Vote to create additional programming fee at University Apartments North fails
UCLA Residential Life held a referendum asking University Apartments North residents if they wanted to increase student fees in exchange for more programming. 91 percent of voters voted no. (Daily Bruin file photo)
By Kate Nucci
March 5, 2019 11:33 p.m.
A referendum to increase housing costs for more programming in north university apartments failed Feb. 27.
The referendum, which was created by UCLA Residential Life, would have increased student fees for University Apartments North residents by $38.76 per year. UCLA spokesperson Katherine Alvarado said the referendum was open to all University Apartments North residents, but declined to comment on what percentage of students voted. Ninety-one percent of voters voted against the referendum and 13 percent voted in favor, according to UAN’s Facebook page.
Advertisement for the referendum began on Facebook on Feb. 25, and the vote was conducted from Feb. 26 to Feb. 27.
Alvarado said in an email statement the referendum was intended to implement an activities fee for programs and services in the UAN. She added the UAN were the only university residential buildings that did not charge an activities fee.
“Activities fees for the hill and grad apartments fund (programs and) services – so we wanted to make sure the UA North apartments had that as well,” she said in the statement.
Many residents said they were unaware the referendum was taking place.
Jomi Williams, an apartment resident assistant for Westwood Chateau and a fourth-year economics student, said he did not think the referendum had been well publicized.
“It was an initiative that kind of came across to us last quarter and I didn’t hear anything about it until like this week, when we pushed it out again,” Williams said.
Rasmus Eriksson, an exchange student at the UCLA School of Theater, Film and Television, said he thought the proposal had not been specific enough in what the money would be used for.
“I actually didn’t know exactly what it was for,” he said. “If it had been more specific about what the money was actually going to be going for, then maybe I would have voted for it.”
Williams also said he thought university apartment residents did not particularly care about programming events.
“People in university apartments, they don’t really care as much (about programming) as people on the Hill,” he said.
Tommy Ervin, a fourth-year mechanical engineering student, said he thought the referendum failed because many students would move out of university housing before the proposal could benefit them.
“Since some people only live here once, they don’t … take into account people who live here after them,” Ervin said. “They just say, ‘eh,’ which … is kind of like a selfish thing in a way.”
Alvarado said in the statement ResLife currently does not have concrete plans for future referendums or apartment programming.
