873
the
Queen’s University
journal
Vol. 146, Issue 6
F r i d ay , S e p t e m b e r 2 1 , 2 0 1 8
Since 1873
AMS seeks JDUC architect before vote Society President says request for proposal requires architect to consult students I ain S herriff -S cott News Editor
The AMS is officially searching for an architect to re-design the John Deutsch University Centre (JDUC). A student fee hasn’t yet been secured for the project. According to AMS President Miguel Martinez, the Society has worked with Physical Plant Services over the last few months in preparation for the release of a
request for proposal (RFP). On Aug. 15, the RFP went out and all bids for the project were due on Sept. 12. Martinez told AMS Assembly the Society has received 18 applications from different firms bidding for the project. “The RFP requests that the selected architect have four separate consultations with students. Those consultations will be with AMS Assembly, Clubs Caucus, an open town hall for all, and a full day with AMS service managers,” Martinez wrote in his
CONTINUED ON PAGE 4
statement to AMS Assembly. Last year, the AMS held a referendum on Feb. 12 to 13 to secure a student fee of $89.00 for the project. The vote narrowly failed. When asked at Assembly when a second referendum will occur concerning the JDUC, Martinez said a vote will “likely occur early second semester.” Martinez also noted that the University has agreed to fund a $1 million bursary for students who may not be able to pay the full student fee, if it passes.
“Even if the students now may not necessarily benefit or get use of the new building, it is important that we as student leaders continue to think of students in future years as much as our students here today,” Martinez wrote. “Many of the success[es] that we have today [are] due to the commitment and forward thinking of previous student leaders.”
Ride-sharing bylaw put on hold by commission Kingston Area Taxi Commission pauses implementation of ride-share bylaw I ain S herriff -S cott News Editor
Activists gathered together on Sept. 20 for Take Back the Night.
PHOTO BY CHRIS YAO
Residence Society denies all responsibility in sexual assault case University claims to have followed “reasonable measures” to guarantee safety and security policies in Victoria Hall R aechel H uizinga Assistant News Editor The Residence Society has denied all liability in a sexual assault lawsuit recently brought against the University, according to a statement from their lawyer Michael Hickey. Hickey is also the lawyer for the AMS and
The Journal. “The Residence Society denies that there is any liability on the part of the Residence Society for the alleged instances described in the lawsuit,” Hickey wrote to The Journal in an email. “As the matter is before the Courts, there will be no further comment by the Residence Society at this time.” As previously reported in June, a former residence advisor is seeking nearly a million dollars in damages from Queen’s and defendants Ali Erfany and Mustafa Ahmadi in the Superior Court of Justice following multiple occasions of physical and sexual abuse. At the time of the 2014 alleged assaults
in Victoria Hall, both defendants were employees of the Residence Society. In her claim against the University, the plaintiff alleges Queen’s is vicariously liable for the assaults. She also claims that Queen’s doesn’t sufficiently educate students about sexual violence. In a June 6 statement of defence, Queen’s denied all vicarious liability for the assaults, according to documents obtained by The Journal. Queen’s claimed that because Erfany and Ahmadi were employees of Residence Society and not the University, Queen’s is not responsible for the incidents. In its statement, Queen’s described
FEATURES
OPINIONS
ARTS
Sir John A. Macdonald falls under scrutiny
page 5
Queen’s should support working class students
Queen’s Reads’ Scarborough explores Toronto
queensjournal.ca
@queensjournal
page 7
page 9
@queensjournal
See Residence on page 4
The Kingston Area Taxi Commission (KATC) has put the brakes on a controversial bylaw, before its Sept. 15 implementation date, regulating ride-sharing companies Uber and Lyft. At a City Council meeting on Sept. 19, a KATC representative said the City of Toronto v. Uber 2015 ruling found Transportation Networking Companies (TNC), like Uber, aren’t taxi brokers. As a result, the Commission doesn’t have the authority to regulate ride-sharing companies. The Commission has been working for nearly three years to do so. The KATC didn’t respond to The Journal’s request for comment. Chloe Draeger, KATC Commissioner, said the body should follow other Ontario municipalities’ lead when drafting new regulations. “I’m convinced that the only reasonable and workable path forward is creating a set of regulations that meet the best practices established in most other jurisdictions in Ontario,” she said. When the Commission originally voted on the bylaw several months ago, Draeger voted in opposition. “We need a regulatory structure that works for both the drivers and the riders,” she said. A potential hurdle is also the Competition Bureau of Canada, which is an independent law enforcement agency tasked with ensuring fair business conditions. In an interview, James Litchfield, a local resident and full-time Uber driver, said he contacted the Bureau in early See Uber on page 4
SPORTS
LIFEST YLE
Hickson aims for rugby all-star status
Exchange student details goals for time at Queen’s
@queensjournal
@thequeensjournal
page 10
page 15