years until the cumulative deficit had reached the hundreds of thousands. As if this unsustainable trend wasn’t enough, the Society rang up an over $400,000 deficit in just one year in 2000–2001. The huge deficit was only discovered during the Society’s annual audit in fall 2001, as the corrupt Business & Operations Manager, Vivek Sharma, had been falsifying statements and stealing from the Society. The Board responded swiftly and decisively by pressing charges against the since resigned Sharma, terminating the General Manager, and conducting a forensic audit. After this crisis unfolded, the Board of Directors embarked on a plan to tighten controls in the SUB’s business operations by such methods as reducing labour costs and food wastage, controlling liquor, and putting locks on freezers and coolers to prevent theft. The Society also secured a half-million dollar loan from UVic against the SUB, which was instrumental in ensuring that the Society was able to meet its financial obligations without interruption. As the 2001–2002 financial year was already half over when the financial crisis was uncovered, the Society could not escape another deficit in the hundreds of thousands. However, beginning in 2002–2003 the Society ran surpluses every year until the Society’s debt of approximately $1 million was repaid in full in 2006–2007. In 2008 the United Steel Workers union representing staff at the UVSS went on strike for a three months, this in combination with a weak economy, and rising costs pushed the Society back into a $350,000 debt by 2009. 2010-present To address the growing deficit and put the Society back on its feet the 2010-2011 board put a number of fee referendums to members in November 2010 all of which passed. The Capital Fund was reduced and shifted into the Operations Fund, dedicated fees for events and elections were established, and a modest increase of 40 cents per full-time student per semester, each semester over a three-year period was also established. Besides this, the 2010-2011 board shifted from a three-person senior management structure to a two-person management structure which further reduced costs for the Society. In 2010-11, the Board moved from a 4-person executive structure to a 5-person executive structure. This change was passed at a Special General Meeting in January 2010 and was largely done in acknowledgement of the fact that certain executive positions had an inordinate amount of work in comparison to other positions. Major changes on the