increase in OSOG, The ERAC concludes that though the statement appeared on a page with the subheader “Victories this Year”, it was in the section “Previous Victories” and as such did not constitute a misrepresentation. The ERAC has investigated this appeal and decided to overturn ERC Ruling 017. The ERAC overturns the 5 demerit points assigned to all candidates of Team Unity. Date: Monday, March 26, 2012 Time: 2:30pm

215

FINAL REPORT OF THE CHIEF RETURNING OFFICER University of Toronto Students’ Union Spring 2011 Elections Submitted by: Daniel Lo, Chief Returning Officer Friday March 30, 2012

61

Appendix D – Elections Notices Notice 001

February 28, 2012, 3:00pm Elections Notice Re: Faculty of Arts and Science At-Large Director Acclamation This is a general notice to inform UTSU constituents and candidates that Nimalan Ulaganathan, a candidate for the Faculty of Arts and Science At-Large Director position has been acclaimed as per section 3(c)(i) and 3(c)(ii) of the University of Toronto Students' Union Bylaws, wherein it states: Bylaw V(3)(c)(i) "There shall be two (2) Directors elected at-large by the members of the Union in the Faculty of Arts and Science on the St. George Campus." Bylaw V(3)(c)(ii) "No more than one (1) Directors elected as Faculty of Arts and Science constituency shall reside at the same college." The remaining spot for the Faculty of Arts and Science At-Large Director position is contested between the remaining two candidates, Paul Ossowski and Kevin Lunianga, as they both belong to the same college.

Notice 002

March 1, 2012, 2:30pm Elections Notice Re: Toronto School of Theology Nominee Christian Persuad This is a general notice to inform UTSU constituents and candidates that Christian Persuad, a nominee for the Toronto School of Theology Director, was deemed not eligible to run in the UTSU Spring Elections for not collecting enough valid nomination signatures as per Article III Section 4(a), wherein it states: Article III Section 4(a) of the EPC "A director candidate nomination form must be signed by at least twenty-five (25) Union members in the relevant constituency to be valid.” The remaining spot for the Board of Director position representing the Toronto School of Theology will remain vacant until the fall by-election.

216

FINAL REPORT OF THE CHIEF RETURNING OFFICER University of Toronto Students’ Union Spring 2011 Elections Submitted by: Daniel Lo, Chief Returning Officer Friday March 30, 2012

62

Notice 003

March 7, 2012, 1:30pm ��

Elections Notice Re: Ripping down of posters

�Please be advised that candidates and their non-arm's-length parties are not to remove elections posters other than their own (Article VI(1)(i)(x)(3)(a)). To do so would be a violation of the EPC, Article VI (3)(j)(iii) "fair play" and Article VI (1)(i)(x)(3) "campaign materials cannot be removed from any posted location, legally or illegally, without the authorization of the CRO".

Notice 004

March 15, 2012, 2:20pm ��Elections Notice Re: Director Results

On March 13, 2012, a recount was conducted for the New College Director positions. During the recount, it was discovered that the columns containing the vote totals from a few polling stations had been inadvertently excluded from the autosum formula in the excel spreadsheet used to tally the final results. This exclusion was limited to Board of Directors positions only and was limited to the Athletic Centre polling station on March 6, 7 and 8, 2012, and the Sid Smith 1 polling station on March 8, 2012.

Updated numbers have been posted at www.utsu.ca/section/1104.

The update to the vote tallies resulted in one change in the individuals elected as New College Directors. Elections for the other Board of Director positions remained unchanged.

Notice 005 On March 13, 2012, a recount was conducted for the New College Director positions. During the recount, it was discovered that the columns containing the vote totals from a few polling stations had been inadvertently excluded from the autosum formula in the excel spreadsheet used to tally the final results. This exclusion was limited to Board of Directors positions only and was limited to the Athletic Centre polling station on March 6, 7 and 8, 2012, and the Sid Smith 1 polling station on March 8, 2012. The update to the vote tallies resulted in one change in the individuals elected as New College Directors. Elections for the other Board of Director positions remained unchanged. However, as a precautionary step we will be conducting a recount for the

Engineering and St. Michael’s College positions on Tuesday, March 20, 2012 at

6:30pm at the UTSU office. As a candidate, you may appoint a scrutineer to be

217

FINAL REPORT OF THE CHIEF RETURNING OFFICER University of Toronto Students’ Union Spring 2011 Elections Submitted by: Daniel Lo, Chief Returning Officer Friday March 30, 2012

63

present at the recount. If you wish to appoint a scrutineer for the recount, please

send their name to cro@utsu.ca by 6pm on Monday, March 19, 2012.

218

Revised Budget, 2011-2012

Fiscal Year Ending April 30, 2012

219

UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO STUDENTS' UNIONLocal 98, Canadian Federation of Students

REVISED BUDGET, 2011-2012 Fiscal year ending April 30, 2012

REVISED REVENUE Revised Preliminary Operating Revised

Budget Budget Budget (draft) Budget

Mar. 15/11 April 30/11 Dec. 2/11 Mar. 25/12

MEMBERSHIP FEES

Summer Term May-Aug 2011 88,700 88,000 88,000 108,000Less transfer to UTMSU (22,800) (23,000) (23,000) (27,500)

Fall and Winter Terms Sep-Dec 2011 + Jan-Apr 2012 1,400,000 1,360,000 1,360,000 1,409,000Less transfer to UTMSU (300,000) (280,000) (280,000) (295,000)

Sub-total 1,165,900 1,145,000 1,145,000 1,194,500

SERVICES

Book Exchange [1] 3,500 2,000 2,000 3,010Clubs Directory Sponsorship 5,000 5,000 5,000 800Convocation 1,000 0 0 0Handbook Sponsorship 31,250 33,000 33,000 29,050Health and Dental Plan Administration [2] 390,000 390,000 390,000 390,000

Less transfer to UTMSU (25,000) (25,000) (25,000) (25,000) Membership Mailing Sponsorship 9,000 12,000 12,000 12,500TTC Support 4,700 0 0 0TTC Revenue[3] 6,000 10,000 10,000 7,500Food Bank Support 11,000 11,000 11,000 8,900Sub-total 436,450 438000 438000 426,760

ORIENTATION

Designated Levy 47,000 43,000 43,000 44,600Less transfer to UTMSU (9,000) (7,500) (7,500) (8,500)

Kit Sales 28,500 30,000 30,000 20,000Club Fair Fees 9,200 12,000 12,000 11,940Sponsorship 123,200 119,000 119,000 85,950Sub-total 198,900 196,500 196,500 153,990

OTHER

Designated Levy - Daycare 47,000 45,000 45,000 44,700Less transfer to UTMSU (11,000) (10,500) (10,500) (11,200)

Designated Levy - WUSC 58,000 55,000 55,000 58,000Less transfer to UTMSU (16,000) (14,000) (14,000) (14,500)

Interest Income 32,000 34,000 34,000 21,700Miscellaneous [4] 10,000 12,000 12,000 27,000Sub-total 120,000 121,500 121,500 125,700

TOTAL OPERATING REVENUES 1,921,250 1,901,000 1,901,000 1,900,950

NOTES:

1 Figure is net of funds returned to book sellers.2 Exact figure cannot be determined until the end of the policy year.

Also note that plan fees (collected from members) for premiums and broker fees are not included.3 Net revenue from 1% of all TTC sales4 Includes net revenue from front desk sales of discounted tickets and other sales, excluding TTC sales.

220

UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO STUDENTS' UNIONLocal 98, Canadian Federation of Students

REVISED BUDGET, 2011-2012Fiscal year ending April 30, 2012

REVISED EXPENSES Revised Preliminary Operating Revised

Budget Budget Budget (draft) Budget

Mar. 15/11 April 30,2011 Dec. 2/11 Mar. 25/12

SERVICES AND PROGRAMS

Book Exchange [1] 8,500 5,000 5000 8500Bursaries - Book 2,550 2,500 2,500 2,500Bursaries - Dollar for Daycare Bursaries 36,000 34,500 34,500 38,000Convocation Rental Service 1,000 0 0 0Discount Card Programs 500 500 500 0Food Banks 15,000 15,000 15,000 10,000Front Desk Service 25,000 0 0 0Handbooks 66,500 67,050 67,050 57,000Health and Dental Plans [2] 17,000 19,000 19,000 23,000Income Tax Clinics 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000Membership Mailing 21,900 23,000 23,000 34,500Post-It-Up 9,000 9,000 9,000 9,000Student Refugee (WUSC) 42,000 40,000 40,000 43,500Teaching Awards 1,200 1000 1000 600TTC Metropass [3] 11,000 3,500 3,500 8,600Sub-total 258,150 221,050 221,050 236,200

CLUBS AND PROJECT SUBSIDIES

Clubs Directory - 10,000 10,000 10,260Clubs Committee 180,000 180,000 180,000 180,000Sub-total 180,000 190,000 190,000 190,260

ORIENTATION

Orientation Kits 66,000 70,500 70,500 44,000Programming / Entertainment 102,000 95,000 95,000 67,000Operations and Supplies 31,000 31,000 31,000 57,000Sub-total 199,000 196,500 196,500 168,000

CAMPAIGNS, PROJECTS AND EVENTS [4]

Campus Life Commission 11,750 7000 11,000 20,000Social Justice and Equity Commission 7,500 7000 9,500 7,500Executive Committee / Strategic Priorities 9,000 7000 5,000 4,500

Advertising Strategy 9,000 11,000 8,000 8,500Service Promotion & Development 2,000 4,000 3,000 3,300

Community Action Commission 7,500 7000 7,500 7,500Academic and Student Rights Commission 7,500 7000 6,000 5,000Sustainability Commission 3,000 3000 3000 3000Sub-total 57,250 53000 53,000 59,300

ELECTIONS & REFERENDA

Candidate & Campaign Reimbursements 6,500 15,000 15,000 15,000Operations: Advertising, Supplies, Wages 34,000 45,000 45,000 45,000Sub-total 40,500 60,000 60,000 60,000

221

UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO STUDENTS' UNIONLocal 98, Canadian Federation of Students

REVISED BUDGET, 2011-2012Fiscal year ending April 30, 2012

REVISED EXPENSES Revised Preliminary Operating Revised

Budget Budget Budget (draft) Budget

Mar. 15/11 April 30,2011 Dec. 2/11 Mar. 25/12

ADMINISTRATION AND OFFICE

Audit & Accounting Fees 16,000 18,000 18,000 17,600Bank, Interest and Transaction Charges 7,000 7,000 7,000 7,000Computer Software and Supplies 1,000 2,000 2,000 1,000Computer Support Services 15,000 15,000 15,000 12,000Equipment Leases and Rentals 6,000 10,000 10,000 6,000Insurance 45,500 46,000 46,000 43,000Legal 50,000 40,000 40,000 63,000Office Supplies and Miscellaneous 26,000 27,000 27,000 32,000Repairs and Maintenance 13,000 11,000 11,000 12,000Telephone 3,500 4,000 4,000 4,000Transportation 7,000 7,000 7,000 4,000Website, Internet and Cable Services 3,000 3,000 3,000 2,000Capital Fund - Equipment and Furniture 4,000 6,000 6,000 3,500Sub-total 197,000 196,000 196,000 207,100

MEETINGS

Conferences and Meetings 19,000 15,000 15,000 15,000UTSU Meeting Expenses 10,000 10,000 10,000 6,000Sub-total 29,000 25,000 25,000 21,000

HUMAN RESOURCES

Salaries and Wages [5] 800,000 800,000 800,000 800,000Employer Contributions (CPP and EI) below below below below

Canada Pension Plan 33,000 33,000 33,000 33,000 Employment Insurance 19,000 19,000 19,000 19,000

Employer's Health Tax 13,000 13,000 13,000 13,000 WSIB Premiums 3,500 3,500 3,500 3,500 Employee Development and Other Benefits 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 Accommodations Fund [6] 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 Sub-total 933,500 933,500 933,500 933,500

CONTINGENCY / RESERVE 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000

TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES 1,919,400 1,900,050 1,900,050 1,900,360

SURPLUS (DEFICIT) 1,850 950 950 590.00

1 Figure is net of funds returned to book sellers.2 Cost of refunds (i.e., opt-outs) and payments to broker (i.e., premiums + fees) are not included.3 The cost of TTC Metropasses sold is not included. Each Metropoass is sold at cost.4 The values represented are net values.5 Includes: Executives (6), Associates (12), Internal Coordinator, Communications Coordinator,Services Coordinator, Health Plan Coordinator, Clubs and Events Coordinator, Operations CoordinatorExecutive Director, Executive Assistant (1), Finance Coordinator, Policy and Student Rights CoordinatorOrientation Coordinators (2), Gardener and any short term employees6 As part of legal settlement, included in budget to provide accomodations for persons with disabilities.

222