Activities Fee Position Papers Removed From Referendum

The Undergraduate Council voted last night to exclude official position papers for and against an increase in the Student Activities Fee from the online referendum ballot.

The papers—which were to accompany the online ballot—were removed after questions were raised about their factual accuracy.

“I’d rather have [students] have no information than bad information,” said Sawalla J. Guseh ’06, who proposed the exclusion.

Proponents of the position paper—who have had their written argument prepared for nearly a week—accused the opposing side of not being adequately prepared.

“What should have happened is that we should have talked about this [at last week’s meeting] and brought the amended versions this week,” said Russell M. Anello ’04. “The con side did not live up to what it was supposed to do.”

Guseh also questioned the truth of argument from the con side.

“I can’t trust their facts,” said Guseh, referring to the presentation by the opponents. “What I don’t like is when someone comes up here and spits out facts that we haven’t seen before.”

The accusations of incorrect information and lack of preparedness were also asserted by the opposition, though to a lesser degree.

Joseph R. Oliveri ’05 said that the graphs showing the fee at different schools were unfair to readers because they often include other services that would not necessarily be funded by the fee hike.

“Both papers are misleading,” said Oliveri.

Jason L. Lurie ’05 told the council members that they should focus more on the accuracy of the position papers, and less on their personal opinions on the issue.

Lurie’s advice did little to ease the debate, and council members continued to pick apart each other’s position papers, charging that graphs, figures and sentences were misleading and incorrect.

Sawalla’s motion to remove position papers eventually halted the debate. The council approved his motion, 32-3, with one abstention.

Following the vote, Lurie made a motion that would require the council to reconsider the issue of the position papers at its meeting next Sunday and thus, postpone the fee increase referendum—slated to start this Wednesday—for another week. P.K. Agarwalla ’04 initially seconded the motion, though he eventually changed his mind—a reversal that led to the failure of Lurie’s motion.

Lurie explained after the meeting that his motion was an attempt to ensure that a temporary majority in this week’s meeting would not overturn a careful decision to have “two full position papers” originally made by the council.

“The purpose of this motion is when there is a very vocal minority and the temporary majority is doing something contrary to the will of the council,” Lurie said.

In addition to excluding position papers, the council also approved an amendment that binds the council not to ask the College for an increase more than equal to inflation if the referendum fails.

“I think its very important for the council to stand behind its referendum,” said Joshua A. Barro ’05, who authored the amendment.

Barro’s amendment specified that the council could not ask for an fee increase greater than inflation as indicated by the Consumer Price Index (CPI).

Teddy E. Chestnut ’06 questioned why Barro chose the CPI as opposed to another index such as the Gross Domestic Product Deflator or the Higher Education Price Index.

“I’m not sure why you would choose one over the other,” said Chestnut. “They measure different things.”

The council eventually voted to remove the specificity and leave the index choice up to the College administration.

Members also voted that if the referendum fails, the council can retroactively request an increase in inflation since 2001—the last time the fee was raised.

While there was some talk by council members about whether the legislation would bind future councils, it was eventually agreed upon by both sides that it would have no legal binding, but instead serve only as a “moral guide.”

In other business, the council voted to change the date of Junior Night from this Wednesday to next Wednesday, May 5, due to another large party being held during this week. The event will be held at the Hong Kong restaurant on Mass. Ave.

The council also approved another grants package, which allocated nearly $4,000 in funding and over $1,500 in Harvard University Dining Services vouchers. The final due date for grant applications is this Thursday at midnight.

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