Race: VP Administration

The portfolio of the VP Administration is pretty straightforward. If it happens in the building, then they need to be a part of the discussion. Currently, this extends to any discussions on the new SUB project and this project will take up most of the VP Admin’s time. The AMS clubs are also a large part of this executive’s portfolio and while they do have a team which will help them with it, it is still a huge part of their job.

The next steps that the VP Admin are going to have to take in the SUB project are all about getting the building’s various user groups to sign off on the plans and undertake Design Development which fills in the nitty gritty details of the design like where every single door, window and wall is placed. At the same time, Value Engineering will determine on a detailed level what can be built for the project budget. During the past year, Ekaterina Dovjenko built a lot of momentum on the SUB project and the top priority of the incoming VP Admin will be to keep these processes moving along at a good pace. If they are successful, one of their final acts in office may be to break ground on the NEW SUB, something everyone would be excited about.

The VP Admin also deals with property maintenance and renovations and/or capital improvements to AMS buildings. There have been few upgrades/improvements to the SUB made this past year, likely because the NEW SUB is clearly on the horizon. The Whistler Lodge will become an issue, but this is mostly being dealt with through the business and facilities committee, under the VP Finance.

Another aspect of the portfolio is AMS clubs. Luckily the existence of SAC, and the elevation of the role of the SAC vice-chair means that the VP Admin has support staff to shoulder a lot of the workload for the clubs system. Still, club disputes happen all the time and dealing with them can require a lot of time and effort for what may be trivial matters. We asked the candidates how they would deal with resource groups, and the issue of minority representation, specifically for students with disabilities. Read the answers to see why the candidates will deal with situations like these quite differently from each other. One step forward already well underway is the digitization of club constitutions and this process will continue regardless of who is in office. Lots of old clubs have also been de-constituted and this process should be kept up on a regular basis.

Candidate Profiles

Name: Gordon Katic
Age: 21
Faculty or program: Philosophy and Political Science
Past Campus involvement: Executive Editor, UBC Journal of International Affairs; Vice President, Allies at UBC; Member, Social Justice Centre; Coordinator of Cinema Politica UBC; Member, Solidarity for Palestinian Human Rights
Past non-campus involvement:
Quite a bit of journalism. I was a frequent contributor to The Leader Post, the newspaper in my hometown of Regina, SK. I also wrote for my high school paper.

1) Providing more inclusiveness within the AMS’s governing framework for students with disabilities has been an unresolved issue for more than a year now because it’s not an easy problem to solve. What ideas do you bring to the table about this issue?

If previous administrations made it a priority, it wouldn’t be particularly difficult to create a more inclusive AMS. The problem is, councilers don’t seen to be aware of discrimination within this student society, despite tremendous evidence to the contrary. The AMS commissioned their own review of equity, diversity, and discrimination in the AMS. The results uncovered “systemic discrimination,” an “unwillingness to engage in reform,” and the wide-spread sentiment that we’re failing underrepresented students. The report also noted that we’re vulnerable to legal action, given that we don’t have an adequate equity policy (UBC equity doesn’t cover AMS clubs). Discrimination issues aren’t just rare possibilities, they’re common occurrence on this campus. It will probably shock most students to learn that there were 64 human rights complaints to UBC in 2009. Yet, we have councilers who think equity is “suffocating,” a case of “white man’s burden,” and “reverse discrimination.”

Clearly, we can’t count on the current crop of hacks to provide us with solutions. But that’s okay, because answers have been laid out for us time and time again by activists working tirelessly for underrepresented students on this campus. First, we need to restore a seat on council to represent students with disabilities, international students, and indigenous students. These are students whose unique needs aren’t being represented by council. We need to have the humility to recognize that we can’t speak for these students, that we must allow them to speak for themselves. Next, we’ll need to review the axed equity policy–what worked, what didn’t?–and replace it with a program we can be proud of. And most importantly, we’re going to have to communicate with the populations we seek to include. These problems aren’t going to be solved on UBC Insiders, they’re going to be solved by making earnest efforts to understand how underrepresented students feel about the character of the AMS. Once we commit to that, I think the answers will reveal themselves.

2) Should resource groups be given more autonomy? Or should they work more closely with the AMS executive and council and develop a stronger partnership?

This is a false dichotomy. I do not believe that providing the Resource Groups with more autonomy means that they will not work with the executive and council. Rather, ensuring Resource Group autonomy will enable them to fulfill their mandate to make the AMS a more inclusive space for students. As autonomous bodies, the Resource Groups serve as an independent voice that can hold council and the executive accountable to principles of equity and social justice. Everyone within the AMS, including executives, ought to welcome the Resources Groups as a fresh pair of eyes that can see problems that might not otherwise come to light. Thus, there is no contradiction between the Resource Groups’ autonomy and the crucial partnership that they can engage in with the elected leadership of the AMS.

3)What most excites you about the NEW SUB? What has been the project’s biggest weakness up to this point?

I’m really excited by the prospects the new SUB holds for providing additional space and resources to clubs and other student groups. The new building holds out the promise of a vibrant student community on this campus with room for all the creative work that clubs do to make this campus so vibrant.

At the same time, I’m distressed by the lack of effort to involve ordinary students in the design and construction of the new building. We’ve been told that the new SUB will be more economically sustainable, environmentally sustainable and even look cool (not hard when compared with the current building). But will the process of creating this new home for the AMS actually represent the interests of the people that we are supposed to serve? We have to be sure that we’re not simply telling students how wonderful their new building is, but that their voices are driving the process.

Name: Mike Silley
Age: 22
Year: 4
Faculty and program: Arts. Sociology.

1) Providing more inclusiveness within the AMS’s governing framework for students with disabilities has been an unresolved issue for more than a year now because it’s not an easy problem to solve. What ideas do you bring to the table about this issue?

Back in November of 2009, I voted in favor of creating a disability seat on AMS Council. I did so because there were students with disabilities at the meeting explaining the lack of accessibility they felt to the AMS, and that this would be something that they felt would be a great step forward. I understood the concern coming from some councilors about keeping council split strictly by Faculty, but this did not matter to me. A seat like this would have changed everything. It would have definitely complicated the governance of the AMS, but the fact of the matter is it would have been a great step in making the AMS accountable to those who matter: the students.

Since 2009, there has been much more thought on the issues. Today, I would approach Access and Diversity and work with them to determine the issues that actually mattered to students with disabilities and how they would want to get involved. From here, I hold consultation workshops to make sure students have a voice about the potential options. Finally, I would created and provide solutions to better include students with disabilities. Two proposed resolutions talk about creating an alternative council/forum to include marginalized groups, and adding a seat on AMS Council itself so they can lobby for it. I am not opposed to either, however I have not yet given up on finding an alternative solution. If elected, I’m won’t be afraid to roll up my sleeves and start hammering out and implement a viable solution.

2) Should resource groups be given more autonomy? Or should they work more closely with the AMS executive and council and develop a stronger partnership?

I am not against Resource group autonomy. However, I think it is not only in the interest of Resource groups to work closely with the AMS executive and council to develop a stronger partnership, it is also in the interest of the AMS executive and council themselves to develop a stronger partnership with Resource Groups. One has to understand that Autonomy is not a diametric opposite of Partnership. If I wanted to take away resource group autonomy, I would have ran for Legislative Procedures Committee chair and made it a pet project of mine, but that is not my goal. I am of the firm belief that resource groups were created to protect the rights of groups that could face potential marginalization on campus and and educate the UBC community about social issues of importance to the membership, and I think this is absolutely necessary. However, SAC should most definitely have the right to intervene in and investigate the affairs of Resource Groups if a violation of their own rules or the Constitution of the AMS is reported to have occurred. This is the current AMS Policy on Resource Group Autonomy. SAC Intervention is in place to prevent any wanton violations or rules such as not holding elections or restricting AMS members from meetings, and as VP Admin, I plan on following whatever rules AMS Council mandates.

3) What most excites you about the NEW SUB? What has been the project’s biggest weakness up to this point?

The New SUB is an exciting project. It is a project that comes along once every 30 to 40 years, and it needs to be taken very seriously if we are to harness its full potential. One thing that I would like to continue to host well into the construction phase of the New SUB is to hold information sessions about the New SUB. This way, we can not only inform the stakeholders of the project, we can also increase involvement and promote transparency and accountability. Also, I would ensure more focus groups happen. This is particularly important as we begin designing the finite details of the building. Although the concept has been mapped, things like the actual facility layout of club rooms, businesses, or the open space have yet to be worked out. Without information sessions and focus groups, I feel as if the SUB Project could fall victim to the system of turnover. Every year, there will are new student minds working on this project, and if there isn’t a wealth of information publicly available, it will make it very difficult for them to competently accomplish any job related to the New SUB. Students want to be in control, students should be in control, and this is the best plan forward!

Name: Kath¥ Yan Li
Age: 21
Year: 3
Faculty and program: Arts, Theatre
Years on campus: 3
Past campus involvement: Social Coordinator with Pride UBC; Sprints with UBC Track and Field; Server at The Pendulum; Lived at Totem Park & Gage Towers; Board of Directors, Associate Culture Editor at The Ubyssey; Polling booth clerk with AMS Elections; GALA Leader with GALA UBC; Volunteer with ShineRama

Past non-campus involvement: Volunteer with Vancouver Pride Society; Volunteer with the International Vancouver Jazz Festival; Lighting design assist/ Assistant Stage Manager with Vancouver Asian Canadian Theatre; Volunteer with Nando’s Canada Cup of Beer; Volunteer with Terminal City Roller Girls

1) Providing more inclusiveness within the AMS’s governing framework for students with disabilities has been an unresolved issue for more than a year now because it’s not an easy problem to solve. What ideas do you bring to the table about this issue?

I would write a song about it. WWKD – What Would Ke$ha Do. Writing songs about it will get everyone’s true feelings out about it, because song-writing is always so soulful and deep. Once we get everyone’s true feelings about it, it’ll be easier to make a decision because then people won’t be dancing around the subject. They would be just dancing. Which would be awesome.

2) Should resource groups be given more autonomy? Or should they work more closely with the AMS executive and council and develop a stronger partnership?

Yes to closer relationships. The resource groups need to work closer with the AMS to make the resource groups more inclusive, may it be through better branding, outreach or making a big ol’ keg of alcoholic love together. What says “I care about you and your glitter” than a big mug of frothy goodness?

3) What most excites you about the NEW SUB? What has been the project’s biggest weakness up to this point?

That we get to choose whatever we want to go into the New SUB. I don’t know why no one’s talked about Jack Daniel faucets and glitter fountains. They are obviously a MUST have in the New SUB. I think one of the biggest weakness about the project so far is that there is still not enough student involvement. There is some, but not enough. We have to spice things up, hold a “Make Your Own SUB” with only beer cans contest, or have a dunking machine where the design cube is located, and fill it with Jack Daniels. People will WANT to be dunked. What were we talking about?