Detailed Unofficial Results Are Available

/in ,

This spring, the 2026 UVSS General Election and Referenda saw a turnout of 2,156 voters (11.9% of the student body). We want to extend a huge thank you so much to the candidates and voters for participating in your student democracy and making your voice heard!

Referenda Results

Four key referendum questions were on the ballot this year, and all four were approved:

  • UVSS CPI Adjustment: Passed with 52.0% (949 votes).

  • Martlet Fee: Passed with 55.3% (1,043 votes).

  • Clubs and Course Unions Fee: Passed with 61.3% (1,188 votes).

  • Uni 101 Fee Removal: Passed with an overwhelming 95.3% (1,873 votes).

How We Count Your Vote

The UVSS uses two different voting systems depending on how many candidates are running for a specific position.

First-Past-The-Post (questions with two choices)

When there are two choices for a question, we use the old fashioned First-Past-The-Post system. This is the same system used in Canadian federal and provincial elections.

  • How it works: The candidate who receives the most votes wins the seat. Simple majority is the most direct way to determine a winner when there are exactly two choices.

Single Transferable Vote (three or more choices)

For races with three or more candidates, the UVSS uses a ranked ballot system called known as Single Transferable Vote.

  • How it works: Instead of picking just one person, you rank candidates in order of preference (first choice, second choice, third choice, and so on).

  • The counting process: If no candidate gets more than 50% of the first-choice votes, the candidate with the fewest votes is eliminated. Their supporters’ votes are then transferred to their next choice. This continues until a candidate reaches a majority.

Why So Many Rounds?

If you look at the detailed results for the Director-at-Large positions, you’ll notice the count went through 21 rounds! While that might seem like a lot, it is actually typical for a competition with this many people running for this many positions.

In a race where 11 directors are being chosen from a large pool of candidates, the system meticulously moves through rounds to ensure that every seat is filled by someone who carries a legitimate share of student support.

Sounds Complicated! Why This system?

Ranked ballots provide a more accurate representation of student preference and ensure a wide range of beliefs are represented because:

  • There are No “Wasted” Votes: You can vote for your favourite candidate without worrying about “splitting the vote” or accidentally helping someone you dislike win.

  • True Preference: It allows you to express your full range of opinions. You aren’t forced to choose the “lesser of two evils”—you can vote for who you actually want, knowing your backup choices still count if your first pick is eliminated.

⚠️ Reminder: Results are unofficial until expense reports have been verified, all complaints and appeals are settled, and the current UVSS board of directors ratifies the Chief Electoral Officer’s report.

Full, detailed unofficial results can be found at this link.

Complaint Ruling #3

/in , ,

Complaint 20260306-0224 B— Ruling

Prepared by: John Morrison • Chief Electoral Officer
Date of Decision: March 7, 2026
Respondents: (Names removed due to complaint dismissal)
RE: Ruling on Complaint 20260306-0224 B

1. Summary of Allegations

UVSS Elections received a formal request to reconsider Complaint 20260306-0224 following the submission of additional evidence. The complainant alleged that a coordinated effort to disseminate false information regarding his campus affiliations led to a “poisoned environment.” Specifically, the new evidence concerns an advocacy group’s consideration of retracting its formal endorsement of the complainant as a direct result of these rumours. The complainant alleged this constitutes a breach of neutrality, defamation, and a failure to campaign with integrity.

2. Jurisdictional Mandate

The mandate of the Chief Electoral Officer is limited to the enforcement and interpretation of the UVSS Electoral Policy as it relates to campaign conduct and the administration of a fair election. While the impact of external rumours on third-party organisations may be significant, this office only adjudicates matters where a direct violation of electoral policy by a candidate or board member can be proven.

3. Evidentiary Review and Analysis

Following a review of the additional evidence—which included correspondence from a campus advocacy group regarding the potential retraction of their endorsement—the Chief Electoral Officer has made the following determinations:

  • Reconsideration Based on New Evidence: This matter was reconsidered specifically to determine if the potential loss of a formal endorsement constituted a material effect on the election’s outcome linked to an identifiable offence.

  • Threshold of Evidence and Plausible Deniability: Despite the documented impact on the advocacy group’s endorsement process, the source of the misinformation remains attributed to hearsay. Without direct evidence linking the respondents to the creation or intentional distribution of the false narrative, the evidentiary threshold for a Major Infraction has not been met.

  • Circumstantial Nature of Impact: While the correspondence from the advocacy group proves the rumour was destructive, it remains circumstantial. The “friend of a friend” nature of the communication provides the respondents with plausible deniability, as no direct link or “smoking gun” was established to prove their personal involvement in the act.

  • Integrity of the Electoral Process: The investigation confirms that the UVSS electoral process had the potential to be affected by these events, but the current policy does not provide a mechanism to penalize respondents based on the real-world consequences of rumours without primary evidence of their origin.

4. Conclusion and Ruling

It is the opinion of the Chief Electoral Officer that, although the additional evidence regarding the endorsement retraction demonstrates clear harm, it does not provide the necessary link to sustain a ruling against the respondents under the current UVSS Electoral Policy.

In accordance with Electoral Policy, this complaint is dismissed. However, this ruling highlights a significant shortcoming in the current framework regarding recourse for candidates facing coordinated misinformation. UVSS Elections intends to conduct a comprehensive policy review to propose robust changes that ensure the behaviour described in this complaint can be more effectively addressed in future cycles.

Complaint Ruling #2

/in , ,

Complaint 20260227-1422 — Dismissal, Appeal, and Sustained Dismissal

Prepared by: John Morrison, Chief Electoral Officer & Martin Cruz, Election Adjudicator
Date of Decision: March 2, 2026 (Chief Electoral Officer) and March 6, 2026 (Election Adjudicator)
Respondents: (Names removed due to complaint dismissal)
RE: Ruling on Complaint 20260227-1422

Following a formal complaint and subsequent appeal regarding conduct during a candidate debate, UVSS Elections has issued a final ruling. Both the initial investigation and the independent appeal process have resulted in the dismissal of all allegations.

I. The Complaint

A candidate alleged that two other candidates engaged in personal intimidation, harassment, and public shaming during an official Lead Director debate. The complainant specifically cited:

  • Targeted Identification: Claims that respondents used proximal language (“currently here”) and historical descriptors (“failed ratification multiple times”) to identify the complainant and their associated club without naming them explicitly.

  • Physical Gestures: Allegations of deliberate eye contact and physical pointing to “mark” the complainant to the audience.

  • Policy Rhetoric: Arguments that proposing a bylaw to permanently ban certain groups constituted a “structural microaggression” and a threat of permanent exclusion.

The complainant argued these actions violated the Electoral Policy (Major Infractions), the Safer Spaces Policy, and the University’s Discrimination and Harassment Policy.

II. Initial Dismissal

The Chief Electoral Officer (CEO) dismissed the complaint on March 2, 2026, based on the following findings:

  • Inconclusive Evidence: A review of video footage and interviews with three electoral officers in attendance showed no evidence of physical pointing or explicit naming of individuals or clubs.

  • Permissible Debate: The CEO ruled that discussing club ratification and proposing policy changes are reasonable activities during a debate, particularly when responding to moderator questions about policy positions.

  • Jurisdictional Limits: The CEO noted that while the allegations were serious, their enforcement jurisdiction is strictly limited to the UVSS Electoral Policy. The complainant was directed to the University’s Office of Equity and Human Rights for matters regarding general harassment.

III. Appeal and Adjudicator’s Final Decision

The complainant appealed the dismissal to the Election Adjudicator, further alleging that the UVSS Elections social media account showed bias by engaging with a “hit post” on Reddit.

On March 6, 2026, the Election Adjudicator upheld the CEO’s decision:

  • Identification Threshold: The Adjudicator found no concrete proof that the respondents’ comments referred specifically to the complainant, noting that policy stances expressed during a debate do not constitute harassment.

  • Safer Spaces: It was determined that answering a moderator’s question regarding policy does not breach the Safer Spaces Policy, as the statements were not intended to make a specific person feel unsafe.

  • Impartiality of Staff: The Adjudicator reviewed the Reddit engagement and found that the Elections account only responded to a question about the voting process. This did not demonstrate bias or meet the definition of administrative interference.

Final Status: The complaint is dismissed. UVSS Elections maintains that the candidates’ conduct remained within the bounds of fair political debate.

Voting Opens Tomorrow

/in ,

Tomorrow marks the beginning of the voting period for the 2026 University of Victoria Students’ Society board of directors election and referenda.

Candidates have been working hard to share their platforms, connect with students, and participate in our debates. I want to take a moment to commend everyone for their dedication to the process and wish all the candidates the very best of luck as we head into the voting period.

To vote, access this link from Wednesday, March 4 at 9:00am until Friday, March 5 at 3:00pm.

Before you cast your ballot, please note two recent updates to the candidate list. Griffin Foster has officially withdrawn from the election and Gabriel Copeland has been removed from the ballot. Neither individual will appear as an option when you log in to vote.

Thank you to everyone who has engaged with the campaigns so far—now it is time to have your say in who represents you on the UVSS board this coming year.

Good luck to all, and happy voting!

Candidate and Referendum Proponent Platforms are Live

/in ,

The UVSS election and referenda campaign period is in full swing, and we have some exciting updates as we head into the final stretch of the campaign period.

Candidate and Referendum Proponent Platforms Are Now Online

Want to know exactly what the candidates stand for? Take a look at the candidate and referendum proponent platforms.

Every candidate for the board of directors and each referendum proponent has shared their vision for the upcoming year. We encourage you to read through these statements to make an informed decision before the polls open next week.

Debate Update: Round One a Success

A huge thank-you to everyone who joined us in Vertigo (and online) for our first round of candidate debates. It was a big success, featuring fantastic engagement and insightful questions for our Lead Director candidates.

Next Debate: Friday, February 27

Don’t miss the second half of our debate series! We look forward to hearing from our remaining candidates and representatives.

  • When: Friday, Feb 27 | 2:30pm – 4:00pm

  • Where: Vertigo (Student Union Building)

  • Featuring:

    • Director of International Student Relations candidates

    • Director-at-Large candidates

    • Referendum Proponents

This is your opportunity to hear directly from the students who want to represent you and to learn more about the referendum questions on the ballot.

Candidate Withdrawals

Isabelle Easton and Evan Duffy have withdrawn from running for Director of Campaigns & Community Relations and Director of Finance and Operations, respectively.

 

Meet Your Candidates and Referendum Proponents

/in ,

The verification process is complete, and we are excited to officially announce the nominees for the 2026-27 UVSS board of directors and the upcoming referendum questions.

Below is the list of candidates who will be appearing on your ballot. We want to thank everyone who put their name forward for these vital leadership roles.

Board of Directors Candidates

Director of Campaigns & Community Relations

  • Tam Aljundi
  • Isabelle Easton
  • Norman Kaminski
  • Gunner Leifsson

Director of Events

  • Lainy Harper
  • Evangeline Kaye
  • Kade Leifsson
  • Mohan Selvarajan

Director of Finance and Operations

  • Evan Duffy
  • Jayce Kusardi
  • Mariah Luzon

Director of Outreach & University Relations

  • Matthew Allen Curtis
  • Katie King

Director of Student Affairs

  • Mickey McDonald
  • Joseph Diamond Noor
  • Maddy Vanderhooft

Director of International Student Relations

  • Cherop Lyoba
  • Julia Razok
  • Felipe Semedo

Director-at-Large

  • Ethan Baker
  • Gabriel Copeland
  • Quilla Decker
  • Griffin Foster
  • Alena Gavrilenko
  • Lila Grierson
  • Naimeng Jiang
  • Emily Jobbins
  • Siena Jones
  • Juliette Kaniki
  • Тёма Kuklev
  • Ame (Amerilia) Sillars
  • Evan Maher
  • Peter Nguyen
  • Zoey Perry
  • Zachary Reinhardt
  • Midori Schimmelmann
  • Sydnee Tailfeathers
  • Lachlan Van Egmond
  • Makalia Waplak
  • Donovan Wood-Gaines
  • Lily Luz Yeo

Referendum Proponents

The following individuals have been registered as official proponents for their respective referendum questions. Full text of all referendum questions can be found on our website.

  • Lindsey Andrew: UVSS CPI Adjustment
  • Declan Snowden: Martlet Fee
  • Jonah Arnold: Uni 101 Fee Removal
  • Katie King: Clubs and Course Unions Fee

Please note that there are no registered opponents.

What’s Next?

The campaign period is scheduled to begin on Saturday, February 21, immediately following Reading Break. This is when you will start seeing posters, social media campaigns, and platform details from all the candidates listed above.

We’ll be in touch with all candidates and proponents with details on candidate/referendum proponent orientation and debate scheduling.

John Morrison
Chief Electoral Officer, UVSS Elections

Nomination Period Closed: What Happens Next?

/in ,
Read more

Nomination Deadline Extended

/in ,
Read more

Call for Nominations

/in ,

The call for nominations is officially underway for the 2026 UVSS elections. If you are interested in representing your peers and shaping student life at UVic, the nomination period shall be open from Jan. 26 to Feb. 5.

The road to the 2026 UVSS elections and referenda is officially open. We have just published the full election timeline and the official referendum questions for this year. Whether you are planning to run for the board or want to weigh in on the future of student fees and how they’re used, now is the time to get informed.

Key Dates to Remember

  • Nomination Period: Jan. 26 to Feb. 5, 2026. Forms are due by noon on the final day.

  • Open Office Hours: Feb. 11, 2026, from noon to 3:00pm in SUB A104. Come by to have your questions answered!

  • Voting Period: March 4 to March 6, 2026. Polls close at 3:00pm on the final day.

Official Referendum Questions

Four referendum questions have been submitted by the UVSS and accepted by UVSS Elections for the 2026 ballot. These questions invite the membership to vote on proposed changes to student fee structures and allocations, and can be found at this link.

Electoral Policy and Governance

All candidates and referendum participants must follow the official UVSS electoral policy to ensure a fair and transparent process.

Contact the UVSS Elections Team

Elections can be complex, and we’re here to help you navigate the process. If you have questions about nominations, campaign rules, or how to get involved, please reach out to our staff.

  • Chief Electoral Officer: John Morrison (email or book a meeting)

  • Senior Electoral Officer: Jon Metzger (email)

  • Office Location: Student Union Building (SUB), room A104

Stay tuned for more updates as we head toward the start of the nomination period.

2026 UVSS Board of Directors Election and Referenda Underway Soon

/in ,

Hello UVic students,

Preparations are officially underway for the 2025-26 UVSS board of directors election and upcoming referenda. Detailed information packages and official notices will be released shortly. In the meantime, please save the following key dates:

Phase
Dates
Referendum Submission Deadline January 12, 2026
Nomination Period January 26–February 5, 2026
Campaign Period February 21–March 6, 2026
Voting Period March 4–March 6, 2026

Questions? Book a Meeting

If you have questions about the nomination process, referendum requirements, or electoral policy, please book a 1-on-1 online meeting.

Stay tuned for more details coming next week!

John Morrison,
Chief Electoral Officer, UVSS Elections