You’ve most likely seen their posters, flyers, and buttons, and their stickers on the free coffee—right across from the polling stations—in support of the “yes” vote. Undergraduate students are being asked to vote on the construction of a Student Commons on the St. George campus. However, have students had a chance to access information in support of a “no”?

We all agree that student space is an important part of our university experience. The administration is well aware of our needs, but prefers to reserve its own budget for expanding high-cost, revenue-generating programs like the expansion of the Rotman School of Business. Students have long resisted these projects. In 2002, an overwhelming 82 per cent of students voted against the proposed Varsity Stadium levy, which would have funded a building useful only to the school’s elite athletes.

This year’s referendum could easily dupe a new generation of students into paying for buildings through levy contributions rather than expecting the university to responsibly distribute tuition and government subsidies. Our university is a public institution: the government, not students scraping by on loans, should pick up the tab to ensure space needs are met.

The “vote yes” flyers flooding campus are misleading. They advertise a $5 levy, while in reality, students would pay $10 per year from summer 2008 until its completion. In its first year upon opening, the centre would cost each student $41.50, increasing by up to 10 per cent in each subsequent year. Once the first 25 years are over, the operating costs would remain subject to a continuing 10 per cent maximum annual increase permanently. Yet pro-levy flyers reveal none of these substantive costs. Raising incidental fees through levies like this is a very serious burden to put on students, especially considering that OSAP will not take this levy into account when assessing loan allotments.

All materials critical of the project have been torn down almost immediately. Dissenters have been followed, confronted, and felt harassed by the elected leaders of UTSU. On October 29, UTSU executives also called campus police on critics peacefully handing out flyers—a form of free speech—on St. George Street, claiming that they were violating UTSU bylaws. Only UTSU members fall under the organization’s bylaws.

The “yes” campaign run by UTSU has channeled student money into a high-cost campaign—which includes promotional t-shirts, free food and drinks near polling stations—and have done their best to intimidate any critics of the project. These unjust tactics have been witnessed by shocked students across campus.

Part-time students have been criticized for opposing the proposed student centre, even though the referendum is an issue that impacts our campus as a whole and sets a dangerous precedent for the future. The “yes” side, however, has brought students from York, Ryerson, and the Canadian Federation of Students onto campus to campaign on behalf of the levy.

This is not a democratic referendum. Pro-levy campaigners are clearly afraid of losing, given that they are resorting to such underhanded, juvenile, and unprofessional behavior.

Katie Wolk is involved in the APUS campaign against the Student Commons levy.