ASUO leaders Nilda Brooklyn and Joy Nair have long promised to put control of student fees in the hands of students, and now they are starting a campaign to put that goal into action.
“I want the energy fee gone by winter term,” ASUO Vice President Joy Nair said.
In July, the University raised tuition and fees by 6.6 percent. The energy surcharge fee, which administrators said would cover rising energy costs, was one of several new fees added.
ASUO President Brooklyn said it seems unfair to target students for rising energy costs when University administrators, faculty and staff use energy as well.
And as a part of regular building maintenance, energy costs should be paid for with tuition, she added.
Nair is skeptical that that the cost of energy has gone up enough to necessitate a $30 fee, which she said would bring in an additional $500,000 each term.
“Have energy costs gone up $500,000?” she asked. “I don’t know.”
Nair said that if energy costs have not risen that much, she would like to know where that money is going.
She said that she has been trying to find out more information about the energy fee from Provost John Moseley, who handles matters involving tuition and fees.
However, Moseley has been unavailable to meet with her, and has not put her in touch with anyone else in his office who is, she said. The lack of response she received shows that administrators need to be more accessible to students, she added.
“This is not me trying to throw my weight around,” she said. “I’m a student who pays tuition here and I have a right to hold my administrators accountable for what they do.”
Moseley said he has returned Nair’s calls several times to discuss the issue, but she was not in the office.
He said the energy surcharge fee and other new fees this term are necessary to make up for expenses not covered in the budget handed down by the legislature.
“The legislature gave us no increase in our budget for the massive increase we’ve had in our energy costs,” he said. “We are only asking students to pay their share of the unfunded increase.”
The $30 fee is only an estimate, he added. Moseley said he hopes the fee will be lowered once final energy costs are calculated.
Brooklyn said the main objection she and Nair have against the energy fee is that it was not approved by students.
And, she said, they would like to see the University implement an energy conservation plan to reduce costs rather than increase student fees.
“For me to be comfortable with any kind of energy surcharge fee, it would need to require a focus on conservation, and a lot of student input,” she said.
Brooklyn and Nair plan to discuss their concerns about the energy fee with state legislators in early September.
On Sept. 27, they will hold a rally in the EMU Amphitheater on the issue.