Wednesday, April 8, 2009
Student Senators have spent countless hours reviewing and revising fees during the past several weeks. As they prepare to make final recommendations regarding fee cuts to the full Senate tonight, some senators have noticed a conspicuous lack of change in one area of funding: women’s and nonrevenue sports.
The fee began when the student body passed a referendum in 2006 to increase funding for women’s sports. More students voted on the referendum than voted for the student body president and vice president that year.
Senators have the authority to overturn any referendum 12 months after it passes.
“The fee review committee and a good portion of student senators would really like to see that fee cut instead of other fees that provide a lot more tangible and substantial benefits to students,” said Eric Foss, student senator and member of the fee review subcommittee.
Each student currently pays a $40 sports fee every sememster, $35 of which is part of a contractual obligation. The remaining $5 is not under contract and could be cut to save money.
But Chancellor Robert Hemenway, who must approve any fee recommendations made by Senate, has made it clear to senators he would not support any such decrease in funding.
Last year, Senate proposed a cut of 25 cents to the sports fee in order to provide funds for the sustainability fee. Foss said that the decision was “unilaterally overturned” by the chancellor and that no cuts were made to the sports fee.
Foss, along with other senators, expressed the idea that if Senate proposed a similar cut this year, the chancellor would again overturn the decision.
“I don’t think he’d blink twice doing it,” said Brian Hardouin, chairman of the Senate fee review subcommittee. “When he removed the 25 cents before, he didn’t seem to give a whole lot of pause at it and I don’t know that anything’s changed since last time. The chancellor has already taken the position that it’s the students’ responsibility to fund women’s sports.”
Hemenway said in an e-mail that he originally vetoed the cut to the sports fee because he was in favor of providing funding to Title IX sports.
Title IX states that “no person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.”
The most public application of this bill has been to high school and collegiate athletics.
“The administration should be supportive of Title IX funding,” Hemenway said. “Seeing 16,000 women’s basketball fans on Saturday speaks for itself.”
Other senators, however, said they did not think it was the student body’s responsibility to support Title IX funding.
“Title IX is a requirement of the athletics department,” Hardouin said. “The purpose of Title IX was to distribute some of that revenue from revenue-generating sports to other sports. I think students’ paying for it is kind of deceiving.”
Associate Athletics Director Jim Marchiony said it was important for everyone to take responsibility for providing funding for Title IX. He said that if the athletics department did not comply with Title IX requirements, the entire University would lose federal funding.
Saving money has been the main objective of the fee review subcommittee since Senate received a mandate from Hemenway and the Kansas Board of Regents saying no overall increase in fees would be accepted.
Alex Porte, Great Falls, Va., junior and student senator, said the extra $5 in the sports fee was used to fund things such as office supplies and travel expenses, and that he didn’t feel guilty cutting it. He said he thought Athletics would able to absorb the cost of the $5 cut without much difficulty.
“Athletics runs a pretty significant profit,” Porte said. “The profit margin between revenue and expenses is more than what that fee generates. So to me it seems like they can still have a profit if that fee were cut.”
Marchiony said that Athletics would have to find ways to make up the cuts, and that possibilities included raising the cost of the student combo ticket package.
Hardouin said the final fee recommendations presented to Senate tonight would not include funding cuts to the sports fee. He said that the bill could be amended to include cuts to the sports fee, but that it would need a two-thirds vote. Hardouin said he did not think a bill with a cut to Athletics would receive much support.
Foss said he thought it was important for both the student body and the chancellor to understand that the money would have to come from Athletics or from other programs.
“It’s probably better if we cut it out of Athletics, but it’s unlikely that will happen, because the chancellor has already shown that he’s reluctant to do that,” Foss said.
— — Edited by Brandy Entsminger
Student Senate reviewing fees
To keep overall fees the same, some individual fees will have to ...
Editorial: Chancellor should support Senate lowering nonrevenue ...
Compared to other student fees, the non-revenue sports fee is one that ...
Senate finalizes funding recommendations
Some student organizations will see increases or decreases in budget.
Student Senate notebook
Here's what happened at the Student Senate meeting Wednesday.
Fee continues amid controversy
Senate votes to continue $80-a-year charge to subsidize KU athletics budget.
Editorial Board: Athletic funding shouldn't fall on ...
The Women and Non-Revenue Sports fee was voted to be increased from ...
Student Senate has 'most important meeting' of ...
The Student Senate dealt with line and block allocations and a student ...
Senate treasurer out for finance talks
Alex Porte was suspended Tuesday for leaking a confidential senate budget proposal ...
Campus elections 2009: Students of Liberty
A more sustainable campus, creating separation of power within Student Senate are ...
Leaving a lasting legacy
As Hemenway prepares to retire, he and others look back at how ...
Campus fees will not increase next year
Student Senate will review current fees to ensure that overall campus fees ...
Student Senate to vote on fee increases
The Student Recreation and Fitness Center, Parking Department, Watkins Memorial Health Center, ...
Campus fees generate more than $20 million
Student Senate finance committee reviews funds to determine what will might face ...
Editorial: Senate reduced impact of fee cuts ...
Fees increase despite Senate's efforts to find places to save money.
Senate Notebook: March 6, 2008
Here's what Student Senate discussed at last night's meeting.
Senators question student body president’s vetoes
The vetoed legislation concerns Gmail technology, a sustainability fee and the Multiculural ...
Groups must detail fund proposals
Student Senate looks closer at funding requests after a decrease in the ...
Women's sports funding kicked up a notch
Funding for non revenue and women's sports will increase by $1 million. ...
Coalitions offer their platforms to campus
ConnectKU, Students of Liberty, and United Students hope to appeal to students ...
Executive Committee votes to uphold Porte’s suspension
President’s ability to remove executive staff members one of the issues debated.
Student athletes focus on Students of Liberty, ...
The debate revolved around Adam Wood’s proposal to cut women’s and non-revenue ...
Letter: Student Senate elections about participation, not ...
Students all have a stake in Senate elections, whether they know it ...
Multicultural groups confused about funding
The Student Senate Finance Committee is trying to sort out funding for ...
No ‘huge regrets or disappointments’ for chancellor
Robert Hemenway has overseen record enrollment and increase in minority faculty in ...
Editorial: Olympic Village highlights gap between athletics, ...
The administration's first priority should be improving academic standards.
Committee discuses student fee increase
The rising cost of fuel and other products along with the desire ...
Student Senate to vote on fee increase
The Student Senate could raise student fees for the third time this ...
Senate votes to keep Kansan funding
Senators approved an amended bill that includes a separate Kansan subscription fee, ...
Students praised for making boathouse a reality
Students and University officials endured snow Friday to celebrate the construction of ...
Chancellor talks budget cuts with Kansas Senate
Hemenway spoke to legislators about his concerns of the effects of Sebelius’ ...
Student Senate candidate talks about his party's ...
Adam Wood, Student Senate presidential hopeful, discusses strategies to help with dorm ...
Student fees increase more than $35
In four years, student fees have increased 44 percent. They were $287 ...
Senate rejects funding bill
Legislation would have restricted money allotment for groups.
University postpones aquatic center plan
Because of budget cuts next year, McGonigle calls plan “not the responsible ...
Senate Finance Committee passes cuts to media ...
The full Student Senate will take up the issue in two weeks.
Student Senate Notebook
Here is what happened at the Student Senate meeting on Wednesday
Proposed cuts would limit Kansan's budget
Student body leader wants $1.70 cut from media fee.
Athletics Department scores twice with new football ...
Hemenway stays with University
Kansas University Endowment Association provides funding for former chancellor to take sabbatical, ...
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
Athletics fee not part of proposed cuts
So, let me try and make sure I have this straight. Quick disclaimer, I DO think Title IX sports SHOULD be funded by somebody...anyways... If KU Athletics, Inc. does not completely fund Title IX sports, the whole University is at risk for losing federal funding. Therefore, the University of Kansas student should therefore partially fund these sports. HOWEVER, when the University of Kansas is facing massive cuts, hiring freezes, continuous restructuring of various departments, and campus-wide low morale because of job insecurity, Kansas Athletics, Incorporated, doesn't feel it's responsibility to return money to the University to try and alleviate some of these painful cuts. Maybe it is just me, but this seems very hypocritical.
Any thoughts?
Athletics fee not part of proposed cuts
Lets look at the numbers: KU Athletics made a PROFIT of about $20 million last year. The Big XII average is about $8 million, and our fee generates $2 million.
If athletics made $20 million beyond their expenses last year, they can afford a cut of 10% of that to allow Student Senate to not have to decrease as many services for students next year. This is absurd.
Athletics fee not part of proposed cuts
If KU Athletics doesn't get this fee, they will extinguish your Sun. That is why we give them money, because the threat of a frozen planet is so great. We must not arouse the wrath of KU Athletics.
But seriously, ask yourself how much money "campus environmental improvement" brings in for the university, and how much KU Athletics brings in. Sure, it never goes to anyone but athletics, but overall the university has more money. Of course they're reluctant to reduce funding by a tiny amount. Greed is nothing to be ashamed of, it's part of our culture, and we should be proud of it and embrace it.
Athletics fee not part of proposed cuts
I'm glad this issue was discussed in an article. Hopefully, making the student body aware of this unfair use of student fees will make students more vocal on the issue and cause the new chancellor to take a more rational approach to this problem.
Athletics fee not part of proposed cuts
Good article! Hopefully this will increase student awareness as to both the concept of Title IX funding (constitutionally required in public institutions, and KU is such a place) as well as the fine line between making certain cuts in programs across the board in a time of economic crisis. It seems to me that dozens of programs are taking major hits, and the refusal to even consider a marginal cut to just one fee of many is in and of itself unfair. Let me be blunt as possible without undermining the concept of equality, to arbitrarily overturn legislative decision in favor or holding one group (regardless of who they are) secure for remedy's sake is both moral and financial inequality. I would argue this point whether it was W&n-RS or ANY other organization is generally unfair. The problem is not Title IX or any wish to curb, inhibit, or diminish one particular group, it's the unwillingness of our Chancellor to allow responsible decisions to be made by a representative legislative body. Perhaps next year we should put this up as a referendum instead and allow the students to make this decision for themselves. I doubt the Chancellor will have any such problem with the retirement of the Campus Safety, or the deep cuts of other boards as well.
Athletics fee not part of proposed cuts
Francesa....the students overwhelmingly voted for this fee. I don't know why its unfair because the womens teams are students and were helping them out. I mean honestly when you say athletics should pay for this you're saying that these great women aren't part of the student body.
Athletics fee not part of proposed cuts
calikufan:
the students 'overwhelmingly' voted for a fee that would pay for a boathouse before 'sunseting' off into the distance. they didn't vote for an amorphous 'woman's sports fee.'
and how does wanting to cut this fee mean that these 'great women' aren't part of the student body? is this really the best you can do?
i suppose since the multicultural, student senate, and media fees are being reduced we are sending a message that 'minorities, student senators, and journalism majors are not part of the student body.'
mike has the right idea here, lets let our extremely well financed athletic department fund our student athletics and give every fee-paying student a break.
does this make sense to you?
Athletics fee not part of proposed cuts
correction:
we are reducing the 'newspaper readership fee' which would mean that business majors who want their wsj are no longer 'part of the student body' but journalism majors, luckily, get to keep their spot... just pathetic, haha.
Athletics fee not part of proposed cuts
Haha. The media fee was cut and newspaper readership was stabilized. Yes it really does mean something. You and many others have consistently gone against the athletics department and this fee. But you and many fail to mention that students are the sole purpose of the athletics department. They are students too...and many a times the women and non-revenue sports are always shoved to the side.
I'm just saying that at KU, the MRC, Student Senators and Journalism majors are always spot lighted. I don't think we should take away from that, but also give more to the athletes who make up a similar portion to this campus.
Make sense? Probably not because these students seem like members of a corporation to you guys instead of members of a student body.
Athletics fee not part of proposed cuts
Bill, what's your response to my statement about Athletics making $20 million in profit beyond their expenses last year and how our fee represents ~10% of that?
People on this board like to select the easiest questions to answer and then ignore the others. Let's hear it. I'm sure Athletics and the Chancellor have a reason why they think this fee is important. What is yours? What functionality does this $2 million have if it's just 10% in the pot?
Sign in to comment
Or login with:
OpenID