Thursday, February 21, 2008
The Student Senate finance committee voted down a resolution to eliminate the Women’s and Non-Revenue Intercollegiate Sports Fee. Students have voted to pay $80 a year for this fee, which goes to the Athletics Department.
Janiece Richard, student athletics advisory committee senator, and Alex Earles, student rights committee associate senator, present an artist’s redoring of the new KU rowing boat house scheduled to break groud on March 7. Richard voiced her concern Wednesday night at the Senate Students Rights Committee meeting about a proposed student fee cut that would cut funding to non-revenue sports. Accomodations, like the boathouse, for non-revenue sports depend on the current student fees.
In spring 2006, students voted to raise the fee from $20 to $40 a semester, which gave the department $1.9 million a year in student money. Fifteen dollars of the $20 increase was allocated to help build a new boathouse for the rowing team.
Eleven members of the committee voted to pass the bill and six voted it down, but two-thirds of senators have to vote yes to pass a resolution.
Lennea Carty, Andover senior and junior/senior CLAS senator, wrote the bill to lower required campus fees for students who cannot afford them. She said she had heard people complaining about the fee, but when no one wrote a bill to eliminate it, she decided to write one herself.
“I don’t care if it polarizes Student Senate,” Carty said. “If it’s the right thing to do I’ll do it.”
She said after she talked to a friend who couldn’t afford the increases, she decided to do the only thing she could to help: write legislation to lower fees.
“Eighty dollars is a heating bill in winter and that’s three new pairs of shoes depending on where you shop,” Carty said.
Carty said she also wrote the bill because it violated a Senate regulation by funding a group that was not open to all KU students. Senate created a subcommittee last year to discuss how the fee should be used.
“Accountability has always been an issue with this fee,” said Brian Hardouin, Broomfield, Colo., law senator.
Carty said she did not visit the committee or talk to the department before writing the legislation.
She said it also violated a Senate regulation because it funded a third party. The department is a non-profit organization separate from the University.
Sean Lester, associate athletics director, said eliminating the fee that generates $1.9 million a year would directly affect not only users of the boathouse but also the athletics department in general.
“It would affect them in 1.9 million different ways,” Lester said.
Brandon Macneill, another associate athletics director, said athletics director Lew Perkins pledged to keep student sports pass prices the same as long as Senate supplied the student fee. He said the University has the second-lowest sports pass price in the Big 12 at $150.
Lester said the department’s budget was transparent as it listed all payments for the boathouse. He said the department had so far paid $1.3 million of the $1.8 million cost of the boathouse.
Hailee Jones, Burden senior and member of the rowing team, said the boathouse facility before the fee was introduced was nothing more than a chain-link fence. She said the University was one of two Division I schools in the country with a rowing program without a boathouse.
She said when the microburst hit Lawrence in March 2006, some of their $40,000 boats were damaged. Rowers also didn’t have a locker room, a place to have team meetings and experienced safety problems.
Eric Foss, Overland Park law senator, said the fee should be removed because the department was not concerned about students.
“I’ve gone to school here for almost six years, and the department is the most unresponsive organization on campus to student needs,” Foss said.
Carty said she felt her legislation had become a coalition bill where a whole coalition was opposing it. She said she felt some people were intimidated by the department and were reluctant to stand up to it.
“Athletics is so close to the pulse of this University, it’s considered untouchable,” Carty said.
Joanne Bauer, Leawood freshman and associate finance student senator, said she was originally a sponsor of bill but removed her name because she wanted to hear more debate about the bill.
“We don’t want to alienate athletics because they help a lot of students,” Bauer said.
She said she was not confronted to remove her name from the legislation and would probably have supported the bill if it had made it to full Senate.
Jordan Williams, Coffeyville junior and Queers and Allies senator, was also originally a sponsor of the bill but removed his name. He said he went to talk to Ray Wittlinger, student body vice president, and Adam McGonigle, student executive committee chair and current United Students presidental candidate, for advice about the legislation. He said McGonigle was adamant about making sure he could vote however he wanted to. He said Wittlinger brought up some good points about the legislation but did not imply how to vote.
“I don’t want to hurt my coalition,” Williams said, who is a member of United Students.
Williams said he felt the fee was disproportionate compared to other fees, but also did not want to alienate athletes, who are a great asset to the voting constituency.
Wittlinger said he had worked to make sure all senators were informed about the bill and that coalitions didn’t influence how senators voted.
McGonigle said he had not told people how to vote and was happy to be a member of a coalition where people have their own brains.
He added that he did not support the bill because it was extreme.
“We could sit back, do nothing and pretend like nothing’s wrong, or completely cut the fee,” McGonigle said. “I think the right decision is somewhere in between there.”
Tom Cox, Shawnee senior and holdover senator, was originally a sponsor on the bill but removed his name because he also felt the bill was one extreme fee option. He said he would rather find a compromise than remove the entire fee.
“Extremes force facilitated discussions,” Cox said.
—Edited by Nick Mangiaracina
Students praised for making boathouse a reality
Students and University officials endured snow Friday to celebrate the construction of ...
United Students propose pool for Recreation Center
One coalition said the addition, estimated to cost about $20 million, wouldn't ...
Student athletes focus on Students of Liberty, ...
The debate revolved around Adam Wood’s proposal to cut women’s and non-revenue ...
Student Senate works issues for this semester, ...
Many issues are works in progress right now for the Senate
University postpones aquatic center plan
Because of budget cuts next year, McGonigle calls plan “not the responsible ...
Student Senate notebook
Here's what happened at the Student Senate meeting Wednesday.
Senators question student body president’s vetoes
The vetoed legislation concerns Gmail technology, a sustainability fee and the Multiculural ...
Boathouse dedication on Saturday
The new 16,000-square-foot building provides a home for the varsity and club ...
Senate considers fee increases
The fees have not been implemented yet.
Senator to address violations
At tonight’s meeting, Mason Heilman, Student Rights Committee chair, will face violations ...
University to review piracy policy
Student senate and University administration have a one-month period to research the ...
Senate votes on buying clickers
Although a faculty member has had problems with the clickers, Student Senate ...
Kansan gives Student Senate grade report
Kansan Student Senate reporter Brenna Hawley graded the outgoing Student Senate administration ...
Student Senate Notes: October 18, 2007
See the results of discussions about the removal of senators and the ...
Executive Committee votes to uphold Porte’s suspension
President’s ability to remove executive staff members one of the issues debated.
Student Senate notebook: Funds may be used ...
Student organizations with selective membership may qualify for free advertising in the ...
News Briefs: Sept. 13, 2007
News Briefs for Sept. 13, 2007
Student Senate Notebook
Here is what happened at the Student Senate meeting on Wednesday
Editorial Board: Athletic funding shouldn't fall on ...
The Women and Non-Revenue Sports fee was voted to be increased from ...
United Students wins Student Senate with 48 ...
Adam McGonigle and Michael Gillaspie received 2,005 votes, securing the positions of ...
Student body president suspends treasurer
Suspension comes after treasurer releases memo to The Kansan.
Student Senate notebook
Student Senate Notebook
Student Senate committees met last night to vote on legislation concerning large ...
Student Senate leaders claim compensation under new ...
Six Student Senate leaders will receive between $1,500 and $3,000 per semester ...
Student Senate discusses plans for KU aquatic ...
Student Senate is looking at three different plans for a possible aquatics ...
Student Senate Notebook
A look at Student Senate hopefuls
A glance at presidential candidates before the Student Senate debate: Austin Kelly, ...
Platforms discussed in Student Senate debate
United Students, Connect KU and Students of Liberty debates issues such as ...
Coalitions offer their platforms to campus
ConnectKU, Students of Liberty, and United Students hope to appeal to students ...
Student Senate leaders claim compensation under new ...
Six Student Senate leaders will receive between $1,500 and $3,000 per semester ...
Student Senate creates new graduate position
Student Body President Michael Wade Smith hopes the move will improve relations ...
Student Rights Committee keeps Court of Appeals
The Student Rights Committee voted against a bill that would have restored ...
Grad fills highest NCAA student position
Matt Baysinger represents 400,000 student athletes as chairman of an NCAA student ...
United Students meets, discusses plans
The coalition describes their plans for election season, and its vice presidential ...
Commission approves boathouse permit
The Lawrence City Commission approved a special use permit that would allow ...
Student Senate gets report card
The Kansan takes a look at the current administration’s promises and achievements.
Senate treasurer out for finance talks
Alex Porte was suspended Tuesday for leaking a confidential senate budget proposal ...
Student Senate dismisses senator, sends bill back ...
Full Student Senate met last night and dismissed one senator because of ...
Student Senate reviewing fees
To keep overall fees the same, some individual fees will have to ...
United Students win top seats in election
United Students secure the Senate with 51 percent of the student vote, ...
From left: Kimberlee Hinkle, Libby Johnson and Hannah ...
1 comment
Kansas Jayhawk fans hold aloft a reproduction of ...
2 comments
Erin Saupe, a Ph.D. student from St. Cloud, ...
1 comment
0 comments
Armed robbers continue to threaten.
3 comments
Lecture from Greg Mortenson, co-author of New York ...
0 comments
Comments
Fee continues amid controversy
Anyone that supported this bill needs to re-evaluate who they represent. The students voted in 2006 to increase the fees, and if the students want to support women and non-rev sports, then let them do so. If there is such an outcry from the students to cut this funding (which there is not, only from Lennea's friend), I'm pretty sure there is an election coming up soon. . . Why don't we let the students decide. . .again!?!
If we are going to reduce fees, we should take a small portion from everything student fees support (clickers anyone???), rather than taking it all from women's and non-rev sports. This is simply an attack on Athletics and would only hurt our hard working women and non-rev student athletes.
What should have been realized from the beginning is that Athletics is going to get their money somewhere, regardless of if it is from student fees or increasing the student ticket prices.
Fee continues amid controversy
Richie, that vote to increase student fees was a total sham, and anyone who voted in that election knew it. First of all, the wording of the fee increase was cleverly disguised to prevent students from really knowing what they were voting for, secondly KU athletes were telling people to vote for this increase to "help the basketball team" (A rather shady tactic), and third only 3,000 students out of a campus of more than 30,000 voted. How can you call something passed by less than 10% of the student population a legitimate vote? You're dreaming if you think that the majority of students wouldn't take that $40 a semester straight back if they knew what it was going towards.
This is not an attack against Women's and non-revenue sports. It is an attack on the ability of the Athletics Department to take money from students who have no affiliation with Athletics in any way shape or form. Why should 30,000 students pay for a boat house that many will never have the opportunity to use? It's not right, and you know it.
Who cares what Athletics wants? They are a separate entity from the university and therefore shouldn't be able to take money from students via the university. Let them raise ticket prices and make the minority of students who go to athletic events pay for them.
There IS a huge outcry against campus fees. Most students just feel there's nothing they can do about them because they've got a money grabbing university on the one hand and a Student Senate on the other that lacks the moral fortitude to actually do what's right for the majority of students they represent.
KU obviously values athletics more than academics, and therefore can expect to not receive one single penny of support from me after I graduate in May.
Fee continues amid controversy
I think we need to look at a bigger picture here.
These fees go to help both the women's and non-revenue sports. Like it or not, the majority of the public associate the popularity of a sports program to the academic institution. Think about it, what comes to mind when you think of Duke, USC, UCLA, etc.? Ok, now what comes to mind when you think of UMKC, University of Missouri-Rolla, Wichita State?
Yes, I know that comparing Duke to UMKC is comparing "apples to oranges" but I think you get my point.
Athletics brings in more money from sales than they do from student fees. Think about how much money fans spent on tickets, memorabilia, booster clubs, etc. Also think about the recent high school grad who is influenced to pick a school because of the strong athletic ties.
Unfortunately, lack of paying fans for women's/non-revenue sports is SERIOUSLY lacking at KU (not to mention hundreds of other schools across the country). Whether it's the need for more tactical marketing from the athletics department to create a stronger fan base, or just general student apathy, if these sports are not receiving the support they need from fans they then have to scrape by on what little funding they do receive.
As a former rower, the KU rowing fans that came to support us was a coffeehouse study group compared to the lecture hall amount of people from K-State or even Texas. And it's the same thing across the board for sports that are not men's basketball or football.
I personally don't believe that the fees should be increased anymore but I do believe that the athletics department marketing/PR team needs to look at better ways to create a fan base for the athletes who need it most, and I don't mean (men's) basketball or football.
Fee continues amid controversy
I agree that the Athletic Department should be self-supporting. The Athletic Corporation at KU is extremely profitable and the corporation should not ask for an excessive student fee. A link to the Department of Education's Office of Postsecondary Education is listed at the end of this post.
The website shows that the KU Athletic Department had a surplus of $7,147,759 during the 2006-2007 year. The total revenues were $65,194,721 and the expenses were $58,046,962 for the entire Athletic Department at KU. The web page also shows that KU spent $16,040,048 in just two sports, Men's Basketball and Football. There is also a nebulous expense category of "Not Allocated by Gender/Sport" which gobbles up $30,884,148 of the budget, which is more than the $27,162,814 spent directly for all Men's and Women's sports at KU. The Kansas Athletic Department could have paid for almost four boathouses itself (4 x $1,800,00 = $7,200,000) with its surplus of $7,147,759.
http://ope.ed.gov/athletics/InstDetail.asp?CRITERIA=3
Fee continues amid controversy
I am 100% in support of lowering student fees. But let's not take that fee cut from one area. Many people are trying to take their frustrations out on Athletics by cutting funding to women's and non-rev sports. That is simply not the answer.
If there is such an outcry to cut just the women's and non-rev sports, let's vote again in the next election. Regardless if you believe the election was a sham or not, every student had the right to voice their opinion in 2006 and they voted to support Athletics. If the opinion of the students have changed in the past 2 years, which it may have, lets have the students decide. Simply having a a few senators take out their anger at Athletics and trying to cover it as "good for the students" because it lowers fees is not the proper way to go about this.
Fee continues amid controversy
I somehow really doubt that even if the students voted to cut women's/non-rev sports that it would actually happen. The NCAA (not to mention everyone else associated with the athletics department) would have a field day with that issue.
But you're right richie09, lowering student fees should mean tightening up the belt in a variety of areas and not specifically targeting just one group/entity.
Fee continues amid controversy
No one is suggesting that the students voted to cut women's/non-revenue sports. They voted to cut the fees associated with funding the boathouse. I have been against this fee from the beginning. Not only is the Athletic Dept. a separate entity and students fees should not be used for this purpose but the Athletic dept. should be looking to its own donors/endowment for these funds. When KSU was faced with this very problem, the wife of President Wefald committed herself to the task of raising the money for their rowing boathouse. The indebtedness of students has grown exponentially over the past 5 years and students should not be burdened with this kind of fee. And shame on Lew Perkins for suggesting that student ticket passes will say the same price IF the fee is continued. Someone is not doing their math in Student Senate. The 1.9 million generated by students fees is a much better deal for him than raising tickets prices for a select few..He is obviously no dummy and preying on the inexperience of students and the lack of anyone looking out for their best financial interests.
Fee continues amid controversy
The year after the fee increased, Athletics increased student ticket prices from $125 to $150. How is that consistent with their reasoning for the fee?
Also, the student vote was a sham, as previous people pointed out. More people voted on the fee issue than even voted on President. Some people say that shows unbelievable support from students for the fee. I say that shows voter irregularities. The election rules were changed because of how Athletics abused the election system. They had free food and drinks on Wescoe Beach with athletes telling students how to vote on laptops. 85% of students don't vote in student senate elections, and most students have no idea what's going on anyway, so of course if an athlete says "come get some free food and help KU sports by clicking yes on this survey" for two days you can get 3,000 votes. That doesn't mean the student body wants to shell out 80 bucks a year to support a boathouse.
Fee continues amid controversy
“I don’t want to hurt my coalition,” Williams said, who is a member of United Students.
This piece of legislation is not about coalitions. When senators start voting on the basis of their coalition in February, eying elections in April, senate is fully corrupt.
As a two-year senator, I'm still not sure on the merits of this bill. My committee, Rights, voted to send it back to subcommittees to try and find a compromise. I would have liked to see Finance do the same.
I do know that dirty politics played a role in the failing of this bill and that's just sad.
Fee continues amid controversy
Oh of course dirty politics played a part. Adam McGonigle already traded in his dignity for a chance to be student body president.
Fee continues amid controversy
It bothers me that a large chunk of an article on a significant debate in Senate ended up devoted to United Students. It really wasn't relevant to the story.
Fee continues amid controversy
kcchiefs27,
When I read the article, I thought it said that Adam McGonigle was "adament" when telling Jordan Williams that he should vote his own way. That's why your comment caught my attention.
Then I looked at your previous comments. This is the second comment where you have personally attacked Adam McGonigle's character. You also only seem to comment on article directly related to student senate - and always seem to somehow relate them to how you don't like United Students.
Frankly, your fascination with Adam McGonigle is kinda sick. You should seek some help.
Fee continues amid controversy
I think anonymous posters are pretty weak.
Can't everyone just say what they mean, face to face? Pathetic.
Fee continues amid controversy
Hawks101, there are a few people who only comment about their dislike of Delta Force and Connect (or whoever else dares challenge their beloved KIgnited Students from year to year). Why don't you go calling them out, as well? Are they sick, too?
Fee continues amid controversy
Calling out a coalition is one thing (not something I particuraly like, as I don't give a damn about coalitions), but name calling and personally attacking a particular candidate is just rude. That's the difference.
Fee continues amid controversy
I'm with Jarrod. Anonymous name calling only takes the focus away from the important issues that Student Senate should discuss.
Sign in to comment
Or login with:
OpenID