Just over a year ago, the Carleton University Students’ Association (CUSA) passed a controversial motion that kicked off a series of events culminating in a five-month long legal battle that cost students upwards of $200,000.
The motion amended the constitution to require a larger majority of council to approve changes to the constitution, bylaws or policies. It also tweaked the bylaw requiring proxies in the summer to be from the same faculty as the absent councillor they’re representing.
CUSA’s constitutional board repealed the motion a month later, but vice-president (internal) Ariel Norman said CUSA wouldn’t recognize the board’s decision, since they broke bylaws just by hearing the challenge.
In keeping with the motion passed April 21, 2011, Norman attempted to move 16 councillors from office on July 28, 2011 over discrepancies in council meeting attendance. The result was a legal battle that suspended council business until almost the end of the year.
Hundreds of thousands of dollars in student fees later and dozens of council hours spent arguing over technicalities and slinging insults from one side to the other have brought CUSA no closer to closing the growing gap between the plaintiffs and defendants.
Looking back on the year, CUSA president Obed Okyere, who was elected with an executive composed entirely of an opposing slate, said the fact that next year’s executive are all from the same side might prevent a repeat of this year’s conflict and make life easier for students.
“Sometimes it’s good for [Carleton] to have a mixed slate where there’s balance to make sure [CUSA] isn’t going too left or too right, but sometimes it means we focus more on the fighting,” Okyere said.
Although Norman agreed that one slate will make things easier, she said it also means “they can silence any opposition as they please.”
“I worry for the future of this association, not because I believe the elected CUSA representatives can’t do their jobs, but because I believe that they don’t understand how truly precarious a position the plaintiffs put CUSA in this year,” she said via email. “I wouldn’t be surprised if CUSA became almost non-existent next year.”
Although having one slate might make it easier, the question now is whether this year’s bad blood will spill into next year. Will the plaintiff versus defendant divide that practically polarized council still be an issue?
Based on the words of next year’s executive, the answer is no.
“Students have voiced their opinions and elected individuals they can put their trust in for once,” said vice-president (finance)-elect Michael De Luca. “This coming year will be one of change and progress, a year where students’ faith will be restored in their student association.”
However, given the fact that two vocal council members, computer science councillor Justin Campbell and De Luca himself, who was one of the lead plaintiffs, are returning, the answer doesn’t look quite that simple.
Although president-elect Alexander Golovko said he dislikes being associated with one side of the conflict since part of his leadership plan centres around getting people to work together, he said the legal conflict formally launched by fellow slate member De Luca was really about standing up to current CUSA executives.
“The way I see [De Luca] is as the person who stood up for the constitutional rights of the councillors and decided to take the lead while they were being harassed by some of the executives . . . I personally deplore the fact that [CUSA] spent $200,000 of students money but on the other hand I’m glad and proud that we stood up for our rights last year,” Golovko said. “We’re able to make sure that democracy is maintained and no illegal disqualifications occurred.”
The combination of two polarized sides on council and a new chair who was unfamiliar with CUSA policy led to council meetings post-legal dispute being monopolized in large part by debates over technicalities and interpretations of Robert’s Rules of Order, a set of rules that govern how CUSA council operates.
Robert’s Rules are necessary, Okyere said, because they ensure everyone gets a chance to voice their opinions on important issues and motions and they help keep meetings productive.
Sometimes, however, they don’t.
“We’re supposed to focus on things that matter the most [to students], but sometimes people get very emotional,” Okyere said. “It’s just all the political drama that happens behind the scenes . . . and [Robert’s Rules of Order] can be used to filibuster meetings and prevent things from happening.”
Golovko said he’s already looking into training for councillors prior to September where they would become well versed in policy, bylaws and Robert’s Rules of Order.
Still, many think it’s going to require more than just a better understanding of the rules.
Former journalism councillor Yaelle Gang was a plaintiff up until a month ago when she resigned. Although she’s quick not to generalize all councillors as “dramatic or crazy,” Gang said CUSA politics and values have fallen by the wayside in favour of fighting and both sides, including the plaintiffs, have lost sight of their priorities.
Gang said she put up with the “crazy” because she believed the plaintiffs were standing up for democracy, but once she felt they weren’t she said it was no longer worth the stress to be a CUSA councillor.
“I think now we’ve seen what’s happened at meetings, what’s happened with people on both sides pulling out technicalities,” she said. “It’s not about the principle of democracy, it’s not about maintaining the rules, it’s just about fighting . . . there’s the technicality and then there’s the spirit of Robert’s Rules of Order. Whoever wrote it didn’t intend for it to be used this way.”
The recent disqualification of public affairs councilor Sarah McCue and the overturning of the original disqualification of public affairs councilor Salar Abdul-Baki are just examples of the harm caused by CUSA’s ambiguous bylaws.
Part of the settlement agreement was to rewrite some of CUSA’s documents to make CUSA the association and CUSA Inc. accountable to one another, Gang said. However, the governance reform committee, which was supposed to do just that, has taken a backburner to other CUSA issues.
At this point, “the organization has just been mismanaged for so long that the actual issues are too big to address so we’re wasting time on little things,” Gang said.
Okyere said he agrees that CUSA needs to improve its bylaws and policies, but that the legal dispute delayed all attempts.
“I’ve already advised the new executives and councillors to look into it,” he said.
In fact, Golovko said revisions, including a possible merger between CUSA Inc. and the association, will be looked at.
“Everyone is in the middle of exams, so it’s not a lot of time to look into it,” Golovko said. “We’ll be willing to work with it, as of right now we haven’t discussed the details.”
The details are what Sarah Cooper, current faculty of arts and social sciences councilor and member of the constitutional board, is paying attention to.
“I don’t really know what’s going to happen, nobody does, but if it continues the way it continues . . . I’m sure it’ll be just as disastrous as this year,” she said. “Clearly the system isn’t working.”
The next council meeting is scheduled to take place at 6:30 p.m., April 23 in 608 Robertson Hall.
