The Insiders
-
Posts by Neal Yonson:
- No disability seat
- No unbanning of slates
- Stephen Owen and Nancy Knight bring the spin about Metro Vancouver’s proposed bylaws
- The AMS Foundation has achieved a balanced budget!
- YVR Add Fare opposed for U-Pass holders
- Electoral Code Changes for appeals and the international student seat
- Committee Appointments
- AMS serves intent to leave CASA as of April 1, 2010
- Committee Reform Proposal
Nov
30
AMS Elections Nominations Open Today
Comments Off on AMS Elections Nominations Open Today
Do you find yourself suddenly interested in the AMS? What good timing, because the AMS Elections Administrator has an announcement to make…
AMS Elections Nominations Now Open!
Are you interested in playing an integral role in the administration of UBC’s highest-governing student body? The AMS is currently accepting nominations for various positions on Council. The nomination period is from November 30th, 2009, until January 8th, 2009 at 3pm.
The AMS represents over 47,000 UBC students as well as students at affiliated colleges. It operates student services, student owned businesses, resource groups, and clubs. In addition to offering services to students, the AMS is an advocate of students’ issues and ensures the needs of students are presented to the University administration and the federal, provincial, and municipal governments.
Executive Positions
President – Coordinates the executive team, guides the direction of the AMS according to the will of AMS Council, which represents the student body.
VP Academic & University Affairs – Liaises and builds partnerships with the University on various projects and initiatives, lobbies the University for students’ priorities.
VP Administration – Oversees the operation of the existing Student Union Building (SUB), as well as the development of a new SUB.
VP External – Advocate and lobbyist for student concerns and issues to external governing bodies (such as tuition fee levels, the U-Pass and Translink, and student financial assistant)
VP Finance – Oversees the operation of AMS businesses (including SUB businesses, conferences, and catering) and spearheads the AMS’ annual budget.
Compensation for all executive positions is $25,000, based on a 40 hour work week.
More Info – http://www2.ams.ubc.ca/index.php/student_government/category/ams_executive
International Student Seat
Non-voting member of Council that advocates for the interests of international students exclusively.
Student Legal Fund Society – Board of Directors
Supports litigation, advocacy, and lobbying for improved education and access to education at UBC, and other matters of law that set broad precedent and are of concern to UBC students. 6 members-at-large are elected onto the Board of Directors.
More Info – http://studentlegal.org/
Board of Governors
The Board is responsible for the management, administration and control of the property, revenue, business and affairs of the University. Two student representatives on the Board are elected by students. It is the responsibility of the Board to monitor the fiscal vitality of the University, and to determine that all possible areas of revenue enhancement are pursued.
More Info – http://www.bog.ubc.ca/about.html
Senate – UBC-Vancouver
The Senate is the campus’ highest governing body on academic matters (including degrees, courses, and faculties.) It is responsible for the conferring of degrees, the guidelines of co-operative programs in faculties, student recruitment, and much more. Five student members-at-large are elected by students.
More Info – http://www.senate.ubc.ca/vancouver/index.cfm
Nomination Forms
Nomination forms for all positions are to be picked up at the AMS Administrative Office, SUB 238A. They are also available for download on the elections web site (http://www2.ams.ubc.ca/index.php/student_government/subplate/category/ams_elections/). Completed forms must be returned in person to SUB 238A, except in the case of Board of Governors and Senate nomination forms, which should be dropped off at the Student Information Services desks in the main concourse of Brock Hall.
Ubyssey Publications Society Board of Directors
In addition, nominations are also now open for the Ubyssey Board of Directors. More info – http://ubyssey.ca/?p=14703
Nov
28
A spirited emergency AMS council meeting took place tonight to react to Blake Frederick’s human rights complaint to the UN. Because of the large turnout, the meeting took place in the Hebb Theatre and went for approximately three hours.
At its most populated, there were 175-200 students present, with a large number of students-at-large. As was outlined in a letter earlier today, Blake and Tim did not show up. The other three executives (Tom Dvorak, Johannes Rebane and Crystal Hon) did attend. Many students-at-large did voice their opinions during the meeting. A small contingent either defended/supported Blake and Tim’s actions, or condemned AMS Council for going ahead with this. A much larger number of students voiced their displeasure, for various reasons, with the actions of Blake and Tim.
All three motions of the motions on the agenda passed unanimously (the first motion was amended minorly during the meeting). AMS council has withdrawn the UN complaint, and asked for the resignations of President Blake Frederick and Vice President External Affairs Tim Chu.
After that business was over, Tom Dvorak and Johannes Rebane got up and addressed the fact that they both signed off on the contract with Pivot Legal Society. Tom and Johannes both apologized and took full responsibility for the lack of due diligence displayed in signing the document, and were also questioned by the audience about it.
After a number of questions, Mona Maghsoodi (GSS councillor and Former GSS President) then moved a motion to ask Tom and Johannes to resign. Much of the discussion focused on the fact that whereas Blake and Tim willfully deceived council, Tom and Johannes made an error in judgment and the fact that councillors consulted with constituents about Blake and Tim, but there has not be any time to consult constituents about Tom and Johannes. This motion was tabled until the first AMS meeting in January.
Petitions to recall Blake and Tim were also completed, putting the recall process in motion. In addition to the regularly scheduled council meeting on Wednesday, December 2, (agenda here) a special council meeting was also called for Monday, December 7, to deal with the recall.
If you want all the gory details, you can check out the live blogs:
And finally, a little history of of the last recall attempt that took place in the AMS.
Dec. 7, 2004: The Executive fired the General Manager.
Dec. 10, 2004: Council held an emergency meeting to discuss the firing, and notice was presented of motions asking for the recall of the whole Executive at a meeting to be held the following week.
Dec. 17, 2004: At the second meeting Council reversed the firing of the General Manager and passed a motion asking the President to resign. It then adjourned till after Christmas.
Jan. 5, 2005: Council met again; the President said she had decided not to resign. The motion to recall her was defeated, and the motions for recalling the rest of the Executive were essentially withdrawn. Council then passed a motion to censure the Executive.
So it started as recall, ended as censure. This way it’s going the other way around.
Another round up of other media:
The Ubyssey provides a few more updates.
Geoff Costeloe, vice-chair of the UBC Vancouver Senate with a very good piece on idealists and realists.
Radical Beer with some historical context, and the right way of dealing with bad ideas. Also, asking us in an unfortunately-worded manner to “please lay off the staff”.
Erica, bringing the dramazz and Paul Bucci love.
UBC Spectator on people who support Blake, Blake and Tim retroactively asking permission in a motion with more than a page of whereas clauses, and Blake and Tim’s letter.
Social Capital with a day two update and coverage of today’s letter from Blake and Tim.
Andrea thinks this is embarrassing and likes to plug the Social Capital blog.
Jason In Vancouver is jealous of Blake Frederick.
Chanelle, telling us to beware of the Blake Witch trials.
AMS Gossip Guy thinks he understands Blake’s rationale.
Mary with some perspective of her own, and a liveblog of her own
Jesse Ferreras still showing a few feverish symptoms of AMS-itis.
Terry spreading the word about the meeting.
Phew. And we are sure there are many other forums, tweeters and the like out there on the tubes.
Nov
27
The following is a coedited post with files from both Neal and Alex.
The Timeline
This issue was first brought up by Blake and Tim. The first mention of this appears shortly after they took office in the March 13, 2009 Executive Committee minutes, in which there is a one sentence mention:
13. UN international covenant
The AMS will pursue a legal battle with the Province on the basis that the recent Education funding cuts are against the UN charter.
Notice that what is mentioned is not a complaint to the UN. They are contemplating a lawsuit against the province. In an interview yesterday, Blake said this must have been a typo.
The second mention is in the April 16, 2009 Executive Committee minutes, in which it also warrants only one line:
UN complaint with Pivot; may wait till Adrienne gets back.
This issue then appears to go underground/dormant until it came time to make the big announcement. Blake acknowledges it was not discussed at any other committees. The External Policy Committee did not see any part of it, reportedly because Blake and Tim felt it was within their mandates to push it forward. The Communications Planning Group was described as a relatively inactive group which is why it was not brought to them, despite the fact that Blake as chair is responsible for that inactivity. Council did not receive any notice because it was felt the minutes, all two sentences of them, were enough. As far as Blake is concerned, it had been passed in executive committee (though other executives state there was never a resolution) and that was enough to pursue it. It’s certainly worth noting that the complaint was signed by Blake on November 18; a council meeting took place that evening where Blake was given the floor to give an executive report. UBC Insiders was in the room that evening, and the topic of a human rights complaint to the UN was not addressed. We shouldn’t have to point it out, but we will to be safe: this is a gross manipulation of the system.
In an interview yesterday, Blake was asked why he pursued this. His response touched mostly on the fact that the AMS had a desperate need to advocate on behalf of students in any possible way to address the costs of post-secondary education which were “escalating out of control.” On most questions, he deferred to the meeting on Saturday, saying he was looking forward to the opportunity to address councillors, respond to their concerns, and explain more about the complaint itself.
Blake said he looked forward to the chance to have a civil discussion about councillors’ concerns. Justin McElroy of the Ubyssey pressed him on why not have a civil discussion about the councillors’ concerns before holding a press conference? It was an executive decision to push ahead with this because of its importance to students. He mentions this despite the fact that this has been on his table for 7 months—before the BC General Election, and before to any cuts by the current Minister of Advanced Education—certainly enough time to run the idea by AMS council. When asked if he feared he’d lose his job, he deferred to the fact that he was wearing his “AMS president” hat and shouldn’t comment on his personal feelings
As for the money, $3,000 was paid to Pivot Legal Society as a retainer. Nobody has been able to say how much money it will ultimately cost the AMS once the actual hours that were spent working on the complaint are added up. This year’s AMS budget had a line item for $25,000 for legal fees. It is not inconceivable that the cost could be higher than that. The AMS does not know how much it will cost, nor do they even know when Pivot will tell them how much they owe.
Because the budget was approved, it is true that Council or the Executive Committee can spend this money but would have needed to have as a bare minimum an actual resolution associated with it. In the two mentions of this that were found in Executive Committee minutes, neither has a resolution associated with it. It is unclear, then, which two of Crystal, Tom and Johannes signed off on the cheque as the sole signatories of this nature for the AMS.
Once Pivot was on board, it seems they took over the project. Although the AMS held the press conference this morning, the Ubyssey was not invited. When the Ubyssey asked why, the original response from Tim Chu was that the Ubyssey “didn’t do press releases,” followed by the real reason, that Pivot was completely in charge of communications and the Ubyssey is not one of the media sources they notify. For something which should have a massively important communications strategy for the AMS, Pivot had total control over how it was framed (with them in the centre of the frame).
Press conference that occured earlier November 26, 2009. Photograph by: Ian Lindsay, Vancouver Sun.
The AMS already has their own legal counsel they attend to for legal affairs. Reportedly Pivot is involved in lieu of the in house counsel because they had a more positive viewpoint of this complaint than the AMS’s counsel. And they were cheaper. Although Blake claims the idea came from him and Tim, the possibility that Pivot approached the AMS is plausible.
Yesterday and Tomorrow
All in all, yesterday was a busy day for a lot of people. Upon hearing the news, Matthew Naylor circulated a petition to councillors in order to call a special council meeting. This required 10 signatures; 13 were obtained. A council meeting has been called for Saturday at 5pm in Council Chambers (SUB 206). The Agenda is here.
At the same time, he called a meeting for interested persons to discuss what was happening. Most senior members of AMS Council attended this meeting to share knowledge and talk about what to do next.
While some people present reportedly expressed concerns about having an “offline” meeting of council, there was wide support for holding an official meeting. It was widely agreed that Blake fucked up big time, and this wasn’t simply an isolated incident, but a culmination of Blake behaving badly.
The path forward at this point is somewhat clear. These are the motions coming forward at Saturday’s meeting:
“BE IT RESOLVED THAT Council retract the complaint to the UN against the BC and Canadian governments, and direct the AMS Communications Department to issue a press release stating that this was not the will of the Society, and that, as the President overstepped his bounds in taking this action, this should not be construed as an action of the Society.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT Council prohibit the expenditure of any further AMS resources of any nature on this action.”
“BE IT RESOLVED THAT Council request that President Blake Frederick resign from Council.”
“BE IT RESOLVED THAT Council request that Vice President External Affairs Tim Chu resign from Council.”
It seems very likely at this point that all of these will pass. It also seems Blake has zero intention of resigning. In that case, council would be seeking impeachment (referred to as “Recall” in the bylaws). As per bylaws council would provide at least 7 days notice that such a motion was coming. After 7 days, another special meeting of council could be convened, with motions to impeach Blake and Tim. The vote for impeachment specifies that the motion must be “passed by a Two-thirds (2/3) majority of the votes cast, including abstentions and blanks,” in essence meaning there is no such thing as an abstention. Abstention = NO. This is unusual in that normal council votes do not count abstentions.
There’s also a possibility of conflict with the Society Act, wherein impeachment might have to be done at a general meeting instead of a council meeting. This would make impeachment almost completely infeasible legally, but politically still very possible (by, for instance, removing all powers of the President to those of any other councillor, and telling him to leave).
In the event that Blake and/or Tim are impeached, it would be up to council to appoint interim executives from itself to fill those positions, and then hold by-elections for someone to hold office for a very short period, then hold regular elections again.
In the event that there isn’t an impeachment (ordinarily I would expect a large number of abstentions in a vote like this, which are now NO votes), what happens next? Does Council suspend all parts of code and policy giving him authority to act or sign things? Put in place a policy that any further action taken by the President involving legal, external, or PR functions, without the explicit prior approval of Council or an appropriate committee, constitutes a letter of resignation?
Other media
Justin McElroy at Macleans on Campus, with a subsequent follow-up with very good analysis and some more details about how the situation unfolded.
AMS Gossip Guy, being as descriptive as a set of Exec Comm minutes.
Terry, with a skit that can hopefully be performed as a prelude to Saturday night’s meeting.
The UBC Spectator, with another short summary.
The Radical Beer Tribune, wondering what the hell Blake was thinking, with suggestion follow-up.
Social Capital, with a good primer shedding light on some of the background.
Foxtrot UBC, having a tea party.
Jesse Ferreras, an alumni news writer for the Ubyssey, after thinking he was cured, once again contracting a case of AMS-itis.
Trisha Taneja, a fourth year political science and microbiology major and writer for the ethics of international engagement and serivce-learning project on the practical effects of such a move.
Taylor Loren, second year artsie, UBC twittebrity and fan of the federal Liberals, on her personal path to education.
Hansard, from when the Simon Fraser Student Society attempted the same thing four years ago. It caught Bill Siskay’s attention. More details on this attempt forthcoming.
Facebook presence: Former Devil’s Advocate crew is mobilizing the 1st UBC Expeditionary Force, the 50+ comment-long status update that you can read only if you befriend Alex on facebook.
And of course, someone has submitted it to Fail Blog.
Nov
19
7+ hours of defeating motions. Highlights:
Nov
18
More Executive Shenanigans. Sigh.
Comments Off on More Executive Shenanigans. Sigh.
Oh, AMS emails.
To whom it may concern,
I would like to formally apologize for certain content contained within the original version of my 3rd quarterly report. I originally chose to include comments about executive dynamics within the report in an attempt to shed light on the causes of recent events. I now realize that an official quarterly record is not the appropriate venue in which to raise these issues.
Further, I would like to specifically apologize for a reference made within the original document. The intention of drawing on an historical example (Wikipedia further apologies for lack of citation) was to support a shared executive responsibility for the current state of affairs. However, if such a reference has at all caused negative feelings or implications outside of that intent, I take full personal responsibility for those feelings and sincerely regret any such outcome. Such a sensitive reference should not have been included.
Please find enclosed an updated version of the report to replace my original submission.
Sincerely,
Tom Dvorak
What appeared in his original quarterly was a dissertation on dysfunctional executive dynamics and the reasons for that. It detailed how executives were more concerned about making sure their personal point of view was put forward, rather than coming to a consensus as an executive. Communication is poor. It was also disconcerting to hear that executive committee meetings were rarely, if ever, happening. Note that Tom is careful not to retract what he had to say, just to concede that the quarterly was not the appropriate venue.
Of course, what the second paragraph of the letter refers to is that Tom took it to a whole new level, referencing the “banality of evil”, in which it is postulated that great evil can be done not by psychotic or evil individuals, but by regular people who accept that what they are doing is considered normal and acceptable. This was put forth as a theory for how things got the way they did within the AMS. Tom acknowledged that it was “fairly drastic” to compare the executives to war criminals, but then… did it anyways. On a side note, we are extremely proud to proclaim UBC Insiders: Not war criminals, since 2007.
To all this we say: meh.
The AMS is at its best when it looks outside itself at issues rather than internal political BS. The navel-gazing that normally goes on, however, is a huge turn-off. With tonight’s council agenda focused on the slate debate, a proposal for a non-voting disability seat, and probably some discussion of this quarterly, it’s pretty clear which types of issues they are absorbing themselves with. My level of interest is at a near-low.
Executive dynamics are, I’m sure, a perennial problem. Hey look! UBC Insiders even had a post about it just last year. But why care? It’s a complete waste of energy investing any energy in this issue. This is one problem that is 100% guaranteed to work itself out, and quite soon: elections are just around the corner.
Nov
17
We need to be able to acknowledge current political structures, like the government, and the law, and work within them for reform. Equally important however, is that we engage in an active critique of those structures, which should entail some forms of confrontation.
– Stefanie Ratjen speaks on civil liberties and the 2010 Winter Olympic Games.
It has been confirmed that Stefanie Ratjen, former VP External of the AMS, has been hired by the BC Civil Liberties Association to run the Legal Observer training and Know Your Rights workshops at UBC, which are partially funded by the Student Legal Fund Society, which is in turn funded by student fees.
Is Stefanie a motivated, committed individual legitimately concerned about the impact of the Olympics? Yes.
Does Stefanie’s hiring destroy any pretense that existed about the BCCLA’s program being neutral and non-partisan? Yes.
Oct
28
For those of you new to UBC and UBC Insiders, Dr. Darren Peets has already written the authoritative piece deconstructing the poor planning behind the underground bus loop. Darren would undoubtedly be proud to think that he may have literally analyzed the project to its death.
Before the big news broke yesterday, UBC Insiders had been looking further into the technical design of the underground bus loop. In the interest being topical, and also of not having all this research going to waste, here’s an interesting data study that was conducted on the bus loop’s capacity showing that the whole thing would have been absolute chaos every single day.
Carson Lam, a science student at UBC, developed an absolutely awesome website called TransitDB, which takes all of Translink’s data and presents it in new and much more useful ways of looking at it. But for data nerds, the biggest asset of having a database is that you can mine it for information. Data is a science student’s best friend.
Oct
27
The AMS this morning released a statement saying that UBC intends to cancel the underground bus loop project.
Earlier today, Blake Frederick outlined the situation: 3 weeks ago UBC starting thinking of a contingency plan if loop wasn’t going forward, due to concerns over Translink’s funding drying up. Translink was supposed to commit $10M to the project. Blake: “If Translink’s funding doesn’t come through, they have no other source of funding and they will have to cancel the underground bus loop.” Translink’s ten year plan does not include this funding. Blake has now reached the conclusion that the project will be getting the axe.
Blake also passed on information from Tim Chu’s meeting with Translink representatives this week. Apparently Translink does not yet have the technology available for the proposed bus loop, and also do not have the staff available to devote to the project, presumably because of the transportation planning going into the Olympics.
Ken Hardie, spokesperson for Translink said only that “Translink is not in a position to fund expansion,” adding that what exactly falls within the definition of expansion is a discussion to be had between Translink and the University.
Nancy Knight, AVP Campus & Community Planning, said that while the Mayors Council funding package announced earlier this week does not appear to contain the necessary funding to go ahead with the project, UBC is still waiting to hear this officially from Translink. She indicated that UBC is still committed to the project, but that it has always been a partnership with Translink, and in a partnership, if one partner is unable to meet its obligations the project falls apart. In the event that Translink pulls out of the project, the tunnel will not be built but that in all likelihood the road would (half of which is already built).
When asked about all of the utilities that were moved last year, she said those would have needed to be moved anyways in order to properly service the new buildings going in there (currently only the New SUB and the Alumni Centre, and possibly some student residences.) Even if the project is cancelled, the university still does not look fondly on the current location for two reasons: a promise made to the UEL that the bus loop would only be temporary, and the designation of the land it currently sits on as the “Gage South” neighbourhood, slated for market housing. As to what that means, while Campus and Community Planning will be looking to develop the future transportation plan with all of campus (we can all hope that actually happens; it certainly didn’t with the underground bus loop), a rather large, easily accessible and relatively central location would have to be found if a new bus loop were to be built. In the land use plans laid out in the current version of the campus plan, that certainly isn’t there (and this is why we should all listen to Darren Peets when he says planning is a total crapshoot).
Although no one has yet confirmed the exact fate of the underground bus loop, it’s a safe bet that the project’s dead.
Update: October 27, 4:56pm
Nancy Knight has issued an open letter regarding the status and future of the Underground Bus Loop, which can be found here. Details are still vague, and confirmation regarding this cancellation is still pending discussion with TransLink.
Update 2: October 28
Nancy Knight has released an amended version of her open letter in which it has been confirmed that Translink will not be able to contribute its share towards the underground bus loop.
Oct
22
Highlights from tonight:
Oct
19
The UNA just started a public consultation about their proposed noise bylaw which runs until November 9.
This process has been ongoing since well before the appearance of Bill 13, which would give UBC the ability to regulate noise all over campus. The University Neighbours’ Agreement, the document which defines the governance of the UNA, outlines how rules regarding noise, nuisance, parking, and traffic can be put in place. Although the UNA does all the legwork to develop the rule(s), UBC’s Board of Governors would be the ones to ultimately put them in place. The Neighbours’ Agreement is clear that any new rules would apply only to the areas falling under UNA jurisdiction, not all of campus.
The fact that Bill 13 exists is a tacit acknowledgment that the BOG never really had the legal authority necessary to enact any noise rule the UNA came up with (not that it would have stopped them, of course.) Since it’s likely Bill 13 will pass, this is probably a moot point but still worth noting.
Reading through the proposed bylaw the image that comes to mind, to borrow a phrase, is that of a wildly overlapping Venn diagram. It contains some very broad, very vague rules with seemingly contradictory clauses, odd exceptions and an uneven mode of enforcement. Naturally, this is a subject on which UBC Insiders cannot keep quiet.
