Student-at-large Victoria Romero has been barred from seeking candidacy in the 2025 University of Manitoba Students’ Union (UMSU) general election following a ruling that stands from the UMSU chief returning officer (CRO).

In an emergency motion at the Feb. 13 UMSU board of directors meeting, Romero unsuccessfully sought to be granted candidacy from the board as an election appeals committee had yet to be struck.

Romero was deemed to have breached the “student in good standing” clause within the UMSU Election Manual — one of the requirements to be nominated as a candidate. The clause stipulates that “the student must not have been disciplined in the last calendar year by UMSU,” yet Romero states that a warning letter she received on Dec. 5, 2024 is being erroneously considered as disciplinary action — thereby barring her candidacy.

The letter entitled “warning letter” in the subject line was signed by then UMSU board chair Nicholas Lu and addressed an incident on May 9, 2024. The letter alleged that Romero was “seen yelling at UMSU executives, recording them without their permission, knocking loudly on the windows and following them through the UMSU University Centre.”

The letter further alleges that Romero “spent hours waiting outside the UMSU offices to yell at and film executives without their consent,” took actions to “violate the sanctity of closed session” and attempted to obtain private information from board members and identify anonymous ad hoc committee members.

“Going forward, we expect that your conduct at all future UMSU BOD meetings is respectful and in accordance with UMSU’s Harassment Policy, the University of Manitoba’s Respectful Work and Learning Environment Policy and Robert’s Rule of Order,” the letter stated. “Failure to comply with these expectations may result in further action, including suspension from future board meetings.”

Romero contested these allegations made by Lu, stating that “the letter itself [laid] out of lot of accusations that are untrue or completely out of context.” Romero also circulated documents during the debate for board members to review which refuted the claims.

“Nothing within the letter indicates the letter itself being a disciplinary action, but rather that it is a notice of potential disciplinary action should the alleged behaviour not change,” wrote Romero. “Therefore, I do not believe that this ‘warning letter’ should be seen as a valid disciplinary action in this circumstance.”

Romero also indicated that there is no set definition for disciplinary action in the UMSU governing documents and stated that she believed she was subjected to an “unfair and irregular application [of the good standing] policy.”

Interim judicial board chairperson Gurpahul Kaur explained that the judicial board was first notified about Romero’s request to appeal the decision on Feb. 7, but added that the board does not meet quorum to make decisions.

Joshua Rushka, representative of the University of Manitoba Engineering Society, acknowledged that even though a student in good standing is defined within the election manual, “it also states that the CRO does have the jurisdiction to choose a student’s eligibility […] even if specific circumstances may not strictly align with this definition.”

Racialized students’ representative Christabel Attoni-Oteari questioned why the letter was provided eight months after the incident in May if the claims were so serious. “Why wasn’t there more immediate action?” asked Attoni-Oteari. UMSU president Divya Sharma, who is not seeking re-election, acknowledged that letter was sent in December as it was the “earliest possible opportunity the chair could have sent out the letter on behalf of the executives,” due to challenges in acquiring a permanent board chair.

“I’m not sure if this was such threatening behaviour as alleged […] why steps were not taken to address that sooner, especially if that’s noted in the letter,” said Romero later in an interview.

Sharma further clarified at the meeting that the letter was not sent out eight months subsequent to the actions, but that “actions were happening days before this letter was sent out […] these were things that were happening in various months that led up to sending this letter.”

The letter also stated that Romero’s behaviour has “led the UMSU executives to feel uncomfortable, unsafe and disrespected” and that “actions online have left UMSU members feeling intimidated and threatened.”

After over 40 minutes of debating the motion, Kaur motioned to move the meeting into closed session and requested that the UMSU CRO Jodie Smith be permitted to remain in the room. Sharma then called to vote on the motion through a secret ballot within the first minute of returning into open session.

Romero’s emergency motion to seek candidacy was defeated 14-3.

UMSU vice-president external affairs Prabhnoor Singh — who is now running for UMSU president — recused himself from the room for the duration of the motion.

“I think very quickly, the meeting itself did very much become an adjudication of the contents in the letter when it was supposed to be an adjudication of whether or not that letter as is should have stood as valid as a disciplinary action,” stated Romero.

Romero alleged that “the UMSU executives have kind of sent a precedent that if you dissent or if you call on your elected representatives to do better, they’re able to put unsubstantiated claims in a letter and then use it as justification to bar someone from participating in the union that is meant to represent them.”

Romero, who served as UMSU vice-president advocacy (now defunct) from 2022-23 and was 17 votes shy from winning the presidency during the 2023 UMSU general election, was also disqualified from running in the last election.

There are 34 candidates presently running in the 2025 UMSU general election.