Issuing the “No Levy” campaign 20 demerit points and a $150 fine was not enough. The Election Referenda Committee decided to add another five demerit points as a “slap on the wrist.”
The campaign, which urges students to refuse to pay $18 per year to operate the Varsity Centre, was penalized for allegedly trying to intimidate Sandy Hudson’s “Unite U of T” slate into supporting it. After appealing the punishment, the campaign was harshly rebuked for “presenting frivolous and irrelevant accusations” to the appeals committee.
“No” campaigners sent an email to all members of the Unite slate early Monday morning, asking the slate to endorse their position on the Varsity Center levy and citing the slate members’ avowed commitment to accessible, publicly-funded education. “No” campaigners asserted that this stance made it impossible for Unite U of T to be neutral.
“They have not taken a position,” said Ryan Hayes, who is leading the “No” campaign. “And to add insult to injury, when someone asks them to, they turn around and file a complaint that could have gotten us disqualified.”
Hudson insisted, however, that there were no such intentions. “We have nothing against them. We just wanted to ensure that the elections and referenda did not interfere with each other in a negative way.”
Election and Referenda Committee co-chair Faraz Siddiqui pointed to the last paragraph of the email No Levy campaigners sent to the Unite slate: “If we do not hear back from you by tonight […] we may need to reconsider our campaign strategy, but more importantly, how we as progressive students will be able to work together in the year ahead,” read the letter.
“It was ominous messaging,” said Hudson. “So [Unite] went to the CRO so they would be aware of the potential issue.”
Hayes confirmed that letter informed Unite slate members that, if they did not endorse the No Levy position, No Levy would reword its campaign materials in a less “considerate” manner: The materials would say simply to “vote no” instead of “no levy.” As four out of five Unite can-
didates were Yes/No propositions (they ran unopposed), this could induce students to check “No” on the ballots—disqualifying those candidates.
In their appeal, the “No” campaign cited similar tactics in a Canadian Federation of Students campaign, one in which some Unite members participated. That argument, ruled a “frivolous and irrelevant” accusation, landed the “No” campaign a further five demerit points.
“The email […] asked us to take a position by that night, and we weren’t able to sit down as a slate and talk to each other about it,” said Hudson.
“When we talked about it the next day, we decided that […] we would like to have the plebiscite run its course.” Hudson reported the email to the CRO before that meeting.
The emails in question are currently online, viewable on the No campaign’s Facebook group “How Stupid Do They Think We Are? Vote NO Levy March 4th-6th.”
