Whether through social media, casual conversations about student politics over lunch, or even through this paper, we have all heard in one way or another about the board structure problem that has plagued our student union for the past year.
On Wednesday, November 18th, this issue was resolved. An overwhelming majority ratified the proposal put forward by Khrystyna Zhuk and Daman Singh this past Wednesday. But highlighting the events of the AGM, despite how entertaining it was, is not the purpose of this article. Vic’s efforts in finding a board structure that complies with the Canadian Not-For-Profit Corporations Act has been sustained, concerned and successful because of the hard work of so many hard-working Victorians.
To the vast majority of the student body at the University of Toronto, the inner-workings and day-to-day responsibilities of our student union are a total mystery. The controversies that have surrounded the UTSU have left many asking what they actually do for us outside of providing us with health and dental insurance.
But for some people, these issues have been taking up a good portion of the last year of their life. Bringing the UTSU back into compliance with the CNCA has been a very long and tumultuous process, and now that it’s finished it’ll allow our student government get back to doing the things that we as students need and want them to do: represent our interests, plan fun things, and create a more equitable and sustainable environment for every student at this university.
What deserves attention is the vast amount of work that has gone into this campaign: creating a better, more inclusive experience for all students at U of T.
The newly ratified board structure is, with a few amendments, what was selected by students at the AGM in October over a competing UTM-favourable proposal by Grayce Slobodian. The structure allows for general equity directors (as opposed to the issue-specific portfolios of Slobodian’s proposal), who confront issues related to their expertise on a case-by-case basis. To bring the UTSU in compliance with CNCA regulations, college and professional faculty directors will be elected within their respective communities, and will then be subject to ratification at an annual ratification meeting of all members.
A further amendment that was proposed by VCU member Jonathan Webb and Victoria College director Auni Ahsan at Wednesday’s second meeting moved to do away with two Arts & Science At-Large director positions, instead creating six academic directors (humanities, social sciences, computer science, life sciences, physical & mathematical sciences, and Rotman commerce). This amendment was adopted, and is now a part of the new board structure.
The proposal put forward by Zhuk and Singh was originally a collaboration between directors and student government leaders from the St. George campus and Mississauga campus. However, several days before the last AGM, these bi-lateral supports broke down, and lead to a very short and intense campaign for the election of the Zhuk-Singh proposal. At the year’s first AGM, the proposal was passed by a simple majority, but the split vote between campuses prevented it from being ratified, which required a two-thirds majority.
Given time to prepare, several student representatives sought to prevent the outcome of this previous AGM by working to ensure the ratification of the Zhuk-Singh proposal. A key barrier in the proposal’s ratification in the first AGM was the proxy vote system. In a change from years past, those who wanted their votes proxied (giving their voting power to another person who would be attending the event) had to register at the UTSU office. after accessibility issues were raised, the second AGM moved to adopt an online proxy system. Victoria College UTSU Directors Auni Ahsan and Steve Warner proposed a goal of four to five hundred total votes from Victoria College. This lofty number seemed outrageous in comparison to the previous total of nearly 200 at the AGM in October. But instead of causing a sense of discouragement, the failure to ratify the proposal at the last AGM provided cause for a rallying cry: in the words ofVUSAC vice-president of external affairs Alex Martinborough, “why not six hundred?”
With this goal in mind, these student leaders sought to do things differently. As Warner pointed out, “getting people to proxy their vote is different than simply convincing them to vote for you – you have to get them to coordinate their interests with one another to ensure that their vote is used in a manner that they see fit”.
As they began to mobilize their group of proxy holders, they pushed each of them to bring at least one more person to the table. Each of these proxy holders was then tasked with spreading the information, attracting more proxy holders, and fulfilling their own maximum quota of eleven proxied votes. For example, VUSAC councillor Carl Abrahamsen proceeded to organize his own floor meetings throughout his residence in Margaret Addison Hall, gaining over 60 proxies and several additional proxy holders single-handedly.
If a proxy holder had already maximized their quota, they would add additional students who wished to proxy their vote to a spreadsheet database organized by Warner. These students would then be matched up with a proxy holder who had not yet maximized their quota. This collective effort, coupled with the videos, infographics, and websites created an extremely well informed and involved student body at Victoria College.
The end result of these efforts was an astounding 625 votes from Victoria College alone, which equates to a turnout of over 20% of the Victoria College student body — nearly triple the percentage achieved by any other college at U of T.
The effort on behalf of Ahsan, Warner, Martinborough, the VUSAC team, and the many proxy-holders played without a doubt a huge role in the success of ratifying the Zhuk-Singh proposal. This result, above all, allows our student union to turn the page, and finally turn their attention back to issues that matter. Many regard this success as the beginning of a new era in student politics at U of T, an era which aspires to greater transparency, equality, and inclusivity for all students at the University of Toronto.
