Students will get the chance to vote on an $50 per semester increase in fees Jan. 31 and Feb. 1.
The 26.3 percent Student Service Fee increase would be split, with $5 offsetting the decrease in state funding and $45 would go to the construction, maintenance and operation of the athletic facilities — with the building of a new football stadium and the renovation of Hofheinz Pavilion being the first improvements made, as The Daily Cougar reported in November.
The referendum cites five reasons for the proposed increase: the new facilities would make UH nationally competitive and help recruit student athletes; it will increase school pride by providing better facilities for athletics, graduation and on-campus events; Robertson Stadium will be structurally sound until December, when the athletics department will have to find new housing for football games; UH athletics plans to become more self-sufficient and wean itself off of student funding; and the new facilities would open up internship and job positions for students, while admission remains free.
There are 12 polling stations open from 8 a.m. to 7 p.m.: Athletics Center, Campus Recreation and Wellness, Cougar Village, the Engineering Complex, M.D. Anderson Library, Melcher Hall, Moody Towers, Moores School of Music, Philip Gunthrie Hoffman Hall, the Science and Engineering Research Center, the University Center and the UC Satellite.
Students need their peoplesoft ID number and their date of birth to cast their vote, said Student Government Association President Michael Harding.
The $45 athletics fee will be in effect for no longer than 25 years, and the athletics department has said it will not come back to the Student Fees Advisory Committee for more money, the Cougar reported in November.
The increase, if voted in, will be the first time the University has raised student fees by more than 10 percent, said Associate Vice President for Student Affairs William Munson in an interview with the Cougar when the fee was first introduced.
SFAC asked SGA to send the increase to student referendum when it submitted its final recommendations in November.
SGA voted for the increase to be sent to referendum by a one-vote majority in its last meeting of the fall semester, the Cougar reported in December.
“If students really care, as we know they do, they will turn out (to voice their opinion),” College of Liberal Arts and Social Sciences Senator Lee Arnold said in the meeting.
Do not ask for me to pay for something without telling me:
a) exactly what I am paying for
b) How much it will cost
c) What benefit it will provide (to me or others, I don't care who)
d) What percent change this will be
e) Why the fee doesn't already exist (has it been voted down before)
f) What other fees are paid for in the same heading
Nice investigative journalism, DC. And SGA, for your part, complete fail – it's called educating the electorate.
Mike, nearly all of that is in the article. The only thing you listed that's not in the article is point F. Seriously – there are real problems and glaring omissions with this referendum, just by glancing over the MOU between Athletics and SGA (http://buildinguhpridetogether.com/#Info), and you're complaining that you aren't spoon-fed opinions well enough?
How do you figure?
"Pay for athletics" is not my definition of "exactly."
If you can't tell me "exactly" what it's paying for (stadium of XX,000 seats, eg, with 52 luxury suites on-campus to be completed by 2016 etc) you can't tell me how much it will cost. Paying $50 a head for 'no more than' 25 years under the SFS heading is pants for explanation of cost.
The benefit to students is entirely ommitted.
I'll grant you the percent change, but I admit to a mistake here – I was mainly thinking in reference to other fees, share of total fee bill, relative fee (compared with other schools). It was a poorly formed thought, I admit.
The specifics you're asking for weren't in the article because they don't exist yet. Tthe process hasn't made it to that point yet. If the referendum is passes, then a design firm will be hired to make those plans. Asking for a price tag right now is senseless.
>The specifics you're asking for weren't in the article because they don't exist yet.
Yes, and this is the problem. The University (through SGA) is asking students for a blank check with no forseeable end in sight. They're asking us to "trust them" that the money will be used wisely. If you want me to give you money, you need to tell me what you want it for; and if it's to accomplish a specific task and not an ongoing cost you need to tell me a lot of detail about that project. It's called due diligence. I'm sorry you're not familiar with the concept, as its absence will make managing your personal finances a living hell.
>Tthe process hasn't made it to that point yet.
Then don't ask me for money if you don't know what you're going to do with it.
>If the referendum is passes, then a design firm will be hired to make those plans. Asking for a price tag right now is senseless.
This entire concept is hilarious. Do you think UH started paying the contractor for the Science Teaching Lab building before they had designs in hand? No. They found out what they were paying for first. They're asking for the student body to look without leaping as well. It is asking students to exhibit criminal negligence in managing of their own finances; I understand if you're comfortable with that but I am not. Further, this fee is *UNREVIEWED* by any body, it's allocated directly to athletics. There's no oversight, so if the AD and Regents decided to buy everyone in the athletic department a porsche with the money as the "best way to provide for future excellence" they could do that.
I am happy to spend every penny I can that will make the University a better place. But if you want me to do so blindly, without any rational controls or responsibility, I'm going to have to say "Nyet."