Termbill Put To Vote Today

After over a month of impassioned debate and fiery rhetoric at Undergraduate Council meetings about whether or not to increase the College’s Student Activities Fee by $40, students will finally get their chance to make their voices heard in a referendum vote beginning today at noon and ending this Saturday.

Earlier this month, the council agreed to allow undergraduates to weigh in on the hike that would increase the Student Activities Fee from $35 to $75, as well as a separate question on whether or not to make the fee mandatory.

Since then, council members on both sides of the issue have been working hard to convince students—and each other—that their side is right.

And while students go online to casts their ballots today, council members continue to clash over the merits of the fee increase, as well as the manner in which each side has presented its arguments.

A BETTER HARVARD?

Poster kiosks across campus are littered with signs asking students whether they “believe.”

These “Believe In A Better Harvard” signs have been posted by the proponents of the fee hike in an effort to help people connect the proposal with an improved quality of life on campus, according to council member Russell M. Anello ’04, one of the co-sponsors of the proposal.

Anello, like other supporters of the hike, argues that the increase in the fee will allow the council to offer better services—like more movie nights, expanded shuttle services and larger, more frequent concerts—which in turn will improve the campus environment for all students.

In March, council President Matthew W. Mahan ’05 sent out an e-mail in support of the fee hike, painting the increase as a necessity.

“After almost two months in office and countless conversations with students, administrators, and people at other campuses, I am convinced that we can build a much stronger campus with a student activities fee that is comparable to that of other colleges,” Mahan wrote, referring to how Harvard’s current fee pales in comparison to those of Stanford University and Northeastern University, where students pay $100.

But Mahan and Anello admit that it is going to be a battle to convince students that an increased termbill translates into a better Harvard.

“We understand its not a simple sell because people’s gut reaction is ‘I don’t want to pay any more money,’” Anello says.

The issue of money is central to the opposition’s arguments.

Joshua A. Barro ’05, who is leading the opposition, likens the proposed increase to a tax hike. He says he is concerned with the council’s ability to handle an increased budget, writing in a position paper that the council is “institutionally incapable” of doing so.

The arguments of Barro and the opponents to the hike also take issue with making the current voluntary fee mandatory.

“The U.C. doesn’t know whether a termbill increase will be covered by financial aid. There are just no facts,” Barro says. “Students take a big risk in voting to make the fee mandatory without knowing whether or not Harvard will cover it.”

Director of Financial Aid for the Faculty of Arts and Science Sally Donahue says it remains unclear on whether an increase would be covered in financial aid packages.

“If the fee were to be come mandatory then we would have to have a discussion with [Dean of the Faculty William C. Kirby’s] office,” Donahue says. “We really can’t just increase that amount we’re projecting without going through the normal channels.”

“Our main concern is that students be able to stay here without undue financial stress,” she adds.

But in an e-mail sent to bill co-sponsor Teddy E. Chestnut ’06 and acquired by The Crimson, a financial aid officer writes that a mandatory fee will become part of the cost of attendance and thus, eligible as part of a student’s financial aid package.

Students will vote on this issue of making the fee mandatory in a referendum question separate from the fee hike question.

Aside from money management, Barro also questions the council’s ability to assess accurately what students want.

But Anello says the additional funding would allow the council to respond better to student demands through more adequately funding grant requests made by student groups.

In a position paper, the proponents of the hike say that grant requests are funded at, on average, 38 percent and that an increase would allow the council to more than double that amount.

Anello says this potential funding increase to student groups is one of the key reasons why student groups are backing the proposed increase, noting the endorsement of both the Harvard College Democrats and Harvard Republican Club this past week as prime examples.

Anello also says an expanded budget will allow the council to be more creative.

“Right now there is little room in the budget for new ideas,” Anello says. “We feel like the extra $40 will allow for more new ideas.”

$40 WAR

Despite the fact that a majority of council members support a mandatory fee hike, a vocal minority has complicated efforts to pass the legislation.

“We’re not a big crew,” Barro says of his opposition group, a handful or so strong. “The people who oppose this are ordinary students because what they’re going to get out of [the increase] is not nearly what they are going to put in.”

When the fee increase was first proposed at a general meeting in early April, a heated debate resulted in the issue being tabled. The following week, during the April 12 meeting, council members approved by a 39-5 vote, with one abstention, a referendum that would let students vote on the fee hike.

All the while, the opposition was active in challenging the hike, and both sides have fought each other at nearly every turn.

Last Sunday, Barro successfully proposed an amendment that prohibits the council from asking the College administration for a smaller fee increase should the referendum fail. The council, however, will be allowed to ask for an increase in line with inflation.

Barro and the opposition have also launched their own postering campaign in response to the supporters’ “Believe In A Better Harvard” signs. Their campaign mocks the proponents’ “Believe” message with signs that say “BELIEVE in the Tooth Fairy” and “Can You BELIEVE The UC Wants Twice As Much Money?”

Barro says he hopes these posters will help draw students to vote against the increase.

Anello is also pushing to get his message heard.

“I think that if you have everybody at Harvard voting uniformed, it will absolutely hurt us,” Anello says. “If I didn’t know the information I would vote against it.”

He adds that in each House, the proponents have a “House leader,” who is responsible for keeping the community updated about the issue.

Getting information out was part of the reason the council initially voted for official position papers on both sides of the issue to accompany the online referendum ballot.

At last Sunday’s meeting, after both sides questioned the factual accuracy of the position papers, the council voted to scrap these documents.

On Monday, Joseph R. Oliveri ’05 decided to e-mail the opposition paper to several House lists. The e-mail was entitled, “What The UC Doesn’t Want You to Hear.”

Soon after Oliveri’s e-mail, proponents of the increase sent out their own position paper.

In a different e-mail to the Eliot House open-list that replied to a constituent’s question, Oliveri suggests that some council members may have misconstrued differences in opinion with factual inaccuracies in trying to secure the fee increase.

In response, Eliot House resident Sarah L. Bishop ’05 writes in an e-mail, “Emotions are going to be running very high over this issue in the next few days.”

“It’s important for everyone to remember that the UC reps who are supporting the fee increase are NOT doing so for the sake of personal gain or glory,” she writes.

Should the referendum pass after the votes are tallied on Saturday afternoon, the issue will next go to the Faculty Council and then the general Faculty meeting for a final decision.

It remains unclear whether or not the Faculty will take up the issue at its May meeting. Mahan says it is more likely that if the referendum passes, the Faculty will decide on the fee hike next year, meaning the proposed change would not be implemented until 2004-2005 school year.

Anello says he believes that despite the sometimes hostile nature of recent meetings, council members will be able to prevent the issue from affecting their personal relationships.

“I know that I’m not going to stop talking to the people,” Anello says. “With most of them, we’ve been able to reconcile the differences.”

—Staff writer Jeffrey C. Aguero can be reached at aguero@fas.harvard.edu.