Jeffrey Aho

Yesterday was the first day of my 3A Mechatronics term, and it will be a contrast to the Political Science Minor term I just completed. It is the first time I haven’t had a co-op term in between my school terms but it will be a good summer with everyone in town.

If you had not heard, I decided during finals to purchase a house and took possession less than a week ago. I’ve had my eye on the property for a while and had previously lived here for three school terms so I’m very familiar with it. The sale came together very quickly and I was a little overwhelmed by all the details that needed to be worked out. Dealing with the real estate brokers, lawyers, and the bank was confusing, as it was the first time I purchased a house, but my parents assisted me through the process (my dad is a manager for Ontario Realty Corporation) and I’m pleased with the result.

I got an excellent deal for financing, 4% interest rate (Prime minus .75%) because rates are so low currently. The Bank of Canada has lowered rates by 100 basis points over their last two scheduled dates. I decided to go with a 5-year variable rate mortgage (amortized over 25 years) and take a little risk. A fixed one would have been at 5% and with the slowing economy and inflation under control (in Canada at least) interest rates are likely to remain stable or be lowered. When I got it the mortgage it was 4.5% and it is already at 4%; I’ll track the rates and after three years (about the length of time I plan on holding it) I’ll evaluate if it was a good decision or not. I’m also doing bi-monthly payments to also help reduce the interest I need to pay.

Overall I think it is a good investment. I’m renting to three people and living there so the rent I collect will pay my mortgage and other costs so I’ll live rent free for the next few years (saving thousands of dollars) and when I sell the house I should make a profit given the appreciation of the house and the amount being paid into the mortgage after the interest. Of course I need to deduct lawyer fees and other costs, but the recent trends indicate that the value should increase. With improvements to the area such as the iXpress and the universal bus pass for students (I can’t believe I’m pleased with the UPass but it makes my property more valuable for renting) where one of the stops is only 1 minute walk away, I should have no problem renting. In fact I have tenants committed for roughly the next two years. I was able to transfer leases from the previous landlord, which also made the deal more appealing; less work for me.

In other news, I am officially not a student councillor or board member for Feds as of May 1st. I’m also no longer a member of the Student Services Advisory committee and the only official position I have is Genius Bowl director for EngSoc (to be held on May 26th!). I’ll now have lots of time to work on other things and Waller and I will be starting up an Optimist International club on campus. It will be different being on the other side of the room for IAC asking for approval instead of giving it. I found it intriguing this last term when people claimed my work in Feds was only to a) pad my resume, and/or b) practice for being a real politician. For the jobs I apply for, employers care more about my technical experience at NRCan, Nemak (Ford), and GM than the volunteer mention Feds gets on the second page of my resume. As well, I said I don’t plan on being a politician, either a Feds Executive, or elsewhere. I don’t have any interest in that form of public service.

Right now I believe there are 3 vacancies for engineering councillors. I feel no obligation to help fill them. For the most involved people, you get very little out for the work you put it. I don’t know how Councillor/Director/Governor/FOC Neal does it. He should have won either the President’s Circle award or the Feds Leadership award but instead he didn’t even get a piece of council gear or a meal at the end of the year. Volunteer appreciation severely lacks at Feds and along with apathy it is not surprising why 8 council seats remain unfilled. There is also a definite lack of empowerment. If I ever have a problem I’ll go straight to Chris, Justin, Del, Andreas, or Andrew. The fact is that my representatives are inexperienced (due to the fact of being new to council). It looks like only three councillors have previously served a full year on Feds.

So for now I’m going to focus on school and catch up on my growing book shelf of unread books. On Justin’s advice, I believe the next book I’ll read will be Rawls’s Theory of Justice to be quickly followed by Nozick’s Anarchy, State, and Utopia.

Currently Listening to: Still Alive - Jonathan Coulton

Random Wikipedia Article: Dulce et Decorum Est

Still continuing with my policy of not registering for or posting on LJ, I do see a post by the CKMS Board Treasurer Selene MacLeod (Atmydiscretion?), AKA Synaesthetik (MySpace) and a new discussion spawning from it. Since she makes defamatory claims that the ‘Yes’ Committee and I broke referendum rules, I will respond to her comment here. After all, civil discussion is the proper response instead of threatening legal action.

In terms of her ability to express her opinions, she (as well as all non-student CKMS members) has always had the right to talk to the ‘No’ Committee chairs to provide arguments, opinions, or rebuttals. I will use an analogy of the House of Commons. This was a student referendum issue deciding a topic pertaining to student funding. It would be akin to a US Ambassador walking into the House and yelling out their opinions on the Canadian budget. Yes, this student decision will impact the radio station, just as many decisions our government affects the US. The US has the ability to send us their opinions but they have no right to interfere in the process. CKMS interfered in the process by inhibiting information flow to shareholders, using staff members to prepare an advertising campaign (which used CKMS funds), and by intervening legally. (BTW, is paid CKMS staff participating in information sessions the best use of their time and CKMS’s money?)

Furthermore, three CKMS volunteers (one being a CKMS Board member) were the ‘No’ Committee Co-Chairs. If the board member (who participated in one of the forums) doesn’t have an intimate knowledge of the corporation (which for the record, I believe he does), then that would be a serious concern. In reality, the ‘No’ Committee had access to CKMS Board information and other resources provided to them that were not provided to the Yes committee, despite being requested and promised (i.e. number of student volunteers requested January 23rd, promised January 24th, that was never provided but later was released by the ‘No’ Committee). They had the information advantage all along.

She states that she “felt the adjudication during the committee was biased toward the Yes committee, and that the adjudicator was not an impartial judge.” That is quite a defamatory claim about the Referendum Committee and its Chair. Knowing all the councillors on the committee, I am confident that they worked in an impartial manner. I will also note that there is a separate Referendum Appeals Committee that does not have councillors that any decision can be appealed to.

To address the first defamatory comment, the one claiming that I violated referendum procedures by having a Facebook group soliciting members of ‘Yes’ Committee, I will state that I believe there were no rules violated (given my experience on the Referendum Committee last year). Soliciting members of the committee, which the ‘No’ Committee did as well, is not a violation of procedures as it is not campaigning. The group never discussed the campaign, only informing people of the date of committee formation. I will also note that if you review the Referendum Committee’s decisions, they were never fined for having their Facebook group, even the “I support CKMS” group that they turned into their main campaign group (which I believe is it in violation of referendum rules since it was created outside the campaigning period). As always, someone (even non-students) could have (and may have) filed a complaint.

I will not comment on the document mentioned for legal reasons, but I do appreciate Selene confirming that the CKMS Board knows that I was not the author. I will note that my sources are not limited to that document and I consulted numerous past Board members and staff including ones within the last 3 years. It continues to be my assertion that all information my committee provided is truthful and the facts were not misrepresented.

I found out about the motion for the referendum at the same time CKMS supporters did. I had the same time (and substantially less resources) to prepare my campaign as the ‘No’ side. The referendum was called and was run in a fair way (except, of course, all the violations by the ‘No’ Committee). As per her last comments about me not being at CKMS Board meetings, I’ve never claimed to have attended them. Selene has not been at all the Students’ Council and Referendum Committee meetings in the last year, yet she criticizes their decisions. I am able to my make my claims in the same way; by talking to sources and reading documents.

I think fees for students should always be debated and the organizations that receive them should be held accountable if they aren’t transparent or are poorly managed. I like Imprint and believe they are run transparently and are managed well. Athletics falls under the Student Services Advisory Committee in which funding is reviewed constantly. You don’t think Plant Operations and Employees have reviews and are held accountable if they screw up? This came down to students deciding if they wanted the fee. They resoundingly supported its removal.

I never claimed that campus radio is a bad thing, and I agree that it could fit within the Feds mission statement. CKMS, on the other hand, does not.

EDIT:

Selene has continue to post on LJ and I have more to add now (and will continue to add).

On February 14th I had communication with her that explained the referendum process. It seems this went in one ear and out the next. I stated: “While Feds does not administer the fee, they are the sole representative of students and the only body that the Board of Governors listens to on this matter. While what you state is technically true, in practice it is Feds that yields influence over levying student fees by long standing agreement with the University.” Her “paranoid” “theories” (her words) are just that: paranoid.

Selene has posted a comment that has patently false information (which was even ruled on and explained why it is false in Referendum Decision 5 - Has she even read the decisions she criticizes?). She says the $230 fee (There exists no $230 fee but a range from $163.56 to $241.87) is non-refundable, which is a lie. The Health and Dental plan are refundable (online opt-out) and the non-refundable part is the bus pass. These have all been approved by referendums. I will continue to refute her misrepresentation of the facts. Students put a value on CKMS. It was $0.00.

The Board of Governors will pass this fee removal at their April meeting.

It has been very enlightening reviewing the general meeting minutes of the past few years. The September 2005 meeting minutes discuss how Heather intervened (saying it “sucked”) and stopped a legitimate vote under CKMS’s bylaws (which is noted in the next minutes that their lawyer said was perfectly legal). Too bad it took 7 weeks to get what I requested from CKMS or I would have been able to present more facts to students of CKMS’s ongoing (and still present) issues. Well, I received most of what I requested. CKMS has yet to produce an up-to-date copy of their bylaws. A change occurred at the March 2007 AGM and yet they only have produced a copy from March 2006. So coming up to their March 2008 AGM where new directors will be voted in, shareholders don’t even know the process by which they use to vote.

This is a transparency and accountability issue NOW, occurring under Selene’s time on the CKMS Board. It will be interesting if shareholders hold her accountable for losing 90% of the station’s revenue while she was Treasurer.

Over the past few weeks I was heavily involved in the CKMS referendum as the ‘Yes’ Committee Chair and tried to keep my comments as representing the committee. I would now like to express my personal opinions.

I did not bring forward this motion to Council and found out about it the same time everyone else did. During the debate I provided only one argument to hold the referendum that was not challenged. I said “I cannot see anything that is negative about bringing up this
issue, because it is a way of promoting what everyone here has said they want.”

I decided to become Chair of the ‘Yes’ Committee because of my knowledge of the procedures due to sitting on the Referendum Committee last year and the Bylaws, Policies, and Procedures Committee for two years. I took on an important role in the democratic process.

From the start I was faced with unfair campaigning. Before committees were even formed (the day after council), CKMS was running ads telling people to vote No. They also ran insulting ads with a character meant to be a dimwitted student mocking the referendum question itself. The question was worded the way it was (which I had no part in drafting) due to procedure that dictates that change is in the affirmative and the negative is for the status quo. There was no conspiracy or purposeful bias. The claims of such are just absurd.

The reason that outside corporations can’t campaign is because it creates an unfair advantage. Nevertheless, CKMS used its paid staff and capital to advertise, campaign actively through interviews, through free concerts (including one they named their Birthday celebration despite them having claimed an activity for that in the Fall) and handing out flyers (with false information). CKMS had every right to meet with the ‘No’ Committee and provide them with information, arguments, rebuttals. CKMS had a voice through the ‘No’ Committee, the proper channel.  No campaign rules said that CKMS couldn’t provide them information. As well, one of the CKMS Board members was a Co-chair of the ‘No’ Committee so they had a direct voice. The process would have been fair, but CKMS and the ‘No’ side made it unfair. After all, this was an undergraduate student referendum. They are the ones with rights here, not external organizations. On top of all this unfairness is the fact that the majority of my posters were illegally removed or defaced (apparently speech is only free if you agree with it).

They went out of their way to make my information collection harder. When I requested budget information, instead of numbers, a useless pie chart was sent. It is both quicker and more transparent to copy the numbers and send them to me. When a budget for Feds was requested by the ‘No’ Committee Chair, I sent it 9 minutes later. CKMS went out of their way to keep information from me to present to students. I requested documents (to this date I have not received copies of them, 6 weeks later), went to CKMS to talk to the Station Manager who asked me to make an appointment, which was reasonable so I did. My appointment was cancelled twice (first was double booking, and second her story changed for canceling from personal issues to the snow day), yet I rebooked again, canceling my an appointment to accommodate the other parties. When the meeting finally came I, a shareholder, was treated with contempt and the atmosphere was hostile. I was trying to get information to disseminate to 99% of their shareholders and for fallacious reasons I was denied copies of the documents.

Despite all this, the referendum went forward. The result was a landslide win for the ‘Yes’ side, (2280 Yes vs. 1081 No), over 2:1 margin. It had the highest turnout of the Exec and Referenda votes and beat my own estimates on how many people would come out. I expected 400 less voters due to the acclamations of President and VP Admin-Finance, usually the positions that bring out the voters.

Now I shall air my grievances. As you know, the ‘No’ side was disqualified due to seven different Referendum Committee decisions directed at them (while the ‘Yes’ side had none). They hired a lawyer to help them appeal it. There was no respect for the rules that are meant to allow an even playing field. The GSA Pres has some endgame analysis that I think everyone should read.

One misconception that keeps coming up is this so called “Feds Radio”. I’ve followed the Facebook/Livejournal/Myspace/random blog diatribes and many are filled with fallacious arguments and juvenile rhetoric. Take this MySpace page, making the Feds Radio claim. I never brought up such a concept in the campaign and as a Feds Board and Council member I’ve never participated in any discussions about it. It doesn’t exist! Looking on I’ll note that students contribute 90% of funding while community members contribute only 2%. Then we get to the tenure claim. A radio station does not have tenure. Shareholders have every right to withdraw their funding. The second most offensive (to me) poster was the one that said something like Referendum, Best Birthday Present Ever! It’s insulting to think that you shouldn’t be held accountable because you’ve been around a while. The most offensive claim was the sandwich one, where we have students who can’t afford to buy food and make use of our Food Bank. Disgusting.

Of course there were the claims of smearing Heather Majaury’s name. My original posts did no such things, and only after I felt the need to make transparent a source document drafted by a past Board Member was she ever mentioned (Note: I removed it to comply with the legal threat sent to me. Threatening to sue a student who is just presenting information provided to him is so classy…). I had never met her before this campaign. Now I have and I have experience to make a judgment. In my opinion, despite being a shareholder trying to get information, I was treated hostilely and with contempt by her. She made many false statements (e.g. providing a falsely deflated budget number to The Record), and in my opinion acted unprofessionally when dealing with a shareholder. When she makes comments like “I personally feel it was a hijacking by the student government” to The Record it shows her total contempt for the democratic process and for the great majority of students who agreed with the ‘Yes’ side. My judgment is that I now have no respect for her.

Now CKMS has posted information on their home page which I shall disect. First the statement “not one single concrete concern or suggestion was communicated to CKMS from the Federations of Students”. This is a lie, as the Feds Board has sent CKMS many letters with concerns, and example concern being in a letter to the CKMS’s Board on January 13, 2006, where the Federation of Students Board of Directors declared:

“In the opinion of the Federation of Students Board, the CKMS’s General Meetings were unacceptable. They were poorly planned, executed and more than controversial, they were tense and unwelcoming. In the opinion of the Federation of Students Board, a violation of UW’s policy #33 specifically related to a poisoned environment [has occurred].”

More than one letter has been sent and several issues have been identified in them. CKMS has been plagued by issues for (anecdotally by past Board Members) over a decade. Didn’t their 2006 AGM, where they didn’t elect their Board members, not clue them in that people have concerns? I’ve addressed above the issue of external organization prohibition and the fictitious Feds Radio.

If you want a good laugh you can read this absurd article written by the Editor of Now Media. I love the part where my side is compared to political extremists overthrowing governments.

Finally there are several personal statements that were not shared by my committee, but since this is my blog I get to state my opinions. I believe that the current incarnation of CKMS is corrupt. I believe a group of people have been exploiting students by stealing their money to fund their own personal hobbies. The abused spouse needs to leave the abuser even if they say they will stop and make it better. As the Phoenix, sometimes something old but damaged has to go up in flames to be created new and better.