|
|
| Don't have an account yet? Sign up as a New User
|
|
| Support uws |
 |
|
|
|
|
| Less than a majority favour UPASS: GRT survey (Ryan Chen-Wing) |
Contributed by: uws archive on Thursday, July 25 2002 @ 03:25 PM CDT
|
This is an archived story posted by Ryan Chen-Wing. You can view the original
here. The results from the transit survey from the Winter have been released and show fairly even division of opinion among students on the idea of a compulsory fee and a universal bus pass.
The pass, referred to as UPASS, would allow unlimited rides on GRT routes. Students would pay for it through a fee on their fee statements.
Of the 1,578 respondents, 16.9% strongly favoured and 25.9% strongly opposed the idea. Combined with other answers 44.7% favoured and 44.0% were opposed.
The survey was run from 11 February 2002 to 28 March 2002. It was commissioned by Grand River Transit and performed by the UW Survey Research Centre.
Co-Director of the Survey Research Centre, Professor Mary Thomson, described the GRT's involvement, "JoAnn Woodhall, the Transportation Demand Management Planner of the Regional Municipality of Waterloo, asked the UW Survey Research Centre to carry out the survey. She works with the management of Grand River Transit, and representatives from GRT came to the stakeholder meetings to plan the survey."
"GRT's role was to explain the universal bus pass to the student leaders and to help determine the timelines for the study. Waterloo Region paid for the study, with the intention (according to my understanding) of getting information for both the Region and the student leadership."
The final report was completed on 21 May. Feds President Brenda Slomka received the report on 10 July and met with GRT representatives on 11 July. She released it to uwstudent.org on 17 July.
Principal Researcher Shane Dixon, sociology graduate student, was the project manager for the survey. In outlining how the survey was developed he said, "The survey was developed with a couple of objectives in mind — first, to answer whether the students were, or were not, in support of a universal bus pass — second, the survey was designed to help inform future GRT changes so that they could better facilitate students' needs, such as the addition of more or more frequent bus routes.
"Several questions regarding support for the bus pass came from a pre-existing survey used at the University of Western Ontario. Other questions were developed by GRT, the Survey Research Centre staff and the student's unions at UW and WLU according to the two objectives of the survey stated above."
The survey asked students what they thought an appropriate level for the fee would be, the average responses were a median of $30.00, a mean of $42.40 and a mode of $50.
The report indicates the that a higher than population proportion of first-year students answering the survey. The proportion of respondents who reported being in first year constituted 48.8%, but first year students represent only 27.4% of the UW student population. The report does not give any indication of differences in reposnses across demographic groups.
On 22 July, Slomka sent an e-mail to Students' Council saying, "I have met with Grand River Transit and have entered into negotiations. I am also researching the situation at other universities to see what their UPASS contracts include. As President, my main goal is to determine whether there will be a proposal that would be favourable to students.
"I am making it a priority to have a concrete, appropriate proposal to present to Students' Council in September. If this timeline is not feasible, we will discuss the issue at the following council meeting."
• Grand River Transit boosts service, proposes universal student pass Imprint 1 Feb 2002
• No transit pass yet Imprint 13 Nov 1998
• Universal Bus Pass Report
update: I pass, you pass, they pass, we all pass Imprint 26 July 2002
Level of support for universal bus pass
| Opinion | Frequency | Percent |
|---|
| Strongly favor | 267 | 16.9% |
| Favor | 438 | 27.8% |
| Neutral | 157 | 9.9% |
| Oppose | 286 | 18.1% |
| Strongly oppose | 408 | 25.9% |
| Missing | 22 | 1.4% |
| Total | 1,578 | 100% |
Suggested price of UPASS
| Price | Frequency | Percent |
|---|
| 0 to $20 | 576 | 38.0 |
| $21 to $40 | 335 | 22.1 |
| $41 to $60 | 293 | 19.3 |
| $61 to $80 | 113 | 7.5 |
| $81 to $100 | 84 | 5.5 |
| over $100 | 95 | 6.2 |
| Missing | 62 | 3.9 |
| Total | 1,578 | 100 |
Program year for respondents and population
| Year of Program | Frequency | Percent | Frequency | Percent |
|---|
| First year | 771 | 48.8% | 3212 | 27.4% |
| Second year | 175 | 11.1% | 2392 | 20.4% |
| Third year | 283 | 17.9% | 3223 | 27.5% |
| Fourth year | 303 | 19.2% | 2663 | 22.8% |
| >Fifth year & Non-degree | 23 | 1.5% | 214 | 1.8% |
| Missing | 23 | 1.5% | n/a | n/a |
| Total | 1,578 | 100% | 11,704 | 100.0% |
|
| |
|
|
|
| Authored by: uws archive on Thursday, July 25 2002 @ 05:25 PM CDT |
This is an archived comment posted by On The Record. You can view the original
here.
I do recall the slate including Slomka, Kerrigan and O'Connor stated that they were opposed to a universal buss pass during the Feds election campaign. Is this a flip-flop? Are the Feds endorsing this bus pass?[ Parent ]
|
| |
| Authored by: uws archive on Thursday, July 25 2002 @ 11:28 PM CDT |
This is an archived comment posted by Aaron Lee-Wudrick. You can view the original
here. This idea reeks of 'cash grab' to me.
It is useless to solicit for opinion without offering an amount that it would cost. Plenty of people are in favour of universal things in principle, but you'll see a big dropoff in enthusiasm once they start to see that it is going to to cost them.
That said, the statistics themselves are skewed. The sample size is inaccurate, and it is clear that more students are strongly opposed than strongly in support. Should this even be put to a vote unless it can be argued that a majority of students are in favour?
Aside from my objections on principle, I have major issues with the argument that this initiative will be environmentally friendly. All those students that currently walk, would be taking the bus. How is this going to reduce pollution? That's in addition to the assumption that people will stop driving their cars if they have a transit pass. But will they? Who knows.
As for the argument that it will allow students to do things like go to the mall, assume for a moment they wanted to go the mall three times a term. That would be twelve dollars. So why should every single student be forking out fifty dollars?
The UP-ASS is exactly that: students would be bending over and taking it. It will be very interesting to see who supports this initiative, and whether or not they are the same people who fret over tuition increases.
If Grand River Transit wants more business from students, perhaps it should consider giving university students the same rates as high school students, rather than extorting it from all of us. And for the bureaucrats at the Region of Waterloo, I wonder if they'd have the political gall to suggest that every resident of Kitchener-Waterloo be forced to buy a bus pass out of their property taxes. Ah, but we're just students - so its ok to screw us.
The UPASS is bad in principle and would be a failure in practice. It shouldn't even be on the table considering the proposal did not emanate from the university itself.
Students at Waterloo come here for school, not to be fleeced by the local public transit company. [ Parent ]
|
| |
| Authored by: uws archive on Friday, July 26 2002 @ 03:51 PM CDT |
This is an archived comment posted by RD. You can view the original
here. Disclaimer: The OPINIONS expressed in this post are strictly based on personal observation and in no way are meant to resemble the "holier than thou" arguments of all the political-type people who are debating this isssue.
In considering the viability of a UPASS, and whether or not it will actually have an environmental impact, try this:
Those who currently walk, bike, rollerblade, skateboard, scooter, or unicycle to school are most likely content with their mode of transportation. The majority would probably not appreciate paying for an extra service that they simply have no use for.
Those who have cars (from what I've seen) either:
- Did not purchase the car themselves. Now thats one heck of a gift to get, so this student is probably fairly well financed and another $50 won't really be noticed.
- Purchased the car, but is still making payments on it. Perhaps there is also a mountain of OSAP debt accumulating as well. Now a student who voluntarily takes on this kind of debt on a luxury item (yes, a car is a luxury) isn't going to be broken by an extra $50, and will likely do nothing more than grumble about it to their friends.
- Could afford to buy a car (debt free) because they earned scholarships or bursaries, made a killing in the stock market, had money even before they enetered UW, etc. This is a tough one. But logically, would someone who has a car that is totally paid for give up that convenience, while still paying car insurance, to take the bus for an entire term? They'd have to be pretty darn fed up with gas & parking prices.
IMHO, the UPASS is not a bad idea, just misguided. If it were made optional, like the Student Supplementary Health Plan, then those who don't need it, or who simply will not give up the convenience of a car, could CHOOSE to deduct it from their fees.
After all, it IS still a democracy.... (right?)[ Parent ]
|
| |
| Authored by: uws archive on Sunday, July 28 2002 @ 03:21 PM CDT |
This is an archived comment posted by Aaron Lee-Wudrick. You can view the original
here. (From The Record February 14, 20XX)
WATERLOO, Ontario (CP)
Students at the University of Waterloo yesterday voted to institute a mandatory fee to ensure universal access to booze on campus.
The BoozePass, as the fee will be known, was approved by a vote of 65.3% to 34.7%. Voter turnout was 26.3%.
Beginning in September, the BoozePass will allow students at Waterloo unlimited access to alcohol at the two campus bars, The Bombshelter and Federation Hall.
Joe Public, a spokesperson for the LCBO, and Jane Doe, representing Brewer's Retail, lauded the decision as beneficial to students and their organizations alike. "By ensuring guaranteed revenue, we are able to provide alcohol at a discounted price, which also benefits students." said Public.
Doe also pointed out several other benefits to students. "No longer will students, who are on a tight budget, be stretched when it comes to getting hammered throughout the term. And service lines at the bar will be shorter, since bartenders won't have to waste time making cash transactions."
The LCBO and Brewer's Retail initially approached the Federation of Students after statistics showed a decline in revenue for both companies.
Students were initially concerned about the quality of the products that would be offered, and agreements were struck with the LCBO and Brewer's Retail to ensure a wide selection of major brands and microbrews would be available, as well as an array of hard liquor and spirits. Wine and tequila were deemed to be too costly, and therefore will not be available at campus drinking establishments.
Protests from several groups who viewed the promotion of alcohol on campus as detrimental were disappointed by the results.
"I still think it is ridiculous for us to be subsidizing other student's drinking" said Jeff Teetotaller, chair of the No committee. "We choose not to drink, yet we have to pony up for others? It makes no sense."
Vera Young, a 17-year old student from Alberta, was also distressed. "I can't even drink! I have no need for this pass. This is so unfair."
Albert Coholic, a third year student in Systems Design,was more enthusiastic "subsidized booze? YEEEAAAAAHHHHHH".
Jimmy Lush, Yes committee chair, defended the proposal. "Look, everyone wins. Just because there's a few nerds around who don't want to come out and get smashed, is no reason to punish the rest of the student body. We just want to have a good time! I'd encourage Jeff and his friends to get on board and stop being so anal."
Thursday's vote comes on the heels of McGill University's decision last Novemeber to implement the TimPass for unlimited coffee for students, and the SmutPass, which was voted on in January at the University of Victoria, giving unlimited, universal pornography-rental privileges to students at that school.
[ Parent ]
|
| |
| Authored by: uws archive on Monday, July 29 2002 @ 01:33 PM CDT |
This is an archived comment posted by Danny. You can view the original
here. With some of our tuition levels rapidly approaching the $4000 a term level, another mandatory fee is the last thing we need. [ Parent ]
|
| |
| Authored by: uws archive on Monday, July 29 2002 @ 07:41 PM CDT |
This is an archived comment posted by collective. You can view the original
here. How about a $10 fee per term to eliminate the 75m by-law restriction on lodging houses that restricts supply close to the school. This fee would be used to ensure quality housing and enforce by-laws (could go to hire a new by-law enforcement officer). Also to provide information to the students living off-campus of their responsibility to the community. [ Parent ]
|
| |
| Authored by: uws archive on Monday, July 29 2002 @ 08:28 PM CDT |
This is an archived comment posted by Why isn't that the headline?. You can view the original
here. So more students favoured a universal bus pass than opposed it, and a significant number were neutral. To me, I'd say that's certainly a reason for Feds to keep investigating and working on a proposal to put to a referendum. Then, once a referendum is called, we can all form our referendum committees and prove our points, while people here can call the committee organizers bad names for our entertainment. Any councillor feel like making a motion to get the ball rolling?[ Parent ]
|
| |
| Authored by: uws archive on Tuesday, July 30 2002 @ 01:55 AM CDT |
This is an archived comment posted by Chris Ferguson. You can view the original
here. I endorse the UPASS wholeheatedly, as a councillor and a student.
In first year, even living in a secluded residence, I wished I could have had a pass like so many unversities do, in order to better explore the city.
I think a universal buss pass will help Mayor Woolstencroft out with her stated policy of having students "live all over Waterloo". I think it will give an option to those who might consider living further away from campus, making lower-rent accomodations much more attractive and perhaps thus lowering rents accross the board.
I also think it would be beneficial to the struggling downtown, as more students might go there to hang out.
While it is natural for some to oppose this for personal reasons, all things considered there will be positive repercussions for basically eveyone involved, in some way.
Chris Ferguson
FedS Councillor (Arts Regular)[ Parent ]
|
| |
| Authored by: uws archive on Tuesday, July 30 2002 @ 10:04 AM CDT |
This is an archived comment posted by Jesse Helmer. You can view the original
here. General
- Is a discounted bus pass the most important improvement to student life at UW?
- Should a discounted bus pass be all-pay?
- Should a discounted bus pass be non-refundable?
- How much will it cost?
- What is the opportunity cost of the total amount? (let's say $50*18000 students*3 years=$2.7M)
- Why is the proposal only targeted at students?
- Should the proposal be extended to faculty and staff?
Referendum, or not
- Did the current executives campaign against the UPASS?
- If they did, should council call a referendum?
- If there is a referendum, how many referendum questions should there be?
- If there is a referendum, what should these questions be?
GRT service
- Will service improve if many students buy a discounted bus pass?
- How can GRT service be improved?
- Are the people who will pay for the increased service the ones who will benefit from it?
[ Parent ]
|
| |
| Authored by: uws archive on Wednesday, July 31 2002 @ 10:49 AM CDT |
This is an archived comment posted by Jesse Helmer. You can view the original
here. During the last Feds referendum, and before it, I asked if the proposed additions and renovations were the best use of students' funds. I'd like to ask that question again, about the UPASS.
Has anyone (Feds, for example) surveyed UW students to find out what they need, want, or would like? I don't think so. Until that happens, why are we talking about the UPASS?
The Federation needs to start surveying its members to find out what *they* think is important. Then, when someone comes to the Feds (admin, or GRT) with a proposal, the Feds will have some idea if students would support it, or not.
I went over to sourceforge.net and found php ESP. It looks like a good place to start, with a start up capital cost of...$0/student (mandatory, non-refundable, of course). [ Parent ]
|
| |
| Authored by: uws archive on Thursday, August 01 2002 @ 08:29 PM CDT |
This is an archived comment posted by rob. You can view the original
here. For your consideration
[ Parent ]
|
| |
| Authored by: uws archive on Wednesday, August 21 2002 @ 09:21 AM CDT |
This is an archived comment posted by P. Quealey. You can view the original
here. I guess this will only reply to those who read the 'HOT' link but today's bulletin featured an article on a program that is far superior to UPASS:
-----------------------------------------------------------
Alternative transportation comes to campus
Sebastian, Johannes, Claire, The Rambler, and Ginger Bike line up in racks outside the Student Life Centre, ready for a sprint to a class, a trip to the grocery store or an evening parked outside a local restaurant.
The fleet of five bikes was launched this summer in the Yellow Bike Program's pilot project -- the "light version" of what organizers hope will become a free-wheeling transportation alternative on campus.
Initiated by science student Mark Daalderop -- who spent much of the summer cycling across the country -- and run by Daalderop and co-coordinator Tina Deacoff (psychology) right, the UW program is modeled on successful Yellow Bike projects in communities and on campuses around the world.
Designed to promote cycling as an environmentally friendly and economically viable form of transportation, the program offers loaner bikes to members. For just $25 per term -- $20 of which is refundable at the end of the term -- any UW student, staff or faculty member can join the Yellow Bike Program and have access to a sturdy, three-speed bicycle. The $5 balance is used for maintenance costs.
Members can sign up at the SLC turnkey desk, and leave a Watcard with the turnkeys when they take out a bike. The yellow bikes must be returned by 11 p.m. on the day they are borrowed.
So far, says Deacoff, the bikes have mainly been used for off-campus trips. "They allow students more freedom," she adds, especially co-op and international students who may not have their own bikes at Waterloo.
The five pilot bikes were donated to the program by Recycle Cycles in Kitchener, a group founded at UW and now affiliated with The Working Centre on Queen Street.
"We didn't want expensive bikes often in need of repair, like mountain bikes," says Deacoff. The three-speed versions are "sturdy, unlikely to be stolen and low maintenance" -- a key factor when Daalderop, Deacoff and just a few stalwart volunteers perform repairs at the Bike Centre in the basement of the SLC. Photos promote cycling
The Bicycle Aesthetic: The European Experience, a photography exhibition mounted by fourth-year environment and resource studies student Johanna Stange as a thesis project, will be on display August 21 to 23 in the Great Hall of the Student Life Centre.
Stange is using the photos, taken in German and Hungarian cities, "to promote the use of the bicycle as a sustainable mode of urban transportation."
The exhibition opens at noon on Wednesday, with local resources on biking available, and a presentation on UW's new Yellow Bike Program.
Funding for the project was provided by the Student Life Centre and the Federation of Students, and Deacoff and Daalderop gave each reconditioned bike a coat of bright yellow paint and its own name -- an anthropomorphizing strategy designed to "help people feel more affection and respect" for the bikes.
"So far," says Deacoff, "we've been pleased with the honesty and responsibility of the users."
After a successful start this summer, turnkey staff will begin taking memberships for the fall term during frosh week. The Yellow Bike Program is planning to install a sign over its racks, and depending on demand and the availability of volunteers, may add more cycles to its fleet. Prospective volunteers and members can learn more at the turnkey desk.
[ Parent ]
|
| |
|
|
|
