Regarding the Referendum vote, there seem to be two camps. The first group feels the fee is the only way to finance the Union. The second flat out doesn't believe the first.

The students have been assured that "extensive research" has been done. That a student fee is our only option --

In Wildcat article (ASUA Senate majority passes resolution to support Union fee (October 23, 1997)), Gilbert Davidson is quoted as saying: "Based on extensive research into the funding options for union renovation the Senate voted to support a student fee."

"I can't see how we'll get there without a fee of some kind," said Chief Budget Officer Richard Roberts. (Funding options for Union renovations up in the air, September 17)

Dean of Students Melissa Vito replied that was a valid concern, but added the university couldn't complete the project without them [student fees]. (Union fee up for vote, October 9)

Where is this extensive research? For those of us not present at the Senate meetings, what avenues have been explored? Convince the student body that this is, indeed, the only way to go. How much has been explored from a fund raising perspective? Or corporate funding?

These questions aside, it's still confusing why this fee is being proposed right now. It will go into affect in the Fall of '98, probably years before a new union is around. One of the big selling points is that this will give students input into the new Union. Are students really supposed to believe that without the student fee the Administration will build the Union in a vacuum, without anyone's input?

President Davidson also stated, in the same article, "Next month is going to be very hard and I expect you [ASUA] to be out there educating students." Hopefully that is the case, because right now the proposed fee seems awfully flimsy.

Brett Bendickson
Poli Sci Junior