The Faculty of Arts and Sciences (FAS) is expected to pay for over 40 percent of the University's development initiatives on a recently acquired land site in Allston--$225 million over the next five years, toward a project which is still largely undetermined.

This percentage is much more than FAS' fair share, according to professor of government Gary King, a member of the FAS Resources Committee. A number of other FAS faculty members have joined the protest.

The deans of Harvard's faculties recently voted by a strong majority to recommend financing a new infrastructure in Allston by deducting one-half of one percentage point off the growth of each faculty's endowment for each of the next five years.

Dean of the Faculty Jeremy R. Knowles said at a faculty meeting on Tuesday that he had voted against the measure.

Had the plan been in effect last year, each faculty would have seen its endowment grow 37 percent instead of 37.5 percent, according to King, who presented the opinion of the FAS Resources Committee at the meeting.

But Professor of the History of Science Everett I. Mendelsohn and Arnold Professor of Science William H. Bossert '59 said at the meeting that FAS was being forced to bear too much of the burden for the project.

They said it serves as a subsidy from faculties like FAS--which is heavily dependent on endowment income--to those that derive a larger portion of their budgets from tuition revenue like the Business School, which is adjacent to the new property.

According to Knowles' annual letter to the faculty, FAS derives about 40 percent of its budget from endowment income.

"Many members of our faculty feel the Business School lives rather grandly, and we are being asked to subsidize them when they are going to benefit the most," said Bossert. "If FAS is paying 40 percent [estimated of the total cost], I'd like to see we're getting our couple hundred million back."

Rudenstine said at the meeting that FAS would eventually benefit from the purchase of the land because its use would free space closer to the Yard.

Professors have pointed to alternate models for financing the Allston project, including a loan system--in which faculties that benefited from the move would compensate those that did not after the move was made.

Some professors objected to the manner in which the University made its proposal, which Mendelsohn deemed "taxation with minimum representation."

Rudenstine said at the meeting that he had seen a number of proposals to allocate payment for the project and had deferred the decision to the deans of the faculties.

"It's very important that if the central administration is going to be spending our money we be seriously consulted about it," said King. "We don't have that assurance."

"Dean Knowles has one vote when he's putting up 40 percent of the budget." Bossert echoed. "It's really not about money, it's about governance."

Known as Allston Landing, the land was previously used for industrial purposes, and is currently crossed by railroad tracks.

Rudenstine said at the meeting that the funds were needed to buy out easements, remove toxic waste and lay a basic infrastructure on the land.

Among the proposals for the ultimate use of the land are the relocation of the public collections of the Peabody Museum and possibly an entire graduate school. Mendelsohn cited the Education School, Law School and Kennedy School as rumored candidates.

--Staff writer Daniel K. Rosenheck can be reached at rosenhec@fas.harvard.edu.