Campus: Rent revolt catches a break
Ricardo Bortolon, News Editor
The proposed rent increase for Louis Riel House will not take effect until after September 30.
At last week’s Board of Governors meeting, the Louis Riel Tenants Association presented their case to halt rent increases. The LRTA argued that the rent hikes are too high for the poorest residents of SFU and that the current condition of Louis Riel House demands immediate, serious attention. L ouis Riel resident David Newman stated in his presentation, “The 7.5 per cent rent increase projected for this year, following a similar rise last year, is causing extreme hardship for many low income families, leaving some to move out and others to explore options off campus.” Faculty Board Member Judy Zaichkowsky noted, “I do not think it is reasonable to expect these people to pay ’market rates.’”
Rent increases began in 2004 and are planned until the building’s closure and demolition in 2012. Student Board Member Titus Gregory proposed that rent increases be postponed until an assessment beyond the LRTA’s presentation is dissected at the next BoG meeting in September. The motion passed, but leases will not be extended; new leases will still have to be signed.
The new leases will be of a one-month length, in contrast to the usual four-month length spanning the semester. Residents can begin signing new leases July 31. After the next BoG meeting, residents will know whether rent will continue to rise.
Gregory expanded, “[The next one] is going to be a difficult meeting. The university has a current view that residence and housing should be revenue neutral, but Louis Riel House needs money for repairs and the rent is too high. In my opinion, the best strategy is to ensure Louis Riel House is not subsidising other buildings. The current plan is for profit from Louis Riel House to subsidise new buildings.” Associate Vice-President of Students and International Nello Angerilli disagreed, explaining that income goes into a pool and goes to where it is needed; thusly Louis Riel does not directly subsidise new housing. Student Board Member Shawn Hunsdale was not present for the LRTA presentation or discussion.
The motion to hold back the rent increase sets a precedent where such an interjection has been made on budgeting, interrupting normal lease scheduling. Fee increases in the past have not been stopped so near the deadline for signing new leases, only two days away.
The recent decision is too late for some current residents who have already made plans to leave due to the increase. It will also affect expected residents who anticipated more vacancies that may no longer exist if some residents choose to stay after the decision. Tim Rahilly, senior managing director for campus and student life, stated, “We have a rather full waiting list for the suites in the fall. Students that wish to remain because of the extension of current rates will impinge on our ability to let the new students move in . . . The conditions are the primary concern, and I am uncomfortable with the notion that we are alright with the conditions at a lower rate.”
The LRTA appealed their case to the BoG because residents are not covered by any legislation, neither the B.C. Residential Tenancy Act nor the University Act, leaving residents at SFU without anywhere else to turn. If the LRTA was covered by the B.C. Residential Tenancy Act, the size of the rent increases over the last few years would have been illegal.
Angerilli noted that the recent rent increases have been necessary after years of none. He added that the past lack of increases kept Louis Riel House from having sufficient funds for some repairs that have become much more expensive today. President Michael Stevenson corroborated, “Stopping the rent increase will bring us back to the time when all this started from lack of funds.”
Thurham noted her own experience with the deteriorating building, “Several months ago a pipe burst in our children’s bedroom and the ceiling was left with a gaping hole revealing possible asbestos dust circulating throughout out house. We were offered a single bedroom for our four-person family at a hotel, but we decided not to take it up for logistical reasons. Instead, the children slept in our bedroom while we slept in the living room.”
Stevenson argued that the Residence Sustainability Plan had already been through extensive public consultation and already voted through the board previously. Angerilli conjectured, “The good news and bad news is that [external inspectors] said it was absolutely average for what people are paying and what they get. In every university in Canada, one can expect to see a building in about that condition costing about that much money. It’s not a happy story, but it is a reality.”