On March 7, President Birgeneau sent you a letter requesting your support for the new Varsity Student Centre. We respect the president’s right to have an opinion on this matter, but his request demonstrates that the university’s goal is to continue to raise your fees either through a levy or the annual increase to your tuition. At this time, we feel compelled to present more information to you. The No Committee is a coalition of concerned students, faculty, and student groups opposing the levy for the new Varsity Centre. We are concerned about the escalating and inappropriate increases to our fees. There are many fee increases that we can’t easily control, but students can vote against this levy.

Here are some key facts about what you would be paying for with the mandatory student levy if you vote yes:

  1. The construction and operating costs and a capital reserve fund of the proposed Varsity Centre for Field and Ice Sports;

  2. The levy will be $25/full time student per year ($7.50/part time student) from 2002-2005 and $70/full time student per year ($21/part time student) for the next 25 years, increasing 3% per year;

  3. The levy is a 39 per cent increase to the Athletics and Recreation ancillary fee we presently pay, already the highest of all our ancillary fees; and,

  4. Phase 1, of this project’s construction, totalling $45.4 million, would be funded two-thirds by the student levy and one-third from university funds.

We oppose the proposed levy in the strongest possible terms because:

  1. Students were never asked if we were willing to pay a levy for this project as consultations regarding this development proceeded, because we understood the university would find means to finance this proposal;

  2. We should not burden future students with further debt;

  3. We have two athletic complexes, Hart House and the Athletic Centre. Why do we need a third?;

  4. This levy is a tuition increase by another name. If additional funds are needed, then the university should continue to seek them from government and other sources, and not try to build new projects using students as a source of revenue; and,

  5. Should the levy pass, the student contribution requested by the university will be two-thirds of every dollar, and the remaining third is from the university.

If the university won’t commit to paying its fair share for this development, then why should students be committed to paying for most of it?

Jorge Sousa
GSU President
Partner in the NO Committee