Category: News

The Representative Union (RU)has won the CSU byelections with 1,638 votes. In all 3,603 students voted for a presidential candidate.
According to Chief Electoral Officer Jessica Lajambe, the Umbrella Party came in second with 1,374 votes, a difference of 264. New Organized Way came in last with 591 votes.
RU won despite allegations of bribing New Organized Way into dropping out of the race and being disqualified and requalified in one day. RU representatives said that they were cornered by New Organized Way.
Lajambe said that 45 votes were spoiled and that about 95 students voted twice in the election. “Each student will be contacted and will be given a fine. They will be barred from voting for the next two years and their right to run as candidates will be taken away.”
Not only must Lajambe deal with the fining of the students, but she must also address over 50 contestations of the byelections. “I am treating all complaints as contestations. Most of the contestations deal with the referendum question.”

Nili Yavin, vp communications of the Representative Union (RU) was accused of allegedly bribing New Organized Way (NOW) presidential candidate Luis Diaz over the phone on Nov. 25, but was never allowed to reveal her side of the story.
Since the petition began for the recall of former CSU President Sabrina Stea, the RU had been trying to form an alliance with NOW. Both slates are moderate and appear to share the same interests of changing the CSU.
On Nov. 23, the RU met with NOW to discuss NOW’s dropping out of the race to avoid splitting the vote. “We told them we could get them more involved so they could get more experience, but they weren’t receptive to that,” said RU presidential candidate Chris Schulz.
Then on Nov. 25 came the three phone calls. “I called [Diaz] up to smooth things over and to see how things were going,” Yavin said. Diaz made the next two phone calls, and she believed that the second conversation was taped since it had lasted between 40 to 50 minutes. “He called me back and said, ‘I’m not going to run. What can you do for me?’ I felt pushed into a corner and repeatedly said, ‘Luis, I cannot offer you paid positions.'”
NOW’s presidential candidate had a different story to tell. Diaz said that while Yavin had called him to smooth things over because of the meeting, she again tried to get him to drop out of the election. “She called me to apologize and to try to convince me [about] the advantages of dropping out of the election [and how] it would be better for us to get hands-on experience first.”
This annoyed him because Diaz had heard it before. “We’d already had this conversation many times. Before the campaign, they had been approaching us. We told them we were running and [were not] interested.”
Taping the conversation was done for a specific reason. “Originally, it was to have my group members know what [was] happening,” replied Diaz. “We [found] it really ridiculous that we [were] getting called and called for the same purpose when we’d told them no.” The conversations and his claim that Yavin had offered him paid positions propelled Diaz to file his complaint.
After Diaz handed the tape to Chief Electoral Officer (CEO) Jessica Lajambe between 5:30 p.m. and 6 p.m. on Nov. 26, the CEO made her decision at midnight.
When Yavin found out about the disqualification, the tape and the allegations at 12:20 a.m., she and the other RU members were flabberghasted. “I was in shock,” she replied. “It [made] me sick that I was taken completely out of context and that the conversation was not taken in its entirety. It [hurt] me that [that was] the game Diaz and the CEO [wanted] to play.”
Lajambe’s decision did not allow the RU to tell their side of the story. Yavin said that the RU never received a written disqualification letter. “The CEO didn’t offer us a chance to contest the complaint in an appropriate manner,” said Schulz.
What Yavin found disturbing was how only two sentences were taken out of the whole conversation. “[They] were taken out of context, thus sensationalizing everything which consequently was misleading to the student body.”
Reinstatement of the RU occurred 12 hours later after it was disqualified and after Schulz’s lawyer sent a letter to Lajambe.
“The CEO is not allowed to disqualify a candidate before the election, [only] after,” said Schulz. “Her decision to disqualify us was completely illegal, and that’s why she reversed it.”
Lajambe, however, believed she was in the right with her decision at the time. “The regulations do not endorse corrupt practices. I think it [was] democratic.”
In regards to the tape, neither Yavin nor the RU members have heard it. “I asked her the next day, ‘Where’s the tape? Why can’t I hear it?’ She said that Diaz had it and it wouldn’t be available for a few days.”
Diaz denied that he ever had possession of the tape after he gave it in to Lajambe. “We don’t have the tape. The CEO has possession of [it],” he replied. When asked about the tape, Lajambe said that everything would be made known after the polling is over. “When the right time comes, I will give a press release.”
According to Yavin, the RU’s lawyer was their saving grace. “We wouldn’t be on the ballot if we didn’t protect our interests. Our lawyer basically made her abide by CSU rules.”
Lajambe is remedying the situation. Voting has been extended until Wednesday for students who voted on the morning of Nov. 27, since those votes will not count.
“The fact that Diaz was taping our conversation [made] me question if our negotiation was ever held in good faith. It also [looked] to us like a desperate attempt on Diaz’s part to formulate a setup. I was so nave to assume that the NOW’s interests were the same as ours [and] to think they were acting in good faith.”

While the outcome for the CSU presidency remains unknown, results for the two available seats in the council of representatives have been announced.
One seat was available in both fine arts and engineering and computer science, with one candidate nominated to fill each.
Former councillor and CSU President Sabrina Stea nabbed the seat for fine arts, garnering 71.2 per cent of the vote from a pool of 316 yes or no votes that were cast. 108 abstentions were tabulated, and there were only four spoiled votes.
Meanwhile, computer science and engineering sent Chae Dickie-Clark to council, with 74.7 per cent of the vote out of 332 yes or no votes tallied. There were 328 abstentions and 20 spoiled ballots.
Like Stea, Dickie-Clark has previous experience as a CSU councillor.
Stea said she will vigilantly promote the interests of fine arts students. “I’m focusing on dealing with the situation to give them more outlets to create and present their work, and to provide them with more funding.”
She added that fine arts students are often required to purchase their own basic supplies such as paper, and in the case of photography, developing chemicals.
“Basically we’re dealing with fees and not having resources reflected by those fees,” she said.
As for the lack of competition for the seats, Stea stated that perhaps students are not aware of the different roles and responsibilities in the CSU, an opinion echoed by Chief Electoral Officer Jessica Lajambe.
“I think it is either a lack of interest of participating in student politics, or, I don’t think a lot of people understand the structure of the CSU,” said Lajambe.
Stea added that had there been another candidate vying for the fine arts seat, she would not have run.
The council seats became available after their previous occupants failed to meet their obligations to council. Councillors who miss three regular CSU meetings lose their seat.
Elizabeth Powell of the faculty of fine arts, and Nancy Paliotti of computer science and engineering, were dismissed from council at a regular meeting held in October.
The results of the vote for the seats and the election of Stea and Dickie-Clark to council are expected to be ratified at the next regular CSU council meeting on Dec. 12.

According to Chief Electoral Officer (CEO) Jessica Lajambe, over 500 students who voted last Tuesday morning will have to cast their votes again, as their votes will not count.
Those who voted during this time will have to vote again because Lajambe disqualified the Representative Union (RU) the night before the election, only to requalify the slate 12 hours later.
This confusion led to voter irregularity, where at the Sir George Williams campus the RU slate was not scratched off and another slate that pulled out was not scratched off either. At Loyola the RU slate was scratched off, but the Left Opposition was still on the ballot.
Lajambe disqualified the RU because of allegations of bribery and she later requalified the slate after she received a lawyer’s letter from the RU’s lawyer.
After the confusion, Lajambe met with members of each slate to discuss what to do with the ballots and they decided to extend the voting period for those who voted on Tuesday morning.
“We sealed the boxes with the votes that were cast on Nov. 27,” Lajambe said.
The CEO added that by the evening of Nov. 27 a list was complied of the 500 or so electors who voted. By Dec. 2 all the 500 or so electors were notified by phone that they could cast their vote again.
A special polling station is located only at the SGW campus in front the CSU offices on the sixth floor of the Hall Building.
Voting for those who voted last Tuesday started on Nov. 29 and will continue until Dec. 5.
Luis Diaz, presidential candidate for New Organized Way, does not feel that the recasting votes of the 400 students will alter voter turnout significantly. “If they were going to vote they still will, and if they didn’t care before, now they’re just turned off.”
On Nov. 29 the university sent out a press release stating that the administration was concerned about the irregularities in the electoral process.

Five out of the six referendum questions were passed in last week’s CSU referenda election, even though four out of the six questions are non-binding.
The question that did not pass was the non-academic club fee question, which would have increased club funding. This question was defeated by a small margin of 283 votes. If the question were passed it would be binding, since the CSU determines the budget of non-academic clubs.
CSU interim President Patrice Blais said that he was disappointed that this question did not pass, since clubs do not receive much funding. “Our club funding is 20 years behind and the size of club budgets is pretty bad. McGill [University] has better club funding than we do.”
Another binding question is the media fund fee, which will change the way the Amateur Radio Club, CJLO and CUTV will be funded. 2103 students voted in favour of the question, whereas 989 students voted against the new funding scheme.
The change in funding will take place in January 2002 and will go down from 15 cents per credit to 13 cents per credit and will be indexed to the consumer price index, which is the rate of increase of the cost of living. This rate varies and this means that the funding will vary.
Former CSU President Sabrina Stea said other clubs could get more money from this change in funding.
Another question that passed was the one on democratizing the position of the dean of students, by having the position of the dean of students elected. “We will be talking to the administration about this and we will see what they will do about this. I am estimating that the election for a new dean of students will take place in February,” Blais said.
Dean of students Donald Boisvert said he no comment in regard to the referendum question.
The question on the bad debt fee was passed. The fee would allow the administration to collect 1.61 per cent of student fees in order to make up for the difference in fees that the administration does not receive, but transfers to student groups. The administration does not collect all the fees is because some students do not end up paying for their courses. Even if a student finishes a course without paying for it, the fees from that course have already been transferred to student groups.
“It is clear that students do not want this fee,” said Blais. “It is up to the administration to listen to students.”
Vice-Rector Services Michael Di Grappa said in a letter to the Concordian on Nov. 7 that the without the bad debt fee, the university would be providing the students with a interest free loan and last year that amounted to $783,241. He added that there was an increase of the amount of funds that were being transferred to students that was not theirs.
The fourth question regarded a rumor that the Canadian government would ban students from Libya, Iran and Iraq from taking chemistry courses at Canadian universities. Students voted in favour of not allowing the possibility of this ban from happening.
Rector Frederick Lowy said that he did not think that any Canadian university would uphold such a ban and that Concordia would not either.
The government said it never even taught of implementing such a ban.
Concordians also voted for sympathy with Americans for the Sept. 11 tragedy, but disagreed with the attacks on Afghanistan. Blais said in an e-mail that the CSU must take a stand on this issue.

Students eagerly gathered at the Hive at Concordia’s Loyola campus on Nov. 20 to watch the different slates running for the CSU presidency present their views a debate.
The debate began with Chris Schulz, presidential candidate for the Representative Union, and he emphasized how he is running to create change at the CSU. Opening a student centre and a CSU office at the Loyola campus are a few of the platform points raised by Schulz. He added that in the past months, the CSU has done a number of things that have not represented the majority of Concordia students, listing the student handbook as a primary example.
Presidential candidate Tom Keefer of The Left Opposition continued the debate by reinforcing his dissatisfaction with the university administration. “They’re trying to increase fees for students. They get massive salaries, and the rector has an entertainment allowance of $1,800 per month. All of this is coming out of our student fees,” said Keefer.
“This whole election campaign is very embarrassing for the university administration,” continued Keefer, “because they thought that they could expel and ban me from campus and that I wasn’t going to be able to say anything more about them.” Keefer added that the administration has been involved with trying to tamper with student politics.
Luis Diaz, presidential candidate for the New Organized Way slate, acknowledged how for the longest time, the CSU has had a political agenda that alienates many students. “It is very hard to properly represent 22,000 students with different beliefs, religions, races and cultural backgrounds,” said Diaz. “This is why, if we were to be elected, we would not have a political agenda.” Diaz added that the main goal of New Organized Way is to make students aware of what’s going on at Concordia, and to improve the university’s image.
An Umbrella Party’s presidential candidate, Zev Tiefenbach, stated that their major platform is to have an advocacy service that would help students deal with various problems such as landlord disputes. Tiefenbach also underlined that faculty associations are very important. “A student union should never undermine the work that faculty associations undertake.
Discussions of the candidates’ platforms were followed by numerous questions from the audience. Concerns among students included the Sodexho Marriott contract with Concordia, club funding and changes they would like to see being made at the Loyola campus.
Anna Louise Crago, VP External of the Umbrella Party said our quality education is on the chopping block. “Even if you know your program is not going to get cut, the courses in your program are going to get cut.”
Despite disagreements among the four parties regarding various issues, all of them expressed disappointment regarding voter turnout among Concordia students during former CSU presidential elections. Each presidential candidate stressed the importance of having more students vote during election period.

Last Thursday’s debate at the Sir George Willams Campus between competing candidates for the CSU presidency made it evident that repairing Concordia’s damaged reputation ranked high among the prime concerns of students and slates alike.
“Because of our image, people are judging us,” said Luis Diaz president of the New Organized Way slate. “[They are] saying we are radicals, revolutionaries.”
The bad image resulted from various controversies that rocked the student union, such as the student handbook published by the present student union executive and the banning of two student representatives.
“A lot of people were alienated by the handbook,” said Zev Tiefenbach from An Umbrella Party. He added that his slate would provide a moderate handbook and give other associations the chance to produce their own publications.
“The handbook expressed the opinions of certain groups but others were alienated,” said Diaz. “That is why it is important not to have a political agenda in the CSU. The students’ opinions will be expressed, just not in the negative way it was done in the past.”
Left Opposition’s Tom Keefer also had a negative opinion about the agenda, just in another context. “The handbook was really scandalous; it wasn’t left-wing enough, it wasn’t radical enough, it didn’t have enough controversy in it, so we want to take it one step further,” he said.
The Representative Union and An Umbrella Party both pointed out that financial problems, like last year’s fraud could be avoided by closely monitoring the union’s finances.
Money issues surfaced throughout the debate. While Chris Schulz of the Representative Union talked about establishing a student service fund, Diaz promised to fund clubs and associations more fairly.
Left Opposition’s VP Anti-Corporate Affairs Trish McIntosh extended that thought. “There should be free education for all students,” she said, after making clear that the Left Opposition felt strongly about student issues in general, space, funding and access to resources in particular.
However, all the slates agreed that only one semester in office puts certain limits on their ability to make big changes.
“Experience counts. There is not a lot of time for the CSU executive to learn how the university works, how the CSU works,” Schulz said.
Since this is only a byelection, the winners will have to defend their positions next year. “We only have one semester in office, [so] we have to come up with a few concrete electives and make them happen,” New Organized Way’s VP Outreach Christopher Dubois said.
Tiefenbach leaned towards the same objective. “We understand that there is not much time but we have a small program of plans that will provide concrete benefits to every student.”
In the end, no clear winner emerged from this debate, which was too often complemented by pointed fingers and destructive accusations, which at least provoked the audience to participate through clapping and/or booing.

After a month of deliberation, the Quebec Superior Court supported Concordia University’s decision to ban Laith Marouf and Tom Keefer from campus.
Superior Court Judge Nicole Morneau dismissed their request on Nov. 22 to have the restrictions lifted, stating that they have yet to explore all avenues of appeal within the university. The judge also assessed all the costs of the court case to the two students.
The ban, issued on Aug. 20 by Rector Frederick Lowy, stated that the two students were barred from Concordia premises and expelled from the university. The decision was made after the two allegedly assaulted and uttered death threats against campus security on July 20.
Lowy stated in an e-mail that the length of the ban is still under discussion.
Marouf and Keefer have since brought the case to the Quebec Supreme Court, seeking an injunction where they would be reinstated as Concordia students and face a tribunal.
The judge quashed the injunction, stating that the two did not exhaust all possible avenues within the university prior to taking legal action.
Lowy agreed with the ruling, stating that the two have not yet explored the option of going to the Board of Governors (BoG). The BoG has the power to overturn Lowy’s decision of barring and expelling Marouf and Keefer.
The two students argue that the BoG is already partial to their case. According to both students, they have already passed a motion on Sept. 26 supporting Lowy’s decision to ban the students from campus.
“There’s no actual body that has not taken a position,” said Marouf.
Evidence submitted to the Supreme Court by the university attest that no motion was ever passed. The allegation was not mentioned in the 12-page ruling by the judge, presumably on the basis that there is no evidence to the accusations.
According to Marouf, an article published by The Suburban on Oct. 3 stated that “a number of ‘points of order’ were made in the motion of support for the rector’s actions, especially concerning the expulsion of two students from the university, was easily passed by the BoG.”
Keefer and Marouf claim that BoG changed the minutes of the meeting, omitting the discussion of CSU issues and the CSU handbook. The CSU representatives for BoG were not present at the meeting.
Keefer asserted that the Supreme Court’s ruling would not deter him from infringing on his ban from campus.
“I’m not going to respect the university’s order to ban me. I’m going to carry on about my business,” he said.
The two students have not made any definite plans yet as to how they will proceed with their attempts to be reinstated. According to Marouf, they will either appeal the judge’s ruling or wait and see what the administration will do next.
“If [we] are to win the right to return to Concordia, it must be through the political support of the community and through a broad-based student mobilization against the actions of the administration,” Keefer said in an e-mail Monday.
Lowy temporarily lifted the ban for Keefer last week so that he could vie for CSU presidency. Lowy also stated that he would reconsider Keefer’s ban from Concordia should he win on Nov. 29.

Student who Have an Understanding of Lampoon and have Tremendous Zeal (SHULTZ) have quit the race for the CSU presidency on Nov. 21.
“I received complaints from all the candidates regarding SHULTZ, because it confused students and I found that they were contradicting themselves. I met with the Representative Union and SHULTZ and we had a discussion regarding SHULTZ’s name and SHULTZ decided to pull out of the race,” Chief Electoral Officer (CEO) Jessica Lajambe said.
President of the SHULZ slate, Pyam Montazami said that his party was leeching off the popularity of the Representative Union’s President Chris Schulz. “Because of that acronym students were interested in our slate, but I don’t think we would have won. We didn’t want to deal with the consequences of being disqualified because of our acronym,” Montazami said.
Montazami added people thought he was campaigning for the Representative Union and that this had negative results.
Schulz said he was flattered that the SHULTZ slate thought that he had a chance of winning the elections. “The CEO would have expelled us both, had the SHULTZ party continued to campaign,” Schulz said. “The SHULTZ slate felt bad about the whole thing. It is hard enough to get your message across and it is good thing that they backed out since it causes less confusion for students.”

Concordia students are being asked to vote upon a referendum question which is a rumour. The question asks students to implore the Canadian government from banning students from Iran, Iraq and Libya from taking chemistry courses at Canadian universities.
When the CSU presented the referendum questions, they did not know that the ban was a rumour that the National Post printed, due to false sources. The Canadian government never proposed such a ban.
Former CSU President Sabrina Stea said that the Canadian Student Federation informed Concordia about the possibility of this policy.
The CSU’s Chief Electoral Officer, Jessica Lajambe, who was involved in phrasing the referendum questions said that her job was only to ensure the clarity of the questions so that it could be easily understood by the student body. Her responsibilities include the grammar and sentence structure of the question, but not its content. “Although the ban is a rumour, the referendum question concerning the ban will stay,” Lajambe added.
Patrice Blais, interim CSU president, said that although the ban is not a current policy in Canada, there is still the possibility of its existence in the future. He added that asking this question will enhance the importance of academic freedom around our campus. He hopes that the government will never consider such a ban because of its discriminatory nature.
In an e-mail, Rector Frederick Lowy wrote, “As I understand it, it is in the United States that the possibility of such a ban has been raised. I am not aware of anyone in Canada proposing such action. In my view, Canadian universities, including Concordia, would not support such a ban.”
“It’s still a great question. We want to warn the government: don’t ever consider passing down such a policy,” said Blais.
“It is our responsibility, as a student, to stand against racism and discrimination,” Stea added.

The du Maurier Arts Council has awarded funding grants to 11 students from Quebec, seven of which are from Concordia.
At dinner a held on Nov. 21 at the Lychee Supper Club, the du Maurier Arts Council introduced the young artists who will be sharing in $105,000 of funding awarded under the council’s granting program. The students are being recognized for evolutionary projects in the fields of visual arts, cinema and multimedia. Projects were chosen on the basis of content, innovation, and creativity in presentation.
“It became increasingly apparent to us that some outstanding work was being done by individuals who were in the process of completing their studies,” said Neil Blanche, president of the arts council. “This is our way of trying to encourage artistic development and, in the process, give back to the community.”
Since its inception in 1971, the du Maurier Arts Council has become the largest private source of arts funding in Canada having distributed $56 million throughout the arts community.
The two Quebec recipients in the Cinema and Video category are both from Concordia University. Michael Yaroshevsky was selected in recognition of his film Petropolis, which combines fiction and documentary in an ode to St. Petersburg in the former Soviet Union.
Oleksa Lozowchuk gained the attention of the grants committee with his film Anne’s Wedding. Lozowchuk produced the experimental narrative, which chronicles the struggles of a Canadian photo journalist in post-Chernobyl Ukraine, for his master’s thesis in fine arts.
Concordia artists accounted for five of six prizes awarded in the category of visual arts. Yechel Gagnon, who is currently finishing her master’s degree in fine arts, says she will use the award to continue her experimentation with plywood.
“The council has helped many artists convert their ideas to reality and to have their work seen by the public, whereas they might not have the resources to do all that,” said Selena Liss. She has already used her $5,000 to $10,000 grant toward the completion of an extensive collage of paintings.
Concordia students Carlos Sanchez and Mackenzie Stroh were also selected for their exceptional photographic artwork.
Blanche said that the du Maurier Arts Council will be continuing the granting program in these categories in 2002 following the trend towards new forms of media in the arts.

Exit mobile version