Petition: Reject Current Student Success Fees

SQE has another petition underway to try and staunch the latest round of fees and would-be fees. Here’s a summary of the situation:

The CSU has attempted to raise fees every year for over a decade regardless of circumstances and in many cases justifying increases on speculation rather than research. The most recent attempt, Student Success Fees, has been in defiance of Governor Brown’s 4 year moratorium on tuition fee hikes for the CSU.

And here is Students for Quality Education’s suggestions (nine total) :

1. 50% +1 of entire student body has to participate in vote.
2. A “Yes” or “No” vote will be binding.
3. Every student currently enrolled that would be required to pay the fee, should be allowed to vote.
4. Instate a third party review of budget reports and funding allocation to ensure transparency.
5. Should students approve the new fees, Campus Presidents will host open meetings to present how they intend to spend the funds with uncensored Questions & Answer section.
6. Post-allocation transparency reports should be itemized and given to all students and faculty.
7. Current fees that were voted down by students should be repealed.
8. All campuses that were denied a vote should be required to hold a student vote.
9. Establish a three year sunset on approved fees.

 You can fill out the petition here. Every signature will help the administration understand that students are already overtaxed and overstretched.

Sacramento State Students Reject Fees

Students at Sacramento State University have rejected a 438$ annual fee increase in the previous week. Here’s a blurb:

“The democratic process has been followed,” Gonzalez said in a statement. “Although I could have implemented the student fee last spring … I wanted students to have the opportunity to vote on the issue.”

Also note that while the article is framed as attempting to build a “residential campus”, none of the funding was actually allocated for student housing (which is a major problem). Additionally, note that the democratic oversight in this case (a simple vote) was optional and could have easily been ignored by the administration.

More On Student “Success” Fees

The LA Times had written an editorial talking about the CSU Student Success fees. Here’s a blurb; they aren’t terribly enamored with them:

When fees are imposed, they should include sunset dates, so that one set of students isn’t encumbering future generations. Fees should not be used to hire full-time, permanent faculty or staff, which locks a school into higher expenses down the road in the form of salaries, raises and pension obligations. In fact, fees should not be used on instruction at all. That’s a tuition expense, not a fee. The board should not allow the creation of have and have-not campuses, setting up a situation in which students with more money pay fees that others can’t afford at the colleges that offer more courses and counselors.

SQE On The Radio / Fee Campaign Update!

SQE was on the radio talking about the latest round of fees at the CSU campuses! Check it out here. It’s only five or so minutes.

You can also read a larger article at the Sacramento Bee. Here’s a blurb:

Student success fees have now been introduced at 12 of the 23 CSU campuses since 2011, as the university has turned to raising tuition and other sources of funding to offset budget cuts. Ranging from $162 per year at CSU San Bernardino State to $630 at San Jose State and Cal Poly San Luis Obispo, many of the success fees were implemented through a vote because students wanted to finish their degrees faster.

Criticism began to mount in the past few months, however, as more campuses debated adding or raising their success fees, which come on top of CSU’s $5,742 annual tuition for in-state students and often hundreds of dollars in other facilities, health and activities fees.

1 2 3 8