First, however, I must make a few remarks about why writing things about which you are uninformed is a bad idea.
Jumping to conclusions and making assumptions is something Danielle Webb did when she said that the Mount Allison faculty was going to strike. She wrote that the union voting to reject the conciliation report, by only a 55%, "shows division within the union that may be difficult to overcome." Actually 55% isn't a large majority, especially when not all the faculty members voted. She declared that the vote represented a "margin of victory" for MAFA and that it would irritate the university's bargaining team" who "were quick to accept the board’s report and end the debate on Feb. 1". One side agreeing to something doesn't "end the debate"...as MAFA's rejection of the report proved.
She claimed points of contention were money and trust. She accepted as fact MAFA's press release, saying it "showed that part-time faculty are almost entirely ignored in the report". Showed, not argued. Maybe this sort of one sided garbage will get her a job at the CBC.
Both sides want different things so they argue to get as close to what they want on paper. Written contracts are necessary because of an inherent lack of trust.
In addition, trust isn't something that is negotiated. MAFA didn't appreciate having a conciliation board because it delayed when the union would be in a position to legally strike. This would have been obvious if she looked at any other releases by the school or MAFA. Oh wait she didn't get those because she's reporting without doing any research.
Even people who had been in contact with the administration and MAFA didn't know what was going to happen. So that's just one example of why you shouldn't go making assumptions and predictions when you're not very well informed. That's why I refrained from posting the rumours spreading of an inevitable strike, or taking either side's argument as fact, as she did, and posting it here. I generally don't write about controversial issues here about which I'm not well informed.
However, because of the massive amount of articles and opinion pieces in the Argosy, the Times & Transcript, herenb, the CBC, and on webpages, a facebook group, an online petition and at least two blogs I feel as though I'd be remiss in writing about what's happening at Mount Allison if I didn't mention that there has been some growing controversy since I first mentioned the University was in the planning stages of demolishing the Memorial Library and replacing it with a new Fine and Performing Arts Centre. The Library was turned into a Student Centre in 1970 but since the opening of the Wallace McCain Student Centre, it is mostly unused. I should note the addition to the old Memorial Library, Windsor theatre, is used for practices and auditions throughout the year.) The plan was first offered back in July 2010, but has only in the last few months been met with any vocal opposition.
I don't think I would be inaccurate in saying the vast majority of those opposing the replacement of the old library are older alumni who attended Mount Allison before 1970 when the building was transformed into a student centre as almost all of the letters refer to the old student centre as a it was originally built, as a Memorial to those who died in WWI and because all of the letters I have read so far have been from Alumni who graduated before 1970.
While there has been no real outcry against about the plans here at Mount Allison, the University decided to hold an information session about the its plan. Carly Levy wrote a piece in the Argosy (finally available online) summarizing the events of the meetings and the arguments of the administration in favour of replacing the building.
I've been able to attempt to boil down the various messages from the school and the opposition to a few the main arguments in favor and against replacing the old Student Centre.
1. It is a Memorial to those those who died in WWI.
2. It is a piece of art and the look and feel of the campus would be diminished without it.3. There technically isn't structural fatigue in the building
4. The details behind the estimated costs have not been fully explained
1. The memorial plaques created in honour of the war dead have been moved to the new Student Centre which is used by many more students and appropriately serves to honour the memory of those who died.
2. The new building will incorporate aspects of the old and will be made to with the existing architecture
3. The building in its current form is unsuitable for the physical requirements of the planned performing arts centre.
4. Repurposing the building would cost five million dollars more than demolishing it and starting from scratch.
5. The school cannot fundraise the extra funds and would be forced to increase tuition for future students
The article from the Argosy is included below. Below that you will find a note from Director of Alumni Relations Carolle de Ste-Croix (’90) to University Alumni regarding the school's plan's and the defense of them.
Also, feel free to post any thoughts below but keep them respectful or I will simply delete them as I have in the past.
Alumni Office: Information regarding the former University Centre/Memorial Library
Posted on Friday, January 14 @ 02:05:00 AST by admin
At its May 2010 meeting Mount Allison’s Board of Regents confirmed that the next major building project on campus would be a Fine and Performing Arts Centre. This is an exciting project for Mount Allison and for the community, and reflects the University’s long-standing commitment to the fine and performing arts.
Last fall, the Board authorized expenditures to begin the process of developing specific, architectural drawings. This step required a decision on whether an existing structure (the former University Centre, known prior to 1970 as the Memorial Library) could be used to house the new Fine and Performing Arts Centre. Based on expert advice, we estimated that retaining the existing structure would add approximately $5 million to the project’s cost. The Board therefore accepted the recommendation that architects prepare drawings and plans that did not include the existing structure but would include some of its features.
Given our loyal and engaged community's deep attachment to Mount Allison’s history, this decision has naturally generated discussion, reaction, and even controversy. This decision was taken after a thorough, conscientious, and reflective review of all options, and with a view to balancing the inheritance of the past, with the immediate pressures of the present, and the needs of the future. The University believes that the plans for the new Fine and Performing Arts Centre reflect what are in the best interests of Mount Allison University as a whole. This letter is meant to share the University’s perspective and to address some of the concerns that have been expressed.
As you are well aware, Mount Allison enjoys one of the most beautiful and distinguished campuses in Canada, and it is a campus that has evolved over the decades. Balancing our financial capacity with student and faculty expectations to provide state-of-the-art facilities in older buildings is not easy. But a tour of the University’s campus will demonstrate that it is a commitment that Mount Allison has been successful in pursuing. In all cases where it is contemplating renovations or initiating a new project, the University reviews its buildings on their own merits. If they can be used effectively and it makes financial and operational sense to use them, they are restored. But, if not, the University makes an informed decision to build new.
Each year the University spends a significant amount of money on the upkeep and improvement of its campus and buildings (historical and otherwise): $10 million in 2009, $9 million in 2010. In recent years, the University has restored the Wallace McCain Student Centre, Colville House, and the Bennett Building. We are currently initiating or have concluded major restorations at the Owens Art Gallery, Canada’s oldest university gallery; the “Anchorage,” a 120-year old home now being used as a student residence; and the historic Queen Anne Revival-style building, the “Black House.”
We recognize that buildings hold fond memories for some people, but the University’s ultimate mission and budget has to be focused on educating students and delivering the best possible program for them in top-notch facilities. It has a responsibility to ensure that faculty and students have access to safe, appropriate, effective, and sustainable facilities – now and in the future.
In preparation for the new Fine and Performing Arts Centre, a building assessment was carried out with the assistance of a number of specialist firms. Reports were prepared by two architectural firms, two engineering firms, and other experts on the state of the former University Centre building. The ultimate recommendation of these reports was that it would be imprudent to retain this building:
The challenges to modify the existing structure, to incorporate new building services, and to bring the structural framing up to current codes … will prevent it from being used to house programs such as wood work shops or metal shops where heavy equipment will be carried. In the main supporting beams, a lack of headroom for the building’s purpose, and mechanical and electrical systems that would need to be completely replaced.
Of course, we often look to our supporters to help finance major projects. At an estimated $30 million cost, the project will require $20 million in private donations (a challenge in itself) and $10 million from the University’s operating budget. Some have suggested that the extra $5 million (on top of $20 million) could easily be raised, but our experience in fund raising tells us that this would not be realistic, especially as we near the end of a major fund raising campaign where our most ardent supporters have already made financial commitments. To access the extra $5 million would require taking on long-term debt that would ultimately result in tuition increases for students or reduction in the quality of other programs and services.
There has been some concern expressed over the design of the new building, which has yet to be determined, finalized or approved. The University’s approach has always been to mix the best features of Mount Allison’s past with the new and innovative design, in an intimate, high-quality environment. From campus to curriculum, from facilities to programming, and from students to professors, this approach has proven beneficial and will be so again with the Fine and Performing Arts Centre. The University has a solid record of architectural renewal, so you can rest assured that features of the old building will be found in the new one and that the new building will respect and fit the campus surroundings.
We expect to have preliminary drawings of the new Centre later in the year, and we look forward to the feedback that will be provided when they are announced. If you would like to share your thoughts with us, we would be happy to receive them at email@example.com.
Carolle de Ste-Croix (’90)
Director of Alumni Relations