RSF Referendum Summary

And here's a summary of the RSF fee increase referendum and why it's also a really bad idea.

Currently, we can pay $65 a semester for membership at the RSF. We don't have to. If this referendum passes, everyone must pay $40 (increasing to $55) a semester, regardless of whether they use the RSF or not. Those that want to use the RSF must pay an additional $10 for membership.

Let me make something clear: The RSF is a luxury. Sure, it's cool, and has fancy equipment and stuff, but it's all stuff a student can do without. Staying healthy is not difficult even if you don't have a gym membership. You can stroll through campus, ride a bike around aimlessly if you have one, do jumping jacks at home, whatever. The RSF is also not academic. It's really a place for folks who like having courts and weight rooms and so on in order to carry out their sporting hobbies. Sporting hobbies are great and all, but they shouldn't be funded by mandatory student fees.

Keep in mind the implication here is that in order to take classes on campus, you'll have to fund the sporting hobbies of a group of students. If you don't want to pay $40 so Bob and Jim can play basketball, you would not be able to register as a student. This is completely ridiculous.

Supposedly, this is supposed to help those on financial aid, but it doesn't really. It only helps those who have full rides. Those who are taking out loans will have to take out additional loans to pay for this. If the big deal was the fact that Pell Grants no longer cover RSF membership, then proponents might have given us a different referendum which solved this problem by subsidizing only the Pell Grant students. But they didn't. They gave us this scattershot approach, which means the fee is far, far higher than it needs to be.

And remember that when we lobby Sacramento to avoid fee increases, our argument is that, as students, we just can't afford them. Fee increases put college out of reach for some students. How much credibility does the argument that we cannot afford fee increases to pay for professors and classrooms have if we voluntarily choose to approve a fee increase to pay for a gym?

If we want to protect student choice and keep fees down, we have to reject this proposition.

posted by Beetle Aurora Drake 4/23/2006 11:11:00 AM #
Comments (2)

. . .

Comments:

You know, what really bugs me about this referendum isn't even everyone being charged, it's everyone being charged and then having to pay 10 more dollars.
If they're gonna claim the RSF is this vital institution and that we all deserve access to it, then why make everyone pay 40 bucks just for the opportunity to then pay 10 more dollars if they want to use the facilities?

The fact that we then have to pay 10 more dollars means they know it's not a vital need, it's just something some people will use and some people won't, which means everybody on campus shouldn't be paying for it.

Basically it's just a big way to hide the costs of the RSF. "Look, it only costs 10 dollars!"

# posted by  Anonymous : 10:15 PM, April 23, 2006

 

Beetle. Well said.

Beetle, how the hell did this get to be put to vote in the first instance. Its simply disgraceful. My view is thatll itll likely pass given that those who use the rsf have a strong incentive to vote . The others probably dont even know about this. Also, there were voting booths right outside the RSF door today; reminiscent of something youd see in some dictatorship regime.
Also, the ASUC ought to be ashamed of themselves. One of their pledges is to reduce fees and here theyve orchestrated an $80 fee increase.

# posted by  Anonymous : 4:13 PM, April 25, 2006

 

Post a Comment