This year’s Board of Directors was a cohesive team with cross-sectioned support. Each member brought something new to the table, yet they appeared to function well as a team despite their diversity.
Some USC councillors feel the board was highly successful, others argue its leadership did more harm than good. Here at The Gazette, we feel they fell somewhere in the middle.
Stevenson and his board had an interesting year that was, in many ways, primarily spent following up on prior initiatives.
The Thompson Recreation and Athletics Centre was old news. Built to Lead was Dolan’s baby. Renovations of the University Community Centre were already being discussed. But while this board may not have one huge initiative to leave behind, each member brought their own successes to the big picture.
In the individual report cards to the right, we have highlighted the performance of each vice-president. Overall, the board had its share of strengths and weaknesses. What made the board competent this year was its ability to work together effectively.
Some have criticized this year’s USC board for suppressing information about the departure of USC general manager Karen Jackson. Others, notably activist group Standing Against Queer Discrimination, have pressured the board to take a firm stance on issues such as the Canadian Blood Services’ controversial blood donation policy.
At the end of the day, no great scandal has rocked this board. Then again, no great change was evident, either.
With initiatives like “The New USC,” this year’s board attempted to reach students in a different way and become more transparent as an organization. While the USC certainly had a fresh new look for all its merchandise and graphics — primarily due to the chic styling of communications officer Amy Bi — drastic changes were not evident.
Sometimes no change is a good thing, though. While this year’s board may have maintained the status quo, it ensured the continued success of the USC for the future.