Students should not be main financial resource, says ASUW

Claiming that attending the UW has already become too expensive, the ASUW Board of Directors (BOD) filed a letter of opposition to the proposed energy fee to the Board of Regents last week, calling the proposal "a dangerous precedent."

"It looks like another tuition cost," said ASUW President Danica You. "Students should not be a cash cow for the administration. "

You said she understands running the University is expensive, but said the proposed energy fee, along with a 12 percent raise in tuition and a 10 percent increase in residence hall housing "becomes a burden too heavy for many."

The BOD and ASUW are concerned the approval of an energy fee will open the door for additional "emergency" fees to be imposed on the student body. The Board of Regents has stated that the fee is temporary, and will only be charged next school year in response to recent soaring energy costs.

In its prepared letter to the regents, the BOD claimed there is a possibility the fee will carry over to the following 2002-2003 school year. According to You, the regents also discussed the possibility of charging students to use the libraries on campus.

"We are a public institution, but we've become very elitist," she said. "The rising costs make it harder to get here and remain here as a student. We're trying to make this University more accessible."

Some programs that are allocated large amounts of funding in next year's budget are questionable, said You. "There's a lot of programs that the University spends their money on that students have no idea about."

A copy of the 2001-2003 straw budget shows money set aside for mandated items, such as "ergonomics rules implementation," and "other items" were allotted $500,000. Mandated items are programs that are non-negotiable, according to You.

According to information provided by the Board of Regents, if a fee is not assessed, there will have to be cutbacks in staff and faculty to aid in paying the deficit. The fee is estimated to bring in approximately $7 million in revenue next year.

"Why don't we get more active in getting support in Olympia?" said You. "We need to go down other routes (to raise funding) instead of sticking fees on students. We're (the UW) the easiest targeted resource for money. "

Although the board encourages student input during their meetings, criticisms of the proposed fees were not welcome, according to You.

"When asking about the fees, the response from the regents was: 'We need a lot of money. What do you as students feel that we should do about this?' Figuring out the budget is not the responsibility of the students, that's what the board is for," she said, adding, "I'm very frustrated with the response we've been getting from administrators."

The Graduate Professional Student Senate (GPSS) and ASUW senate are not in session during the summer, and with student enrollment being lower at this time of year, You feels that "making this decision now when no one's here to make a big stink about it is rather sneaky."

Students will return to campus in the fall and suddenly find a new fee that they weren't expecting, she said. "But most students will just pay it and not question what it is," You said.

The Board of Regents has not responded to the BOD letter, and was not available for comment.

The proposed energy fee:

$5 per credit for traditional classes =

$7 million total revenue

$6 million research and service energy deficit +

$7 million instructional programming energy deficit +

$13 million total energy deficit =

Poor UW students

UW balance without energy fee -$16,423 million

UW balance with energy fee -$9,423 million =

UW still in debt