By Lynna Choy
Arizona Daily Wildcat
November 25, 1997

Referendum was premature

Editor:

I am writing in response to Kelly LeFevre's letter that appeared in Friday's Wildcat. Contrary to what she mentioned in her letter ("...financing is not the most important issue here..." -K.L.), financing is the most important issue. Every good plan should have at least two parts: 1) The planned action 2) How it is to be carried out. Funding the project definitely falls into the latter category. In this world, nothing can happen without money.

To be frank, the primary reasons the referendum was defeated were:

1) Yanking $40/semester in addition to existing fees is ridiculous

2) Most of us, especially those students with a couple of years to go before graduating, will not even be on campus long enough to see the ground-breaking ceremony, much less utilize the new facilities - so, why should we pay an atrocious amount for something we will not see?

The students are definitely not voting against a new Student Union. Walking through the dilapidated facility, one can almost hear the building screaming for renovations. Nevertheless, the University should definitely come up with another way of funding this project, a way that does not dip into the bank accounts of students who are not even going to use the facility. The people who should fund the new Union should be the students who are going to be on campus to use it. There should be a way to procure the start-up funds from other sources temporarily. Once the project is well underway, a fee can be billed to the students who will ultimately use the facility.

Lynna Choy
MCB/ East Asian Studies Senior