Divided regents approve fee increase

May 07, 2012
Trevor Stevens | The Battalion Online

Tuition to remain at 2011-2012 levels

In a sea of suits, administrators and a sprinkling of students from across the Texas A&M System attended the A&M System board of regents meeting late last week in the MSC ballroom to set tuition and mandatory fees rates.
 
The board held designated tuition flat at the System’s flagship university for the 2012-2013 academic year, but approved an increase in differential tuition for the College of Education and Human Development, four mandatory fees and the establishment of a “student success fee.”
 
The nine voting members on the board of regents did not consider each case individually, but voted on tuition and fee requests from each of the 12 System campuses. Three of the nine voted against the agenda to increase tuition and fees Friday morning. Non-voting student regent Fernando Trevino Jr., junior political science major, had mixed reactions to the vote.
 
“There’s a difference between wants and needs, and I saw a clear need for tuition increase in places such as Texarkana where their population has just boomed in the last two years,” Trevino said. “On the other hand, I feel that an increase in cost at Texas A&M was much more of a want.”
 
Texas A&M University was the only institution in the System to hold designated tuition flat. Regents approved differential tuition of $300 per semester for a full-time student in the College of Education and Human Development — a $100 increase.
 
The board also approved an increase of about 1 percent in total cost to students by way of mandatory fees.
 
There will be a $43.58 increase in fees for both the fall and spring. The fees that were raised were the computer access fee ($22.50 increase), library use fee ($15 increase), Student Recreation Center fee ($4.08 increase) and University Writing Center fee ($2 increase).
 
The student success fee that regents approved was the center of much question and concern for both regents and students.
 
Jason Cook, A&M vice president for marketing and communication, said the student success fee will address issues such as graduation rates, student retention and high-impact learning experiences such as study abroad and undergraduate research. The fee will be funded through the reallocation of existing mandatory fees, and not increase the net cost to students, Cook said.
 
Trevino said the reason for his opposition to the fee increase was because the student success fee itself is not going to increase costs to students, but overall the new fees that were created in addition to that fee do increase the cost to students.
 
“There was some confusion calling the student success fee budget-neutral and not increasing cost to students,” Trevino said. “While that may be true, there’s more to the story, and the other part of the story is that there were $87 in other fees [per academic year] that were also proposed.”
 
The approved fee increases will generate about $3.87 million.
 
“The goal is to analyze and reduce certain existing mandatory fees, with any reductions going toward the student success fee,” Cook said.
 
University President R. Bowen Loftin intends to establish a “working group” to address the new fee, Cook said.
 
The exact funding structure of the new fee has not been determined at this point. Loftin indicated to the board that he is looking at a two-year process to generate funds. A 10 percent reduction to current mandatory fees the first year would generate $14 million, while a 15 percent reduction the second year would generate $22 million.
 
“That fee allows some flexibility, and it allows for the University to go through all of our existing fees and find areas where we have extra money,” Trevino said. “By creating the ‘success fee’ they are able to make it more ‘liquid’ … in order to do things that obviously would enhance our educational experience at A&M.”
 
During his presentation of the Tuition and Fee Advisory Committee, which is made up of students and faculty, Loftin expressed a need to increase designated tuition to afford merit raises for faculty and staff, who have been without raises for more than two years.
 
Cook said the student success fee will not fund faculty merit raises. He indicated the funding will come from internal prioritizations in each department and interest earned on University assets. 
 
In a memo to University faculty and staff, Loftin said there would be merit funding for the upcoming fiscal year for both faculty and staff. 
 
“Our budgets are complex and burdened already, and funds available are often highly constrained on how they can be used. We will have to postpone some plans and reduce the scope of some efforts, all of which are important, but we are committed to identifying the funds for a merit-based compensation program,” the memo said.
 
In the memo Loftin said the pool for merit compensation, from “every unit on campus,” will total about 3 percent of the total value of salaries and wages. Loftin expressed concern due to the fact that some faculty members have decided to leave the University, and thanked those who are remaining.
 
“Our budgets have been cut, our value to the public has been questioned, and our morale has been tested. And yet, in spite of these challenges, people of exceptional quality have opted to come and join our ranks,” the memo said.
 
Student Body President John Claybrook said it’s hard to discern whether the new fee is purposeful when it isn’t known exactly what the money is going toward.
 
“Obviously we are excited to see tuition staying the same. It’s important for A&M to continue to offer one of the best-valued educations in the country,” Claybrook said.
 
He said it is important to offer faculty incentives, especially if the University is going to meet its goals.
 
“With faculty, it’s kind of a give-and-take relationship; we haven’t increased anything in three years, and I think that faculty retention and recruitment is extremely important, and if we are going to meet our Vision 2020 goals we’re going to have to have faculty to get us there,” Claybrook said.

Signup for Updates:

Latest Updates

  • Coalition Echoes Call for Regent Hall To Go

    The Texas Coalition for Excellence in Higher Education issued the following statement in advance of tomorrow’s meeting of the Texas House Committee on Transparency in State Agency Operations at which Legislators will discuss the findings of the investigative report into the actions of UT System Regent Wallace L. Hall Jr.:

    “Across Texas we have heard a steady drumbeat of voices echoing the same message: Regent Wallace L. Hall Jr. must go. This is not about politics and it is not about one university – this is about good governance for the entire state of Texas. There are 359 entities to which the Governor of Texas makes appointments or nominations, and there is an appropriate and permissible standard of conduct by which each must abide. The actions of Regent Hall are well outside the scope of permissible conduct. His reckless disregard for what is appropriate, permissible – and perhaps even legal – is not the behavior Texans deserve or expect from their public officials. His continued presence on the board of regents sends a dangerous signal that all appointees are not bound by propriety or law. For the sake of good governance and future leadership of our state, Regent Hall must go now.” 

    Continue reading
  • Higher Education Coalition Calls For Hall's Resignation

    The Texas Coalition for Excellence in Higher Education today called on University of Texas System Regent Wallace L. Hall Jr. to resign, citing a comprehensive investigation conducted for the Texas Legislature by an outside law firm, which concludes he has abused his office in ways the Coalition believes are creating a toxic distraction to higher education’s fundamental mission of educating students.
     
    The report outlined a number of potentially impeachable offenses, including “unabated and burdensome requests for records,” “misuse of confidential student information,” “public criticism for UT Austin,” and “obstruction of legislative process,” including pressuring “UT System witnesses to alter testimony provided to the Committee.”
     
    The Coalition issued the following statement calling for Hall’s resignation:
     
    “The job of a regent is to set broad policy and hold administrators accountable, not to create havoc and a culture of intimidation. The primary focus of the Board of Regents right now needs to be on finding and recruiting the very best new chancellor to lead the University of Texas System into a future of continued and increasing excellence. Hall’s presence has become a toxic distraction that is threatening the environment for a chancellor search, creating turmoil on the UT Austin campus and undermining the credibility and integrity of the entire Board of Regents. Rather than put the State of Texas through the spectacle of an impeachment trial that would no doubt bring additional negative national publicity to Texas, Hall should do the right thing and resign.”
     
    The Coalition is comprised of leading Texans with a lifelong commitment to higher education, including former presidents of UT Austin and Texas A&M, former members of the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board, a former UT System Chancellor, and former university regents and chairmen of the Board of Regents. The Coalition also includes CEOs of Texas companies, numerous business leaders, philanthropists and more than 400 concerned citizens.
    Continue reading

Share This Page: