New Fee Vote Rules Will Improve Process

This week the SUNY Board of Trustees has released redefined guidelines regarding the mandatory student fee referendum. New regulations will alter when and how the referendum is held.

Prior to these new guidelines, every four years the student body at each state university would vote on whether to keep the student fee mandatory or to make the fee voluntary. Most ballots also have had a question regarding a proposed increase to the fee. Under the new guidelines, the votes will take place more often - every two years. Also, the votes will be held concurrent with the SA's spring elections, which determine the executive board for the coming year.

This change in referendum presents a mixed bag of results. Holding the vote every two years will likely improve how the SA budget is implemented. This year, SA asked for and received a $10 increase to the previous $69.75 fee. Part of the rationale for this high of an increase was that it was hard to project exactly how much some costs would increase over a four-year period. Holding a vote every two years may prevent fee hikes that overcompensate, providing a more stable budget. Holding referendums every two years will also make the student body more aware of the necessity of the mandatory student fee and about SA's activities in general. Now that the vote will be paired up with E-board elections this will hopefully boost turnout.

However, holding both votes in the spring could be problematic because the candidates running for the E-board may not know the nature of their budget. Candidates running usually develop their platform based almost solely on what they will allocate funding to, and the extent of that funding will not be confirmed, making the construction of a platform difficult. This leaves students with a less than full picture of how SA will look under a new administration.

The guidelines also mandate that language be added to the SA constitution that protects the funding of SA organizations with all viewpoints. This commendable provision will be inserted in response to the U.S. Supreme Court case Board of Regents v. Southworth, in which three University of Wisconsin law students argued that their university should not fund a number of controversial groups like the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual Campus Center and the International Socialist Organization with compulsory fees because of their viewpoints.

The Supreme Court ruled against the law students, stating that the university should provide funding to all groups on campus regardless of viewpoint. Our own constitution will be amended to include this "viewpoint neutrality" wording to ensure funding to all groups.

Assuring funding for controversial SA groups provides students with a variety of viewpoints on campus, while requiring more frequent fee votes will make the process more familiar and the hikes less steep. As for the mandate that the vote must happen in the spring, the system will change to accommodate whatever negative consequences it presents.