The committee advocating that students vote ‘no’ to the referendum question asking them to remove OPIRG-Carleton’s levy has received five electoral violations, and is appealing all of them.
The ‘no’ committee is appealing the violations. If the appeal of all five violations fails, 10 per cent of votes against removing OPIRG-Carleton’s levy will be withheld, according to the Carleton University Students’ Association (CUSA) electoral code.
As per the code, an additional violation would disqualify the committee altogether.
The ‘no’ committee wants to save OPIRG-Carleton’s annual $6.84 levy per full-time undergraduate.
The violations stem from a disagreement between the elections office and the ‘no’ committee regarding whether the committee is responsible for the actions of OPIRG-Carleton.
Head of the ‘no’ committee Adam Carroll said the committee is not responsible for and does not represent OPIRG.
“[The elections office] has been trying to make the point that every activity of OPIRG is my responsibility,” Carroll said. “But there’s nothing in the code that gives that authority.”
The elections office disagrees.
“As far as we are concerned . . . Mr. Carroll is in fact the representative of OPIRG in this election,” said chief electoral officer Sunny Cohen. “He has a responsibility to communicate with OPIRG on the directives of the office, and where there is confusion on any directive of the office . . . it’s his responsibility to come and clarify with our office ahead of time.”
Carroll said he should not be held accountable for the first three violations handed to the ‘no’ committee.
These violations surround the incident of a graduate student collecting contact information and distributing material on behalf of OPIRG-Carleton, according to the official ruling of the elections office. A violation was given for pre-campaigning, another for campaigning by a non-CUSA member, and the third for the distribution of unapproved campaign material.
The grad student was doing “regular outreach” for OPIRG-Carleton, Carroll said.
“We didn’t know until it was too late that OPIRG doing its regular advertising would be against the rules,” he said.
“We informed the ‘no’ committee that these actions should cease, given the fact that we’re in a referendum and the ‘no’ committee is supposed to be the only representation that OPIRG has on campus during the referendum period,” Cohen said.
Carroll said the fourth violation was given when Carroll did not set up a meeting between himself, Cohen, and OPIRG.
“We didn’t feel it was appropriate for [the ‘no’ committee] to [schedule the meeting] on [Cohen’s] behalf,” Carroll said, calling the violation “extremely petty.”
Cohen said it is the responsibility of the ‘no’ committee to tell OPIRG-Carleton the directives of the elections office.
The fifth violation regarded a print ad appearing in the March 28 edition of the Charlatan. The ad includes information about nominations for OPIRG-Carleton’s board of directors, its annual general meeting, and its bursary deadline. A violation for the publication of unapproved materials was given.
“It has nothing to do with the ‘no’ committee,” Carroll said. “I did not allow this to happen.”
Cohen said he understands that OPIRG advertises regularly with the Charlatan—a Charlatan invoice shows the ad was pre-paid in January and was to run until the end of the semester—but that “the position of the office was that OPIRG, to the extent that the referendum demanded, would have to suspend certain activities and certain practices,” he said.
OPIRG-Carleton’s ad space is being printed as a blank space on page 11 of the Charlatan’s current issue.
The appeal of the five violations is now being considered by the electoral board.
Voting for all referendum questions will continue through April 4. Cohen said results can be expected on April 5.
