A Graduate and Professional Student Council resolution asks the University to move forward on a study of the Student Athletic Fee in a bid to expand the amount of student input in fee proposals.

At the Jan. 21 GPSC meeting, the council approved a resolution that opposes the next projected athletic fee increase of $20 for fiscal year 2000 and calls on the University to immediately start a study that will analyze how much money the Athletic Department may need in the next few years.

The administration’s agreement to conduct the study is part of a compromise between Chancellor Donald Beggs, Undergraduate Student Government and GPSC that was reached in June. Study groups were to examine the need for future athletic fee increases to allow student constituency groups to weigh in concerns and opinions.

Advertisement

However, the Board of Trustees voted for the $20 increase in the athletic fee, and approved projected amounts of a $20 per year increase for the three following years.

The athletic fee will increase 17 percent from $116 to $136 in July and likely will jump to $156 the following year. University policy states that under normal circumstances fee increases are to be capped at 3 percent. The athletic fee increase is a special circumstance to repair aging facilities and help provide scholarships for intercollegiate athletes.

The athletic fee study, part of the compromise package, has not materialized. GPSC member Rob Neff, who wrote the resolution said he fears the University may be ignoring students’ input on the Student Athletic Fee.

At the time, they agreed to have focus groups involving hundreds of students but we haven’t seen anything yet, he said.

However, Beggs said he has taken on the athletic fee issue himself to try to determine the No. 1 priority for the Athletic Department.

Our top priority as a Division I school is to put a competitive team on the field or on the court, he said.

Beggs said he did not overlook constituency input in his decision to recommend the athletic fee increase $20 again for fiscal year 2000.

Advertisement*

I did have conversations with student leaders where we talked philosophically about the issue, he said.

The most significant way for a college to stay competitive in sports is through scholarships, and more money for athletics means SIUC will be on a faster track to full funding of sports scholarships.

For instance, Beggs said, if a football player can get half of a scholarship at SIUC or a full scholarship at another Missouri Valley Conference school, the player likely will forgo SIUC for the full scholarship.

By increasing the amount of money for intercollegiate athletics, the University will get even more money from the NCAA the year following the increase.

Let’s say during year one, we give $100,000 in scholarships, Beggs said. If we keep that amount in the budget for year two, then the NCAA might give us an additional $50,000 for scholarships.

GPSC Vice President Ed Ford said though the board approved the projected fee increases in June, it does not nullify the compromise.

Because fee proposals can be more or less than previously approved projections, student input is still a part of the fee approval process.

The Board of Trustees can vote to approve a higher or lower fee increase than was approved as a projection.

Therefore, both arms of student government still have their roles in influencing the board though their decisions are non-binding.

But Ford says more student input should have been included.

This was supposed to provide broad-based constituency input, but so far this hasn’t happened, he said.