Macewan Hall expansion: SLC discusses student fees and future plans
By Elaine Liang, December 2 2025—
The Students’ Legislative Council (SLC) met on Nov. 18 to discuss the results of the Macewan Hall expansion survey, future plans for the building, and the fees that students might be paying.
The Mac Hall expansion survey was opened to undergraduate students from Aug. 15 to Sept. 26 as an initial step to gather feedback on the idea of a proposed referendum for the 2026 Student Union General Election. The referendum would allow students to vote on the introduction of a student fee to help fund the building expansion.
Vice President Academic Gabriela Dziegielewska opened the meeting stating that the SLC has gotten a positive response from the survey.
“The willingness to help fund the expansion was mixed. It seems like it slants towards ‘probably not’,” said Faculty of Engineering Representative Emmanuel Fasesan.
Fasesan questioned if implementing the fee would be representing the interest of the students.
“The nice thing about the university structure is that what we’re asking for is a vote on whether we should propose the referendum question, not to just vote on the thing itself,” Dziegielewska replied. “If this goes to referendum, the students ultimately get to decide if they want to pay for it or not, and if they say no, they say no.”
Dziegielewska added that she is taking a “positive interpretation” of the survey results because at the time of the survey, the SLC had not communicated the idea or given much context to students.
Fasesan followed up by asking what the plan is to “shift the student body from mostly a ‘maybe’ to mostly a ‘yes’” if the referendum were to take place.
Dziegielewska explained that the SLC can choose to adopt an official position to push students towards voting ‘yes’ for the Mac Hall expansion, using motivating marketing campaigns that highlight adding more food and study spaces to encourage student engagement.
If the results of the referendum were a ‘no’ from the student body, it might not be the end of the expansion project. Depending on the SLC’s goals in the coming years, the data from the potential 2026 referendum could be used in the future to guide expansion campaigns.
In response to a question from Faculty of Science Representative Haris Naveed, Dziegielewska states that there is currently no specific timeline on how long the construction would take. Details on the construction will be worked through if the referendum passes.
“I think they could do this in less than 10 [years], but this is my personal opinion,” Dziegielewska said.
“Considering that it would take around 10 years, would it make more sense to charge the same fee to all year students?” Naveed followed up. “Regardless of you being in fourth or first year, you’re not experiencing the final product.”
Dziegielewska agreed, but clarified that the proposed laddered fee with a “baseline amount of $30,” where first-year students pay the most and fourth-year students pay the least, was driven by the results of the student survey. Discussions on whether the fee should be laddered or consistent across all students, as well as further amendments to the referendum draft will be conducted.
Vice President External Julia Law reminded Faculty Representatives that the proposed fee would include students who are off main campus. This includes students at the Foothills campus, students in the School of Architecture, Planning and Landscape (SAPL) and those at the Spy Hill Campus.
SAPL Representative Matthew Moreau commented that current architecture students are already not happy that they have to continue paying the Active Living Fee as they move off of main campus. An additional expansion fee would further make them unhappy.
Faculty of Medicine Representative Nikhil Shrivalsan held a similar view, stating that the Calgary Medical School Association has expressed that they do not want additional fees since students are not on the main campus.
Faculty of Engineering Representative Ibad Rehman asked if there’s a possibility for students to opt out of the expansion fee if they are not in the place financially to pay it, or they feel that they are not getting any benefits from the fee.
“We don’t have an option as of right now to opt out of the fee for individuals,” Dziegielewska replied. “SLC could vote to reduce the fee for one year for either all students or specific faculties or departments depending on the financial considerations at the time.”
Dziegielewska explained that since the bank needs confidence in order to provide a loan for the construction project.
“There is a need from a financial perspective to be able to sustain the funding and to show that this funding is not just going to go away, or is going to be unstable,” said Dziegielewska.
Faculty of Science Representative Abdu Negmeldin asked if the proposed student fee would account for inflation.
“One of the rules that is outlined in the question is that after five years, the amount could be increased based on CPI up to a maximum of four per cent, which is similar to what happens to our health and dental fee, so it would be a very limited amount,” Dziegielewska answered.
Faculty of Arts Representative Simchah Atanda asked about whether students are the only funding source and if the university has signalled interest in helping pay for the project.
Vice President Internal Lorraine Ndovi stated that the university is obligated to pay for half of any of the projects that the Student Union does.
“There have been no conversations with the university just yet because in order for us to start talking about the funding opportunities that the university has for this building, we have to have commitment from the students,” added President Naomie Bakana.
Details on upcoming SLC meeting agendas are available on the SU website.