MEMBERS PRESENT:

Don Farish	Chair
Deborah Gallagher	Staff Representative
Mette Adams	Student Representative
Chanel Brown	Student Representative
Larkin Child	Student Representative
Aaron Pava	President, Associated Students
STAFF PRESENT:
Larry Furukawa-Schlereth	Vice President for Administration and Finance
Dennis Harris	Senior Director, Planning and Analysis
MEMBERS ABSENT:
Melinda Barnard	Immediate Past-Chair, Academic Senate
Michael Ogg	Student Representative
Martha Ruddell	Chair, Academic Senate [or designee]
GUESTS PRESENT: None

I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
II. COURSE FEES - GENERAL POLICY
III. COURSE FEES - SPECIFIC PROPOSALS
IV. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN FAC AND IRA FUNDS
V. NEXT MEETING
VI. ADJOURNMENT

I. Approval of the Agenda

Don Farish convened the meeting at 8:08 AM. He began by providing some background on the CSU's Fee Advisory Committee policy, and the requirement for a majority of students on the committee. There were two issues before the FAC today, general Course Fee policy and specific proposals to establish or raise existing course fees. Aaron Pava requested that a discussion of the relationship between FAC and the old IRA Advisory Board be added to the agenda.

II. Course Fees - General Policy

Don explained that this issue was new to the FAC. Historically, SSU has not been a heavy user of course fees. Unlike many CSU campuses, which interpreted the old course fee policy quite liberally, SSU restricted their application. They were considered a nuisance to collect and appeared to be a surcharge on those students taking courses for which fees were charged. On the other hand, some times they are essential to the functioning of the course (e.g., GEOG 318 - Field Experience, where students cover the costs of their travel Baja California; and THAR 300 - Theatre in Action, where the fee covers admission to the San Francisco theatre performances. The University does not want to appear to be incrementally increasing fees; however, the campus needs to know what student concerns and interests are in this matter.

In response to Larkin Child's question on the role of student members of FAC, Don responded that they could propose a general policy regarding course fees. Should they be "regularized and categorized" so that both faculty and students have guidelines regarding their establishment and appropriate costs.

Aaron noted that the fees appear to be concentrated in certain majors, which rely heavily on the utilization of fees; Biology and Film Studies, for instance. The committee also needs to distinguish between approved fees and the sometimes "illegal" course fees which are also charged students. The general policy should make sure all fees charged students are approved. FAC should also consider a cap on fees or on the aggregate level of payment by a student. He sees the need for fees in some fields but believes there needs to be a limit on how much students can pay in fees. Don responded that a cap would operationally be difficult to implement. Also need to distinguish between courses which are electives and courses which are mandatory; in the latter case, the fee becomes a mandatory fee upon those students. Most fees are created for courses which are elective.

Mette Adams expressed concern over the distinction between elective and mandatory courses, noting that elective courses were often the courses where you can probe the major in depth; the imposition of fees in such courses would deny enrollment to those who could not afford the additional cost. Farish agreed, saying the University was not interested in a two-tiered system, one in which the rich students get one level of instruction and the poor students receive a lower level. Mette responded that the issue is one of concern both for majors and for minors.

Chanel Brown expressed her fear the majors with a large number of fees would start limiting their offerings. Don explained that departments can not charge a fee merely because it wants more supplies; instead, there must either be a value added to the students' educational experience, as occurs with field trips, or a product which the student receives, as would happen in a pottery class where the student was charged for materials but took away an artistic creation. In response to a suggestion that departments make these determinations, Don explained that the FAC policy does not permit FAC to delegate its authority to departments. Instead, it is FAC which must make recommendations to the President.

Dennis Harris asked the committee to also consider issues of equity, given the fact that some departments and courses already have established fees while others have - sometimes with encouragement - held back in proposing such fees. Harris will provide background material on SSU course fees for the next FAC meeting. Don offered to draft a general policy concerning miscellaneous course fees to be considered at the next meeting of the committee.

III. Course Fees -- Specific Proposals

A. Geog 314A

Don introduced the request of the Department of Geography to charge a fee not to exceed $150 to cover the actual cost of the field trips to meetings of Geography professional organizations, which varies depending upon the location and registration fees. The A and B designation is to distinguish between Fall and Spring conference trips. He explained that this was not a new course fee proposal, but rather a proposal to increase an existing fee and to change the unit value of the course. If FAC approved the request, it would be recognizing that the existing fee was not adequate to cover actual expenses. Mette asked the relationship between Financial Aid awards and course fees. Both Mette and Chanel requested confirmation from Student Academic Services that Financial Aid awards are adjusted to cover mandatory course fees. Larkin asked whether Financial Aid also adjusted awards to cover child care for students' children. Mette also expressed the desire that someone from the proposing department be in attendance when FAC considers course fees, as well as the benefit of having a formal policy and criteria for consideration of course fee change proposals, and verification of student consultation prior to approval . Larkin asked why FAC was meeting so late and said that FAC should meet earlier in the course scheduling process to avoid the pressure to make quick decisions to meet course schedule deadlines; Don responded that scheduling conflicts prevented an earlier date for this meeting. Don asked for and received unanimous consent to approve a fee not to exceed $150 for Geog. 314. Aaaron commented that the decision was done without reference to a general policy, which should be developed and sent to the faculty for comment. Due to the need for immediate action on proposals for Spring 98 class fees, the committee agreed that approval would be provisional, until a general policy is adopted.

B. Nursing 305, 549, and 550A

Don introduced the Department of Nursing proposal, calling for an increase in fees from $10 to $20 for Nursing 305 (Assessment and Clincal Decision Making), 549 (Health Maintenance Practicum), and 550A (FNP Preceptorship). Aaron noted that this appeared to be a request for the normal cost of supplies and equipment, rather than the "value-added" product for which fees are appropriate. After further discussion, Larkin moved and Aaron second a motion to table the proposal, which passed unanimously.

C. Anthropology 347

Don introduced the request from the Department of Anthropology for a fee not to exceed $10 for Anthropology 347, noting that this was a field experience analogous to that already considered for Geog. 314. Larry Schlereth noted that under Trustee policy, students have the option of meeting a course requirement independently and thereby avoiding the fee. Aaron cited the example of a roommate, a Biology major, who organizes car pools, charges fellow student passengers for gas, and thus avoids the travel fee. Don cautioned that there are other issues, such as University liability, that appear when ad-hoc "meet at the site" solutions to field experiences are utilized. Don also noted the need for a structure including an entry-level threshold for fees so that trivial fees are not charged to students but instead absorbed by departments' OEE. Mette expressed the desire to see a cost estimate and breakdown of expenses. It was moved by Aaron, seconded by Debbie Gallagher, to approve the Anthropology request provisionally for the Spring semester. Motion passed unanimously.

D. Music 323,324, and 325

Don introduced a request from the Performing Arts Department to charge $40 per student enrolled in either 323 (Monteverdi Singers), 324 (Sonoma Bach Choir), or 325 (SSU Chorus) for field trips involving some seventy students in the three courses. Mette said she was not comfortable with the proposal, that there was insufficient information regarding whether the field trips were optional or required and whether or not students who could not go on the field trips would be charged the fee anyway. Don noted that the proposal raises more questions than answers; he could obtain clarification from the department and distribute it to FAC members through e-mail. Mette moved, Debbie seconded, and the committee unanimously passed a motion to table the proposal.

IV. Relationship between FAC and IRA

Aaron noted that one of his duties as President of the Associated Students was to serve on Chair the IRA Board. Larry said that under the Trustee's FAC policy, SSU established an FAC which superseded and subsumed the previous IRA Board. The CSU policy was ambiguous on the relationship between FAC and such pre-existing bodies as the IRA Board and the Student Health Center Advisory Committee (SHCAC). Campuses could have either both an IRA and an FAC or just an FAC. SSU chose to subsume IRA responsibilities under FAC for greater efficiency; one student-majority committee would have full responsibility for recommending all student fee proposals.

Aaron maintained that it was desirable to have both bodies review IRA proposals; he stated that there was a perception among students of a loss of empowerment, and that he didn't think it was the Trustee's intent to replace IRA Boards. Larry noted that if that were done, two groups would do the same thing; FAC would still have to review IRA actions. Don noted that the intent always was that student fees should be reviewed by students. If there was a perception that students have lost authority over IRA funds, then Aaron should have a conversation with President Armiñana.

In response to a question from Larkin regarding the frequency of FAC meetings and the level of commitment required of FAC members, Don emphasized the importance of FAC, its ability to prioritize competing demands on student fees, its position as the only committee with an overall view of all student fee finances, and its authority under the Trustee policy to make recommendations on the entire student fee structure of the university. Since FAC was new, and needed in some areas to establish policy and in others to review existing policy, biweekly meetings would probably be appropriate. Mette asked that FAC review the Executive Order establishing FAC and issues of recommendation and of referenda.

V. Next Meeting

The committee agreed to meet again on Thursday, November 20th, from 10:00 AM until Noon, in the Provost's Conference Room. The agenda will include the following:

A. Course Fees
B. Proposed Course Fee Policy
C. IRA Policy and the relationship between IRA and FAC
D. Executive Order establishing FAC

VI. Adjournment

There being no further business, Farish adjourned the meeting at 9:51 AM.


Minutes prepared by Dennis Harris
November 13, 1997


Approved as amended,
November 20, 1997


Back to Fee Advisory Committee
Back to Provost's Page
Back to SSU