The Spectrum Student Subscription Fee

Students coming in late. Cell phones ringing. People chatting with their neighbors. Confusion over what is going on and who is saying what.

No, it's not World Civ. It's the Student Association Senate.

On Wednesday, The Spectrum went before the Senate to request that a referendum be put on this year's electoral ballot, allowing students the chance to vote "yes" or "no" to increasing The Spectrum Student Subscription fee. The Senate voted against our request, but that isn't what bothers us - rather, our concern is with the lack of professionalism and courtesy rife in that political environment.

While we at The Spectrum admit to lacking a comprehensive knowledge of Robert's Rules of Order, we expect our elected student representatives, especially at this point in the academic year, to have a firm grasp of meeting protocol. Robert's Rules of Order are used to ensure the smooth operation of meetings conducted with large groups of people, and as we saw Wednesday, they are essential to conducting this kind of business. When the chair of the Senate asks members of the Senate for correct procedure, it is a sign that our student officials are not using their positions as the learning experiences they are meant to be.

We could have looked passed all this, though, had the Senate been courteous enough to grant us their attention while we made our case. Despite repeated explanations regarding the sources of The Spectrum's funding, a printed version of that explanation and a hard copy of our budget, senators continued to insinuate that the majority of our $256,000 budget comes from the Student Association, when in reality, only about $30,000 of that money is drawn from our subscription fee.

And so our biggest challenge Wednesday night was overcoming the preconceptions that each senator walked into the meeting with. Several of the senators told The Spectrum editors in person, days before the meeting, that they were planning to vote "no" on our proposal. We didn't expect an easy victory, but a level playing ground doesn't seem like too much to ask. Of the entire Senate, only one senator put enough thought into the issue to come to our office and question us on our proposal.

In sharp contrast, at least two senators walked into the meeting over an hour late, nearly an hour into our presentation. Without having heard the majority of the discussion, both senators voted against the proposal. An abstention, at least, would have been the fairest route to take.

The Senate voted no and the reason that seemed to sway the vote was a promise SA made three years ago: SA would not raise the Mandatory Student Activity Fee for four years. Three years ago, The Spectrum spoke out against that promise and our reasoning still stands: It is unrealistic to hold future student government administrations to a promise they did not make.

Wednesday night, our prediction was fulfilled. Our proposal passed the Assembly two weeks ago without being questioned as a breach of that promise. When senators pointed this out, the speaker of the Assembly said he had not been made aware that such a promise existed. Several senators were concerned that by approving our request, they would appear to be breaking SA's promise to the student body.

The Spectrum disagrees with that logic. If our request goes on the ballot, it will not be SA asking for more money; it will be The Spectrum. Every four years, students vote separately on our funding and this should be no different. We have faith that the undergraduate student body is intelligent enough to make the distinction.

Unlike the Assembly, the Senate is made up of officers who were elected by undergraduate students. Their job is to act as a voice for students in these issues; this does not, however, mean that the senators should not provide the students with an opportunity to speak.

That is the primary reason The Spectrum chose the path it took. By placing a referendum on the ballot, we will allow the student body to make the final decision on where our newspaper goes from here. If the students vote "yes," we will continue to produce the highest quality paper possible three times a week, mirroring a professional performance as closely as we can. If the students vote "no," then we will know that we need to rethink the objectives and the purpose of the newspaper that has been produced for over 50 years.

For the past 20 years, the student subscription fee has remained $1 per student per semester. Despite increasing production costs, decreasing advertising revenue and inflation, The Spectrum has survived - until now. The Spectrum is facing bankruptcy.

We receive approximately $30,000 from undergraduate students each year, depending on enrollment numbers. We generate around $232,000 annually through advertising. Printing costs are over $80,000 a year. Raising the student's contribution to $3 per semester will bring the cost per issue to approximately $0.07.

One of the senate's concerns was that The Spectrum had not approached other student governments for financial assistance, because the paper was available to all students, regardless of undergraduate status. The Spectrum has approached the Graduate Student Association, but as for the other student governments, our coverage of their events is not as extensive as that of undergraduate events or GSA events. We are not connected enough to the students or issues of the other student governments to give them coverage that is timely, fair and comprehensive.

For the $1 undergrads pay right now, students get a newspaper capable of bringing such news as the University Residence Halls and Apartments decision (and repeal of that decision) not to renew undergraduate student leases in the Creekside Village Apartments; the controversial GSA elections last spring; and the SA Executive Board's raise in compensation to cover their tuition costs. The Spectrum also covers less hard-hitting news that students couldn't find anywhere else, including the dedication of a crew boat in memory of a lost teammate; coverage of club and student events; and in-depth coverage of UB's sports teams.

For these reasons, The Spectrum is important, and that is what we tried to convey to the Senate on Wednesday night. We regret that the Senate placed a higher value on SA's reputation than giving the students an opportunity to judge the value of the service we provide.

Now, The Spectrum must obtain 2,000 undergraduate signatures in less than a week to get onto the ballot and allow the students to decide the fate of the student-run newspaper. If you support us and you want to increase the subscription fee, come sign our petition in 132 Student Union.

If you disagree, come sign the petition anyway. You can still vote "no" during the election.

One way or another, what we really want to know is this: Do students believe the product we put out is worth the time, money and energy that the 90 students who work here put into The Spectrum, three times a week, 80 times a year?