Some wanted to see the fact sheet again....

Rec. & “Wellness” Center Fact Sheet

Have you heard about the proposed on-campus Recreation and Wellness Center our student government wants to build here at San Francisco State University?1
Did you know that it would cost students $93 million to build?
Did you know that Associated Students, Inc. (ASI) AND the Cesar Chavez Student Center Governing Board (SCGB), two student-run organizations, are closely involved in making this happen? They’re not alone—Campus Recreation—a program under Student Affairs is also pushing this project along. 2

Know the Facts:
· Student fees fund both the ASI and the SCGB. That’s right; $42 of each student’s per-semester student fees goes toward the ASI, and $82 toward the SCGB.
· Each enrolled student is an automatic member, and therefore, integral part of holding our student government accountable to representing the students.
· ASI proposed the $93 million Rec. Center and used $300,000 in our student money to assess the “feasibility” of the project WITHOUT informing students.3
· Brailsford and Dunlavey, a private architecture firm, was contracted by the ASI to assess the feasibility of building this project by planning and implementing what is needed to win student approval. They have successfully gentrified over 300 campuses across the nation including most CSU’s.4
· The proposed Rec. Center will likely not open until 2014 and most current students financing this project, if built, will not have access to the Rec. Center. As part of the Master Plan, a long-term redevelopment plan of campus, this project will have an impact on struggling students.5
· Fees have already increased $489 since spring semester ’09. Fees will continue to increase. If approved, the Rec. center will add another $160 dollar increase on top of all other fees within the next six years with an additional and annual incremental increase of $3 per semester.

The Student Fee Advisory Committee, a group in charge of reviewing proposed changes and recommendations to President Corrigan, scrapped a democratic vote in favor of a potentially biased petition requiring minimal approval from students on campus.6
Now that you know this, don’t you think…

We should be able to fairly decide through a vote whether we want to fund this Rec. Center?
ASI should be held accountable to the diverse perspectives of students on our campus regarding this issue by investing in programs relevant to current needs of students?

SFSU should be spending this $93 million to provide us with classes instead of a Rec. Center. Students should not be taxed without their voices being heard and as a campus we can invest in alternative projects such as sustainable initiatives, resource centers, art programs, organic food co-ops, etc? Another school is possible.

Get Informed and Plugged in: NoRecCenter.blogspot.com
Contact: NoRecCenter@gmail.com

· E-mail campus officials including ASI, SCGB, SFAC, and Campus Recreation (e-mails available on website).
· Distribute Petition saying we don’t want a $ 93 million Rec. Center.
· Participate in public comment during meetings, check website for updates!

Let your voice be heard!
Show that you are tired of having fee increases forced upon you!
This is as much about accountability to students as it is about the Rec. Center…

[1] http://www.studentrecreationandwellness.com/FAQ/
[2] http://www.studentrecreationandwellness.com/about_us/
[3] ASI minutes for November 5, 2008.
[4] http://www.facilityplanners.com/ht/d/OrgDir/xcids/397/pid/356
[5] http://www.sfsumasterplan.org/index.html
[6] SFAC minutes for August 26th, 2009.

CARC helping build Solidarity

On December 9,2009 The Coalition Against the Recreation Center went out to go support our fellow peers in support of the Occupation of the SFSU Business building. The building was occupied in response to budget cuts as well for other reasons listed.

One may go to occupysfsu.wordpress.com for more information.

Solidarity!

CARC in the News

UNFIT COMMUNICATION
by [X]press Staff Editorial
http://xpress.sfsu.edu/archives/editorials/014109.html

While the Coalition Against the Recreation and Wellness Center turned in its protest petition early last month, the low number of signatures -- fewer than 2,000 in a student body of 30,000 -- is astonishing for the amount of changes that this center will bring.[X]press has reported on these changes, including the $92 million dollar bill that students are expected to foot beginning next semester. Associated Students, Inc. has chosen to not only put off the vote for a semester, but also forgo the usual referendum process that is commonplace with student legislation.
Though this move technically is not illegal according to California State University policy, it deprives the student body of clarity and fosters absolute confusion. The students of this University, who will eventually be paying upwards of $160 a semester for this project, are ill-informed due to a lack of transparency with paperwork. Though ASI has proven that they have been able to get signatures, who has been signing these forms?
The lack of communication between the opposing Coalition and advocating ASI has also fueled a juvenile feud that has not advanced any discussion since the turning in of the anti- petitions on Nov 6.
President Corrigan's role in this debacle has been minimized but nonetheless important. By approving ASI's petition, he has violated the spirit of the democratic process. He is choosing to be complicit rather than contribute to the knowledge of the student body regarding the high price tags and plans for this center.
Furthermore, the proposed recreation center is listed as a proposal for the SF State Master Plan, a project that is, according to its Web site, supposed to be supported by state funds. Though we won't continue to discuss the state budget problem and how that plays into it, it does raise one question: Why are we paying for it?
Thinking that the student population won't like their plan is not enough for ASI to completely change CSU policy in order to get a resume booster.
As quoted in the Sept. 24 issue of [X]press, ASI President Natalie Franklin proved she cannot, frankly, be bothered by student opinion: "It does not affect our vision."
It is interesting to know that students of this University are not only expected to pay for facilities they won't use, but that they also have no say in the financial decisions of their student government.

Additional News Stories Concerning CARC and student justice

Anti-rec center petition questions spending, fee allocation
http://xpress.sfsu.edu/archives/news/014015.html
by Natalie Leal, [X]press staff writer


Protesters 'sit-in' against budget cuts
http://xpress.sfsu.edu/archives/news/014060.html
by Jonathon M. Schmidt, [X]press staff writer

"the struggle continues"

The Coalition Against the Rec. Center would like to thank all of the groups and awesome individuals who have helped us get signatures for the Counter-Petition. With the limited time frame, in the midst of midterms and furlough days, we have succeeded in raising awareness and providing a source to LET OUR VOICES BE HEARD.

Your continuous support throughout our campaign has most definitely been valuable to the cause; and let it be known, it is not over! La Luche Sigue (the struggle continues)

A video by Michael Payton and the CARC

ATTENTION!

REMINDER.
To:All CARC members and those who are helping gather signatures for the Petition against the Rec. Center

PETITIONS WILL BE DUE THIS FRIDAY NOVEMBER 6,2009

One may turn in their signed petition forms to any CARC member or at BSS-379 (BSS Student Resource Center)

An additional CARC meeting will also be held on Friday @ 11:00 Am at Malcolm X Plaza in which you can sign the petition if you have not already. All are welcome.

If you would like to aid in signature collecting for the Petition against the Rec. Center, please contact noreccenter@gmail.com ASAP.