Unaffordable housing at Vic

For students of Victoria College, the walk up and down Charles St. is full of familiar faces and scenery. You see students rushing out of Rowell Jackman Hall to get to their 9 am classes, congregating in the Goldring Student Centre to nd community, and ocking into the beloved Burwash Dining Hall to grab breakfast potatoes, wa es, and other morning treats. Charles St. has been at the heart of Victoria College for decades. In 1939, a student would likely see a similar array of faces, along with a row of homes numbered 73, 75, 77, 79, and 81—all donated by Dr. F. C. Stephenson.

77 Charles St. played a special role in the Victoria University community for decades. When he donated the houses, Stephenson made an agreement with the Board of Regents (BoR) that required Vic to use that Charles St. property for what became known as Stephenson House: a co-operative house for undergraduate students at Victoria College. In the agreement, Stephenson outlined that his donation should bene t worthy students of Victoria College who had nancial need, were resourceful, took initiative, and who had intentions of joining the United Church. In the nal clause of the agreement, Stephenson wrote that “if at any time the Board desired to use the property for any other college purpose, it shall agree to set aside a sum of $32,600 [equivalent to over $600 thousand in 2022] … to be known as ‘ e Frederick C. and Annie Stephenson Fund,’ the income from which shall be used in establishing another co-operative house or in any other manner consistent with the general terms of the gift.” e BoR upheld this agreement for decades. While Vic’s cherished Charles St. lost Stephenson House in the early 50s, it was reestablished at 80 St. Mary’s St., which was a home with newer facilities and was in better condition. e BoR moved Stephenson House again in the early 90s to its nal location, 63 Charles St..

Stephenson House not only provided student housing, but it also created a hub on Vic’s campus for students who were highly involved. Several former residents recalled the events that the house members held for the wider Vic community. For example, their Halloween tradition pulled in non-residents to help with setup and acting and the house opened up to the whole community.

Residents also spoke fondly of the house’s nightly dinners. House members were collectively responsible for grocery shopping, and the residents took turns cooking for each other. ose living in the house would be in attendance, and often a few guests would be there as well. Professors and administrators were often invited to dinner. Each resident had a job that helped keep the house running, and they all pitched in to complete chores.

Groceries were included in the price of rent at Stephenson House, which in 2010 was around $350 a month. Cost-adjusted for today, that would be about $3,750 for the academic year. Double rooms at

Victoria College today go for around twice that cost, nearly $10,000, not to mention the mandatory meal plan. For the 2022-2023 school year, the cheapest room in residence at Victoria College, a triple room, will set you back $8,405. Meanwhile, the cheapest meal plan rings in at $4,922. All together, that’s $13,327.

At Stephenson House, students were o ered more space, privacy, and autonomy than can be found in residence for a fraction of the price. Because residents shopped for themselves and cooked their own meals, they could accommodate an individual's dietary needs and preferences in a way that Burwash Dining Hall cannot.

After 70 years of co-operative, a ordable housing at Stephenson House, the residents became aware that the Vic administration had di erent plans for the building. After some back and forth with administrators in November 2009, the students of Stephenson House extended an olive branch to the administration by writing a comprehensive recommendation on how to continue Stephenson House amid much discussion about its disbandment. eir proposal focused on two principles that President Paul Gooch had previously outlined: “ e bene ts of the Stephenson gift are directed to Victoria College students who (a) demonstrate and wish to develop the qualities of resourcefulness and responsibility in the service of others, and (bhave nancial need.” e students met repeatedly with Victoria University administration, including the then President of Victoria College Gooch and Victoria College Bursar Ray deSouza, to attempt to negotiate the continuation of the Stephenson House legacy. Craig Ruttan, Stephenson House’s president at the time, describes that at a point in the negotiations “it became clear that [the Vic administration] were …no longer interested in negotiating … that's when we began organising, trying to build extra student awareness and solidarity.” e students brought the issue to the VUSAC Caucus, started a petition, and emailed members of the BoR directly to gain support for keeping the House alive. e administration brought a proposal to the BoR in April of 2010: Stephenson House would move into RJ, and students would pay standard residence fees as well as a speci c Stephenson House meal plan.

Discussions between students and administration turned to the 12-room suite in Rowell Jackman Hall (RJ). Past President Paul Gooch described the suite as being “intended to ful l the functions of Stephenson House.” e student proposal compromised with the administration’s desire to relocate the house, but wanted to keep a number of important factors of the house's legacy. e proposal focused heavily on a ordability, suggesting a $4,000 total annual fee, $2,500 of which would go to rent and $1,500 for food and operating supplies. e proposal quoted a speech from the 1985 Stephenson House community, which said “Dr. Stephenson intended to provide an a ordable residence … Stephenson House is not intended to provide Victoria College with any revenue, and should not be seen so in the future.” Another important element of the proposal was that students in Stephenson House should not have a required meal plan as meal prep and community dinners were historically a vital part of the culture of the co-op.

Past VUSAC president, Catherine Brown, explained to e Strand why the students found this proposal inadequate: “[many] who are part of the Stephenson House community wouldn't have been able to live on campus normally. And often the people selected … were leaders in the Vic communities. ey were heavily involved in enriching the lives of students on campus … there was concern that [the proposal] might create barriers for students to be as actively participating in the future.”

Ruttan described to e Strand some of the many ways the BoR silenced student voices. He explained that he “managed to make one point” at the meeting in April 2010, but the “chair prevented [him] from being able to speak again on the topic.” He also said that President Gooch was upset with him for emailing Board members about Stephenson House directly. Ruttan and Brown both expressed a concern for the lack of student consultation from the BoR on student issues. Leo Josephy, a past president of Stephenson House, expressed similar concerns about the BoR, saying “they could be very good at obfuscating the important details to you as students.”

Ruttan also told e Strand that in BoR meetings the chair would not record votes in opposition of motions, only asking for those in favour. Because of this practice, which is still being used today by the BoR, the students speci cally requested recorded ballots when voting on the future of Stephenson House. Despite the student e ort to oppose the proposal, the motion passed by one vote. e then residents of Stephenson House had to decide how to move forward. Josephy explained, “We decided, look, our rent is gonna go up, we're gonna have to be buying into a meal plan that we don't want

… and meals, communal meals were a huge part of Stephenson House.” resident, both identi ed two crucial reasons why they were able to be so involved: the a ordable cost and location of Stephenson House. e decision by administrators to rid Vic of the Stephenson House community is only one instance in a long history of encroachment upon student spaces on campus. In 1960, Vic made a 99-year lease agreement for the Colonnade Building at Avenue Road and Bloor St. Furthermore, in 1997, Vic made another decadeslong lease agreement for the land on which the McKinsey Building sits at 110 Charles St., a project which came at the expense of the student gymnasium, the eld house, and part of the eld outside Margaret Addison Hall. Indeed, a 10-storey luxury hotel on Charles St. would likely exist today had students not pressured the Toronto City Council to block Vic administrators’ plans to develop the land with Huang & Danczkay in 1989. In each of these instances, spaces that were formerly for students were turned into revenue-producing properties for the University. e lack of appreciation that if [they] raise … students rent, that they're not going to want to keep living there. e lack of appreciation that, hey, meals and sitting around a table are important … that actually there can be a real human element to building community … It was just a lack of appreciation of these human elements that without honouring them made it impossible to build a new community. And maybe that comes from a lack of trust from administration to students.” e Board of Regents Handbook outlines the future of 63 Charles St. Although it is unclear how legitimate their plans are, the proposal says they plan for “the transformation of [63-65 Charles] from underperforming assets with a few o ces into a revenue-generating building.” It is hard to imagine how a student space, vibrant with cooperation, student involvement, and love could have been seen as an underperforming asset. e BoR’s attitude highlights the lack of value the administration gives to student spaces.

“We saw it very … di cult to continue [our] way [of] living,” continued Josephy. “ I… knew from the outset in my negotiations with Kelly [Castle] that [it] wouldn't work.

Without adequate support from the administration, the una ordability of the new Stephenson House, and the forced buy-in to the meal plan, Stephenson House died shortly after its move to RJ, and no such space exists now at Vic.

When re ecting on the end of Stephenson House, Brown told e Strand about the necessity of “special spaces in the community for di erent students. And a ordable housing, particularly in a city as expensive as Toronto is really important. What makes life rich at Vic is the students, the community … is really feeds into the bigger issue of encroachment on student space." Josephy re ected that, “I think the real thing that was missing in the transition of Stephenson House was a lack of appreciation for the human aspects of the problem.

Today, students scramble to a ord residence and to nd alternative housing in Toronto. Many students have to undergo long commutes from more a ordable areas. When students do come to campus, there are now fewer spaces for them to eat, study, and participate in club and levy activities.

On a campus that is now struggling to nd students to ll leadership positions, we need to examine any and all potential methods of convincing Vic students to do more than attend classes and go home. Stephenson House bolstered student involvement. Almost everybody who lived in the Stephenson House had at least one leadership position and participated in multiple extracurricular activities.

Josephy and Andrew McEwan, another 2009-2010

Further, the decision to kill Stephenson House is demonstrative of a broader historical inclination among Victoria University administrators to make transformative decisions without consulting the student body. Members of the BoR are principally concerned with Vic’s revenue. ey do not listen to students’ expressions of their experiences on campus. e BoR’s persistent refusal to communicate with students perpetuates the misunderstandings they and students have of each other. Furthermore, the Board’s lack of transparency with students prevents them from gaining access to information about the institution they choose to fund through Vic fees. If students don’t understand what the BoR is, they will not run for elections for roles in it, and the lack of candidates in recent years demonstrates this. Rather than consulting with students, the BOR ignores them and makes decisions that are detrimental to Vic’s reputation, and in the long run, its nances. e BoR’s behaviour towards its students directly contradicts its duciary duty to the school.

Just as generations of students did at Stephenson House dinners, the Board of Regents and Victoria University administrators must invite students to the table. Before deciding on important issues, such as the fate of entire student spaces, members of the Board must put themselves in students’ shoes. ey must make an e ort to understand, internalise, and apply what students think.

When e Strand reached out to Victoria University for comment on the end of Stephenson House, Sally Szuster, Director of Communications for the O ce of the President, responded that “President Rhonda McEwen has articulated that one of her leadership priorities is securing a ordable housing opportunities for students and this work is ongoing.” Stephenson House no longer exists as it once did, but a ordable housing must continue to be a priority for Vic. e fact that a ordable housing options are no longer available for Vic students is a loss for the University. If a ordability was truly a priority for Vic administrators, there would be no debating, no shutting doors, and no “con dentiality”—there would simply be a ordable housing.