Editorial: Vote NO on Rec Center

There are still more questions than answers about the proposed Recreation Center — and the $200 per year fee hike students would have to pay. This $200 increase translates into a 44 percent fee hike for students.

This semester, CSUS students were barraged with alleged “facts” about the proposed Recreation Center by a high-priced public relations firm hired by ASI and paid for by administration in order to sell the Recreation Center to the voters.

While a Recreation Center might be good for campus, the State Hornet newspaper recommends that students vote NO on the proposal.

This proposal needs much more time for debate, fine tuning, and input from students. Several weeks of rushed discussion was inadequate.

Why should students vote NO?

First, the true nature of the proposal is still sketchy. What students will get — for $200 per year — is unclear. Also, there is no cap on that fee. If the consumer price index goes up, so does the fee — all without a return to the voters for approval.

Second, all the letters of endorsement are coming from people directly involved in the campaign. Up to this point, the only letters received from students have been against the proposal.

Third, what about those students who would clearly not benefit from the addition of a Recreation Center?

Many CSUS students are completing degrees via alternative methods such as Internet and television courses and consequently are rarely even seen on campus. Other students are completing degrees through evening programs after work and simply don’t have time to take advantage of such a facility.

Finally, the magnitude of this project — $25 million and a 30-year bond commitment — requires more time for development. A plan put together in such a short time simply leaves too many questions unanswered.

The State Hornet supports the concept of a Recreation Center on campus. We believe it would help foster a sense of community. But, this proposal is so seriously flawed and premature that students should reject it and demand a better drawn, detailed, well-thought out proposal next semester.