UVSS to pursue CFS referendum
The University of Victoria Students' Society (UVSS) board of directors recently passed a motion to retain legal counsel to pursue a referendum on the UVSS’ membership with the Canadian Federation of Students (CFS).
The motion, presented by Director of Finance Kelsey Hannan at the June 14 board meeting, says the UVSS will “take appropriate steps to assure that a legally valid referendum” is held by the end of the 2010/2011 school year.
UVSS members submitted a petition last fall requesting a referendum on CFS membership. The petition met CFS bylaws with signatures from 11.4 per cent of UVSS members – CFS bylaws required 10 per cent at the time.
However, the petition was declared invalid after the CFS received a second petition from students asking their names be removed from the original petition.
The validity of counter-petitions was called into question when the University of Guelph Central Student Association (CSA) took the CFS to court after the organization denied petition for a referendum for similar reasons. Guelph was granted a referendum by the Ontario court.
The motion passed by the UVSS includes hiring David Borins, the lawyer who represented the CSA and who has represented the Kwantlen Student Association in litigation with the CFS. Borins won both lawsuits.
“We've essentially hired legal counsel with experience on CFS-related matters, and the reason for that is to ideally reduce the costs of any potential legal work required to assure a referendum for the upcoming academic year,” said Hannan.
However, Hannan emphasized that the UVSS is hoping to achieve its goal without going to court.
“We and the board do not want to go a court. We do not want to spend student money on legal action so that students simply have the democratic right to vote,” he said. “However, the UVSS is willing to defend the democratic rights of its membership if the CFS is unreasonably denying us the opportunity to have a vote.”
The UVSS is committed to working with the CFS to hold a fair referendum, he said.
“It is not our intention to drag the CFS to a referendum kicking and screaming,” Hannan said. “We have our hand open and they can grab our hand and we can walk over to that point without a fight.”
Directors who spoke against the motion at the June 14 meeting mentioned that the UVSS is in a $300,000 deficit, and that court cases are expensive.
“I know it's a really emotional issue for the people who are on the other side of it, who voted in the majority, because most of them were involved with the petition that is in question,” said Director-at-Large Dylan Sherlock, who was one of six directors who voted in opposition of the motion. “We don't really have an emotional connection to it. We do have an emotional connection to being able to run the student society because there's enough money to do things.”
Sherlock said he presented two options to his fellow directors at the meeting: spend tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars and two years in court, at the end of which the UVSS can hold a referendum, or file another petition and have a referendum in two years (CFS bylaws limit the number of schools that can hold a referendum each year).
Sherlock said that, based on similar cases at other schools, seeking a referendum in court could cost between $50,000 to $100,000.
“For me it's just a matter of, when our student society is currently facing a $300,000 deficit, are we willing to put forward tens of thousands of dollars of students dollars in order to fight this out in court when there are other avenues by which we can seek to have a referendum on the CFS,” said Director-at-Large Tara Paterson, who also voted in opposition. “It saddens me that we will be spending realistically tens of thousands of student dollars in order to see this go through.”
The motion passed with 11 directors voting in favour, six voting opposed, and an abstention from Director-at-Large Laura McLeod who is the UVSS' CFS-BC representative.
Hannan will act as a liaison throughout the process. An amendment to the motion added chairperson James Coccola to act as co-liaison.
12 Comments
The Martlet has an open comments policy and will endeavour to promote healthy discussion. We strive to act as an agent of constructive social change and will remove racist, sexist, homophobic, or otherwise oppressive comments.
Leave a Comment
John July 8, 2010, 4:22 p.m.
A new petition could get UVic a referendum in as few as two years. CFS gets to pick and choose which schools are lucky enough to vote what year, and there's no visible criteria or mechanism for accountability to compel it to be held earlier than is politically convenient for them. They can & will put off a UVic referendum until they feel they can win it, if it takes two years or ten, or if it wastes hundreds of thousands of dollars. Obviously, if they cared about the UVSS and it's members, they would cringe at making this process so expensive by going to court, but they will do so because they care more about their ideals & politics than their members.
John July 8, 2010, 4:22 p.m.
A new petition could get UVic a referendum in as few as two years. CFS gets to pick and choose which schools are lucky enough to vote what year, and there's no visible criteria or mechanism for accountability to compel it to be held earlier than is politically convenient for them. They can & will put off a UVic referendum until they feel they can win it, if it takes two years or ten, or if it wastes hundreds of thousands of dollars. Obviously, if they cared about the UVSS and it's members, they would cringe at making this process so expensive by going to court, but they will do so because they care more about their ideals & politics than their members.
Maloi July 8, 2010, 9:22 p.m.
Yeah, I'd sure love to hear Dylan's explanation for why he thinks the CFS would not deny a second petition. Does he know anything about how they operate? Look at 99% of societies that have tried to leave.
Maloi July 8, 2010, 9:22 p.m.
Yeah, I'd sure love to hear Dylan's explanation for why he thinks the CFS would not deny a second petition. Does he know anything about how they operate? Look at 99% of societies that have tried to leave.
George July 9, 2010, 2:48 p.m.
The BoD should stop participating in all CFS events. Don't spend any money sending delegates to CFS general meetings, don't buy their material and put all the CFS fees into a trust account until the CFS stops keeping UVic as involuntary members. They should not even have ratified a CFS rep to their Board.
The UVSS constitution and bylaws under the Society Act take precedent over the CFS rules and elections should be run fair under the new election rules of the UVSS.
George July 9, 2010, 2:48 p.m.
The BoD should stop participating in all CFS events. Don't spend any money sending delegates to CFS general meetings, don't buy their material and put all the CFS fees into a trust account until the CFS stops keeping UVic as involuntary members. They should not even have ratified a CFS rep to their Board.
The UVSS constitution and bylaws under the Society Act take precedent over the CFS rules and elections should be run fair under the new election rules of the UVSS.
Tori July 9, 2010, 3:44 p.m.
Even if the court case did cost Sherlock's estimated $50k-$100k, if we voted to leave the CFS once we got the referendum, we'd save around $200k in CFS fees the following year provided that UVic students vote to keep the money in the UVSS.
With the free option of re-filing a new petition with the CFS, you get what you pay for: lousy service and quite possibly no referendum while any of us are still at UVic.
Tori July 9, 2010, 3:44 p.m.
Even if the court case did cost Sherlock's estimated $50k-$100k, if we voted to leave the CFS once we got the referendum, we'd save around $200k in CFS fees the following year provided that UVic students vote to keep the money in the UVSS.
With the free option of re-filing a new petition with the CFS, you get what you pay for: lousy service and quite possibly no referendum while any of us are still at UVic.
David Foster July 10, 2010, 2:58 p.m.
In 1985 UVic students voted in referendum to pay $3.75 per student per term to the CFS. In 1999 there was a little-known referendum which passed an increase in CFS fees to $6.00 per student per term. This is what should be paying, but the CFS has been illegally increasing our fees since 1999 and we now pay $7.98 per student per term in defiance of the University Act and basic principles of democracy. We can't act as though the CFS is a legitimate, law-abiding and democratic organization when it has repeatedly shown itself to be otherwise, rather we should be making an issue of the money extorted from students over the last 10 years.
David Foster July 10, 2010, 2:58 p.m.
In 1985 UVic students voted in referendum to pay $3.75 per student per term to the CFS. In 1999 there was a little-known referendum which passed an increase in CFS fees to $6.00 per student per term. This is what should be paying, but the CFS has been illegally increasing our fees since 1999 and we now pay $7.98 per student per term in defiance of the University Act and basic principles of democracy. We can't act as though the CFS is a legitimate, law-abiding and democratic organization when it has repeatedly shown itself to be otherwise, rather we should be making an issue of the money extorted from students over the last 10 years.
Stacy Chappel July 19, 2010, 7:10 p.m.
Hi! The UVSS bylaws don't take precedence over the CFS bylaws according to case law on CFS referendums (check out the Saskachewan example). The Societys Act does govern all BC societies but wouldn't overrrule the CFS or UVSS bylaws. They should get legal advice on that.
As a seperate fee, the funds paid to the CFS would not revert to the UVSS if students vote to leave, they would simply stop being collected. The UVIC GSS did leave and that is what happened in our case.
At SFU, they voted to keep the fee for the SFSS if the society left the CFS, so they are collecting and holding in trust to see the result of their lawsuit.
Regarding CFS's CPI increases, that is a good question--but it may have gone to referendum in past. It is also the UVSS that writes UVIC and asks them to collect the fee based on a referendum, not the CFS, so you should have a record whether that has been done, and whether such a referendum was held to accept CPI increases. I know some schools did indeed pass CPI increase referenda.
One good thing about having paid the CPI increased rates is the CFS requires all fees to be paid up before a referendum to leave--if you had not implemented CPI increases that would be an additional matter to fight in court before proceeding, making things much more expensive for the UVSS today.
Cheers!
Stacy Chappel July 19, 2010, 7:10 p.m.
Hi! The UVSS bylaws don't take precedence over the CFS bylaws according to case law on CFS referendums (check out the Saskachewan example). The Societys Act does govern all BC societies but wouldn't overrrule the CFS or UVSS bylaws. They should get legal advice on that.
As a seperate fee, the funds paid to the CFS would not revert to the UVSS if students vote to leave, they would simply stop being collected. The UVIC GSS did leave and that is what happened in our case.
At SFU, they voted to keep the fee for the SFSS if the society left the CFS, so they are collecting and holding in trust to see the result of their lawsuit.
Regarding CFS's CPI increases, that is a good question--but it may have gone to referendum in past. It is also the UVSS that writes UVIC and asks them to collect the fee based on a referendum, not the CFS, so you should have a record whether that has been done, and whether such a referendum was held to accept CPI increases. I know some schools did indeed pass CPI increase referenda.
One good thing about having paid the CPI increased rates is the CFS requires all fees to be paid up before a referendum to leave--if you had not implemented CPI increases that would be an additional matter to fight in court before proceeding, making things much more expensive for the UVSS today.
Cheers!