Fee referendum ‘no’ committee disbands after campaign violations

Editor's Note: The Ubyssey's deputy managing editor, Spencer Izen, was a witness in the Elections Committee's investigation on Sunday after members of the SAC, attempting to justify their comments, falsely claimed to be friends with one of our reporters who had previously interviewed them.

Update [March 11, 2026, 2:28 p.m.]: The Student Affordability Coalition officially disbanded Tuesday morning, according to Elections Administrator Keiko Prasadja. In an email to The Ubyssey, Prasadja said the campaign withdrew from the election.

Following comments to The Ubyssey calling the AMS “worse than Epstein,” the Student Affordability Coalition (SAC) has been suspended — twice — by the AMS Elections Committee.

In an emailed statement to The Ubyssey, the Elections Committee said that the SAC had been suspended for its campaign violations.

The Student Affordability Coalition, chaired by Lucas Sun, is running the ‘no’ committee against the AMS referendums calling for fee increases to fund student services.

The first suspension, which took place from last Friday to Sunday, came after they compared the student union to Jeffrey Epstein, the convicted child sex offender.

"You can quote me on this. They're worse than Epstein. At least Epstein doesn’t violate my wallet,” Sun said in the interview. The AMS has since condemned his remarks. Mohkam Singh Malik, a former AMS elections candidate and member of the SAC, also participated in the interview.

Following the ruling by election officials, the 'yes' side of the fee referendums filed an appeal. On Sunday, the Elections Committee met again, where officials “raised concerns” about the truthfulness of the SAC’s original statement to the committee. “Dishonesty in statements needed to make rulings is not tolerated by the Elections Committee and was seen as a violation,” the statement read.

Election officials also alleged that the SAC did not comply with the original ruling of the Elections Committee. They wrote that as part of the original suspension, the SAC was required to archive its social media campaign material, but kept its posts up until well into the suspension period.

This, in addition to “previous instances where members of the No Committee were closed minded to concerns that the Elections Committee raised or responded in a way that was not professional,” was “not taken kindly” by election officials.

The Elections Committee decided that the actions of the SAC was a “serious violation” and suspended it for a second time, starting on Monday and with a planned end on Thursday morning.

“The first 24 hours were for non-compliance of the original ruling,” the Elections Committee wrote. “The 48 hours following were made due to the serious offence of lying, the impact of the published statement, and general non-compliance.”