Wednesday, November 5, 2008

Funding the unusable...

Here at good ol' Trent University, we find ourselves in a precarious situation. The school has no formal student centre. Because we're based on the 'college system' (whereby the campus is divided into four separate colleges), there is no large gathering space for students to call their own.

Apparently, many students are calling for the construction of such a building. It would house food services, student organizations and clubs, studying and meeting spaces and give the students a general feel that there was a spot on campus just for them. And the architects have put together formal plans for the centre, which is to be built in a location that wouldn't cause significant damage to Trent's naturalistic aesthetics.

Great. Sounds good, I guess. I don't really mind the way it is now, but the voice of the people must be heard. So let's get building.

But wait. Who is going to pay for this thing? Well, the university of course. We pay our tuition and all those extra fees (which go up every year), so why wouldn't the university be prepared to pay for this thing? After all, the other spots on campus would open up for other ventures now that the students would be gathering somewhere else.

Wrong. The university is somewhere in the midst of a $10m deficit, which will probably only get worse with the impending shrinkage of its endowment funds coming from this delightful economic crisis. And it's not like students are lining up to go to school. Enrollment rates around the country are falling, which means less money for the university. And the government is certainly not helping out at all.

So who does that leave to pay for it? Well, there's the private sector. "Booooo" come the disgruntled complaints of the left-wing, anti-establishment, hippie students. We don't want "The Man" owning our building. There is some justification to that. Much of Trent is becoming increasingly privatized and the consequences are slowly coming to fruition. For instance, the damn cafeteria food is priced up the wazoo. Today, in fact, I ended up paying an additional dollar to have ONE slice of less-than-fresh bacon put on my burger. Bastards.

So where does that leave us? The latest student president, Liam Mooney, is proposing that the students pay for it. A good $60-$100 each for the next four or five years (call it ten at Trent's pace). Wow. That's almost a month's worth of bills. I don't know about this.

The argument: we'll get to own it. It will belong to the students. Great. But wait, in five years I'll be long gone (fingers crossed) and I won't get to use the damn thing. And I sure as hell ain't paying for something that some damn grade nine kid will be using at my expense come 2012.

The student president continues to push for it and is threatening to put it to a referendum in the next student election. I hope (and predict) it will get blown out of the sky.

And even if it did go through, I would expect some recognition that I'm an owner. Perhaps a giant plaque with the names of every student forced to pay for the damn thing, with a special board dedicated to those who graduated or left before it was built. Or maybe, make it like some kind of a co-op, whereby each one of us receives a dividend of whatever profits this building somehow makes in the future. Then we can feel like those WestJet employees, you know, the annoying 'we're also WestJet Owners' people. Maybe they'd even build a statue to commemorate our hard-earned investment in the building, or at least call it the 'Poor Suckers' building.

2 comments:

Soaking up the Sun said...

ah. you beat me to the westjet comment.

well, i can see your argument for not wanting to pay in terms of you never being able to use it. But you never know. also if we all had that attitude to things, especially the environment, the world would be less a good place.

Chris F-M said...

That's true. But I think when it comes to fixing the environment, numerous stakeholders will have to be involved. In the case of the student centre, I think it's wrong that the cost be burdened on one specific group. I'd be happy to toss in $20 or $30 each year if I knew that the administration was matching it.