Melissa Martinez

Staff Writer

In case you haven’t heard, CSUSM administration is exploring a “Student Success Fee,” in which they are thinking of charging students a fee designated to possibly one or more of four categories: course sections, advising and career support, academic support and student life and recreational opportunities.

As a student, offering more course sections and academic support seems like a fresh breath of air, however, I do not understand why we, the students, should pay more to receive these resources that have yet to be determined.

The CSUSM website dedicated to the Student Success Fee states, “Why a Student Success fee?” and further says: to help ensure students graduate in a timely manner.” This is something every student will benefit from, however, how will charging us money that could potentially go to campus recreation help me to graduate a semester early, as the presentation states? I understand the importance of academic support and being involved on campus. However since most of us aren’t able to afford the tuition and fees now, we are all going to be too busy working extra hours to make rent, tuition and now our “student success fee.” Yes, some of us get financial aid but what about those students who don’t benefit from financial aid? Don’t make us pay another fee without asking first.

The “success” fee was first introduced last semester and there were two open forums providing information on the fee on Feb. 26 and Feb. 27, with another one slated March 12. In the presentation provided at the Feb 27 forum, I felt that the information highlighted only the benefits of the success fee, skewing the information in favor of students. Honestly, I feel that this “success” fee presentation is trying to make the students believe that it is up to us to pay for these resources.

The presentation also showed that in 2013/2014, if approved, the student “success” fee, would start at $175 a semester, then move up to  $225 a semester in 2014/15, and then rise once more to $275 a semester in 2015/16. My question is why the increase?

What also caught my eye was the survey that was so generously offered on the website. Now, if you are a student, faculty or administrator, you are able to complete the survey and in completing the survey, you are asked which departments you would allocate $100, assuming the fee is approved. Not “do you oppose or approve the student success fee?” When I tried filling out the survey, I put $0 in each of the categories and stated my opinion in the following forum. I was not allowed to submit because I did not properly distribute a $100 total. This makes me wonder whether the forum following the survey is even considered since regardless if you agree on the success fee, you must distribute a total of $100 amongst the presented options.

If you are serious about stating your opinion, I suggest filling out the forum on the “Send Us Your Feedback” page, however, if you do not agree with the fee, you cannot properly complete the survey, without deciding that certain departments should receive a certain amount of money.

However, if you’d like to ask administrators directly about the fee at the open forum, you can’t because those providing the forum only represent the administrators and information regarding the fee. When asked questions regarding the fee at the Feb. 27 forum, Student Affairs spokeswomen Bridget Blanshan announced that debate of the fee is not welcome to multiple students. If you want to raise your voice, take the survey! Tell them where you want the money to go, even if you don’t want it to go anywhere! The survey instead should include a choice of whether students agree. I heard at the Feb. 27 open forum that the reason this was not taken to a vote (a guideline in implementing a student fee at any CSU requires either a vote from the students, a referendum or an alternative consultation) was because it was believed that they would not receive proper feedback.

The CSUSM website dedicated to the Student Success Fee states, “President Haynes determined that the use of alternative consultation was more appropriate than a student fee referendum. This decision was based on the consistently low voter turnout the campus has experienced during ASI elections and other fee referendums held on campus.”

However, I believe that had the students been given an opportunity to vote, they would receive appropriate feedback and that was proved with the results of Proposition 30. Because proposition 30 affected money, students cared. I don’t believe the case is different with CSUSM students. Offering an alternative consultation rather than a vote is a way for CSUSM to get what they want from students without giving them the respect of a voting opportunity.

Maybe this “success” fee is important; maybe it will benefit our campus more than it will take away from students. However, does CSUSM believe that proposing a “success” fee without first allowing students to vote is the right way to do this?

For example, students are currently charged for the building of the Student Union. This does not infuriate students because we know exactly where the fee is distributed. From what students understand about the success fee is that it’s being proposed and administration has yet to decide which department(s) on campus will benefit from this fee.

This fee was approved at multiple CSUs. For example, at Cal Poly Pomona, there is information on exactly where and how the fee will be distributed. Their website even offers a fee breakdown of where the fees will be disbursed each year (csupomona.edu/~studentsuccessfee/faq.shtml#faq1). I believe if CSUSM offered us the same information as well as the right to a vote, the success fee may be approved and even supported by students.

Even the university admits on its website, on a page listing the pros and cons of the success fee proposal that without a vote “there is not a way for students to really say NO to the fee.” That is a pretty big disadvantage when you’re asking students for more money; it’s taking away the opportunity for students to have a voice.

I encourage all students and faculty to attend the forum at U-hour, March 12 in Arts 240.