Numerous questions from out-of-town and part-time University students concerned they are not receiving the full benefit of their enrollment fees have prompted University administrators to form a committee to determine whether some
students are paying an
unfair amount.
Full-time students pay $471 per term in “mandatory enrollment fees,” about $180 of which is designated as the “incidental fee” the student government uses to fund student programs. Yet many part-time students and students at satellite campuses in Portland and Charleston are not receiving the services for which they pay
full price.
The students have approached ASUO officials and department-level administrators to try to remedy their problems. Those officials and students involved are looking to University administrators to address the issue, but a group of administrators who are analyzing the fees aren’t sure they will recommend any changes to system for next year.
PSAC problems
One of the most vocal off-campus groups, the Portland Student Action Council, was formed by graduate architecture students studying at the University’s Portland Center to advocate for equal distribution of fees. Students started the group because of concerns that students in Portland have paid full fees for several years, but have not had the same access to recreation facilities and transportation provided to students in Eugene.
Although PSAC students receive health care through Portland State University, they have struggled to gain free access to public transportation and PSU’s recreation center. Incidental fees pay for those services at the University’s main campus.
ASUO Vice President Mena Ravassipour previously told the Emerald that ASUO officials were not aware that about
80 students were not receiving the same amenities as students in Eugene until earlier this year when PSAC began to form, but said the ASUO would work to address concerns.
“It’s kind of early to say what’s going to happen, but right now we’re doing a lot of research to see if there’s a way to partner with (Portland State University) to work with partner services they could use up there,” she said.
After struggling to remedy their problems since the group was formed in October, PSAC leaders said they are perplexed by the varying layers of red tape they have encountered with the ASUO and elsewhere in the administration.
“We want to make change and we want to do it positively … but there are so many hoops that it doesn’t seem worth it,” PSAC Vice President Britt Nelson said. “It’s really frustrating.”
PSAC President Gary Blackwell said although the group has held meetings, he has had trouble getting students involved because group members have questioned why changes aren’t taking place despite
their efforts.
Nelson said the group “hasn’t been moving forward at all” on getting equal funding, and group leaders haven’t heard back from ASUO officials.
“Initially, it seemed pretty positive with working with the ASUO. But to be honest with you, we’re frustrated up here,” she said. “We haven’t heard back from the ASUO about how we’re moving forward. For
10 years we’ve been having to deal with this.”
Although the group received $300 for next year, the maximum a new group can receive, the money will go to enhance the Portland Architecture Program and pay for an alumni roundtable discussion, an event to display student work and a publication of student work.
Blackwell said ASUO officials have been “apologetic” while the group doesn’t know the status of its push for fee equality.
“It’s a lot of ambiguous language, usually never really clear what the goals are,” he said. “That’s really translated into a lot of frustration.”
If the group’s concerns aren’t remedied, Blackwell said he would encourage everyone in the council to file grievances with the ASUO early next term.
“I’m not going to be discouraged,” he said, adding that students are being “taken advantage of.”
Blackwell said students are “just tired of dealing with these sorts of trivial issues” and want to improve the program in Portland.
Nelson said students have paid thousands of dollars “for nothing.”
“This is huge,” she said.
Out of ASUO’s hands
ASUO officials said they haven’t had much to report to PSAC because the situation has moved beyond the hands of student government.
“We’ve been in contact with a variety of different people,” Ravassipour said. “It’s something that’s moved more toward an administrative-type thing being handled by administrators. We’ve been providing them with information.”
ASUO Accounting Coordinator Jennifer Creighton-Neiwert said administrators are looking at fees after concerns from students.
“It’s almost a bigger question that’s being posed that’s not necessarily from PSAC in general, but sort of as an institution’s perspective looking at who pays the fee and at what levels students or individuals pay the fee,” she said. “There’s very many different groups of students wondering where they fall on the assessment level.”
She said the administration may need to provide alternative services or lower fees to out-of-town students.
“I know it’s an issue,” she said. “We certainly care if students aren’t receiving a full benefit for what they pay for. Anytime you have a group of students that can’t receive full benefits to the institution or to what they pay with in fees, that’s definitely a red flag and brings up concerns. What is it we need to provide for them, because this current system is not necessarily working 100 percent in their favor.”
She added that she is seeking a long-term solution to the fee problem.
“Part of the problem, at least on my end, was that I didn’t have anything to update them on,” she said. “I’m just as frustrated … as they are, as it’s a little out of our hands. I guess we could turn around and negotiate services, in a sense, for them this year, but I’m looking more for a long-term solution. I don’t want a short-term fix-it for a year and then lose the continuity. And I think that’s more of the question.”
A committee is formed
The committee of administrators, which formed at the request of Vice President for Academic Affairs Lorraine Davis, may not recommend changes for next year, committee member and Vice President for Student Affairs Anne Leavitt said.
“We have groups saying, ‘You’ve got to look at this,’ but I don’t know that we will,” Leavitt said.
Leavitt — who said PSAC representatives, Oregon Marine Students Association representatives, summer students, community education and part-time students have all expressed concerns about fees — said the committee is working to understand fees and understand the groups that want changes.
Leavitt said students have voiced their concerns to administrators.
“I think they’ve done what they can do,” she said.
Although neither PSAC nor OMSA is officially asking to be exempted from fees, Leavitt said, excluding some students from paying certain fees could be disastrous, ending the concept of “universal payment” that keeps fees low by requiring all students to contribute equally. If students were to opt out of paying fees for certain items, the cost of the items would rise for everyone else who used them.
“If you approved (exceptions) for everyone, the whole structure would collapse,” Leavitt said. “I really like to see them as mandatory.
Mandatory payment keeps services available to everyone for a low cost.”
Leavitt also said mandatory fees are covered by financial aid packages, whereas optional fees would not be.
Committee chair and Vice Provost for Academic Affairs Terri Warpinski said in an e-mail interview that the group will make a recommendation to Davis by the end of the year.
She said it is “too early to forecast what the recommendation might be.”
Warpinski said the key issues before the committee “seem to pertain to how fee
s are assessed for non-matriculated students (those taking eight credits or less and who have not been formally admitted to the University) and how fees are assessed to students who are in programs that are not on campus.”
She added that the committee will seek to clarify the fee policy.
“I believe that we need to be sure that we have consistent policies — which is not to suggest that we don’t, but we do not have a clear articulation of the policy that is readily available,” she said.
She also said the committee will meet again before the end of the term at a yet-to-be-determined date.
Leavitt said the group has met twice and hasn’t made a decision on exactly how to proceed.
“We’re kind of on a slow path,” she said. “It’s taken a long time to sort out fees — why some are pro-rated and others aren’t.”
She said she didn’t expect any drastic changes.
“I think we’re going to affirm fees as we’ve always done them,” she said.

[email protected]