May 18, 2006

MSU Code of Conduct

People have accused me of plenty of things of late cause the MSU Board of Directors and SRA House Leader have been engaged in a smear campaign against me. The latest battle was fought over SRA minutes from 2004-2005 that were hidden from MSU members. They have been posted. Remember that they are edited to make the MSU clique look good and people like Erin Robinson who called for accountability look bad. It is funny, I get the same treatment lol!
Anyway, the MSU clique has claimed they have no problem with accountability and are all for it. Yet they have stopped the Accountability Act. They also claimed this was the first time they had a Code of Conduct put forth and it was insulting to them.
Turns out as I suspected, it was not the first time and that was the reason that the minutes from 04/05 were hidden for so long.
I quote from the minutes of 20 Mar 05 at the SRA meeting:

  1. MSU Board of Directors Code of Conduct
    Moved by Robinson, seconded by Sarin that the SRA approve the MSU Board of Directors Code of Conduct.
    Discussion
    Robinson – had raised this issue earlier in the fall and this is to ensure that members of the Board are acting in the best interest of the Corporation. This has been adopted from other Boards. This will be attached to the full time employment policy and will be given as part of their employment packages.
    Mohan – this was brought to a recent Board meeting but I have concerns about this coming from a current Board member.
    Moved by Brown, seconded by Grenier to defer this document to the Full Time Employment Issues Committee.
    Discussion
    Robinson – Point of Personal Privilege – if members are concerned about the person who brought this document forward, vote against this motion. This was brought to the Executive Board and no concerns were raised. I feel personally insulted.
    Dyason – Point of Order – Robinson’s point has been made and now she is debating.
    Mohan – apologized for the offense. I believe that Robinson is the relevant person and this is pertinent to the issues addressed in the document.
    Brown – any document needs to go through the proper channels. I do not see any major problem with the document as it stands but I would like to see it go to the Employment Issues Committee first.
    Grenier – who is on the Employment Issues Committee?
    Piribauer – John McGowan, Pauline Taggart, Ismael Viegas, Debbie Good, and myself.
    Grenier – I think that impartial people should look this at.
    Gillezeau – I think this is a good document and I do not think that this committee would be impartial.
    Bateman – I am in favor of deferring. I think that it is important given what has occurred this year that proper channels are followed.
    Murray – why does this only apply to Board members and not all Full Time staff? Deferring this to the Employment Issues Committee would see that this document is applied to all staff.
    Gamble – I like the philosophy but it should not come from a current Board member. I do not think that the Employment Issues Committee is a relevant committee for this document to go through. As for Robinson’s statement about no concerns being brought up, this was brought to the Executive Board for information only and no comments were sought.
    Osborne – would recommend that the Operations committee look at this document.
    Robinson – I would recommend that the MSU Lawyer, Derrek Collins look at this document.
    Piribauer – we have relevant committees for this document to be deferred to. If this document is to be included in the Bylaws, then the Bylaws & Procedures committee should review it.
    Speaker – to Robinson – could you clarify where this document will go for review?
    Robinson – I think this should be deferred to the Full Time Employment Issues Policy.
    Bateman – a document like this coming from a current Board member is a conflict of interest.
    Robinson – I am not in a conflict of interest. I would encourage members to read the document before speaking on this issue.
    Amendment
    Moved by Gamble, seconded by Osborne that this document be referred to next year’s Bylaws & Procedures committee.
    Discussion
    Gamble – next year’s SRA would be less biased about this issue.
    Davies – agree, a body that is impartial must review this document.
    Vote on Amendment
    In favor: 17 Opposed: 0 Abstain: 3
    Abstain: Mohan, Piribauer, Robinson
    Amendment Passes
    Vote on Motion to Defer
    In favor: 17 Opposed: 0 Abstain: 3
    Abstain: Mohan, Piribauer, Robinson
    Motion Passes

With that they killed it and it was never heard from again, that is until I saw the lack of a code in the MSU structure and put one forth. Next thing I knew, I was under constant attack from the MSU clique and have been villified ever since.
The nice thing, is that I have received strong support from so many people and there are a ton of people within the MSU hoping that the culture of attacking students ends. I will be the last student attacked by the MSU! That is something I am proud of. Send your buddies in the University Administration after, harass me, intimate me, threaten physical harm against me, continue to threaten to file more false Sexual Harrassment suits against me, I do not care. You are not going to scare me and make me surrender to you. I believe in accountability and transparency and I will struggle for that. I have faced opponents stronger and more dangerous than the MSU clique, and I have won. I am afraid, that is natural. The MSU clique are full-time paid MSU staff, they have all week and unlimited amounts of money to attack me and they are dirty. I may find myself suffering from bodily harm in the near future and they will do it in such a way that I will not even know what hit me. I will not allow the fear to stop me, and I will overcome this. The MSU will work for students, it is only a matter of time.