by Isaac Perez Bolado

The sight of moving cranes all around campus has been hailed by UTEP President Diana Natalicio as an exciting sign of our university’s growth, especially as it strives to become a “tier one” institution.

If you were to ask regular UTEP students, however, some of their impressions could be simply that the construction has made it harder to walk across campus.

Higher education in America is today one of the most expensive around the world. In a country where the gap between rich and poor is only surpassed by that of nations like Mexico and Turkey, there are few alternatives for those who wish to obtain a high-quality education without becoming indebted for life. This is one of the many reasons why the UTEP mission and vision under Natalicio has been so laudable.

Yet, with dwindling state support and limited access to private resources, her administration has struggled to find ways to continue the university’s growth in the face of a largely unforeseen economic recession.

Surprisingly, administrators have also been fairly successful at obtaining the backing of students when it comes to obtaining resources from one of the few revenue sources they have left – students’ own pockets.

UTEP students have let tuition increases occur in the recent past – 4.9 percent in 2009, 5.2 percent in 2008 and 6.5 percent in 2007. Since 2004, UTEP tuition has been effectively raised almost 70%.

A good explanation could be the administration’s excellent tactical ability when it comes down to presenting the case for increases. One of their main arguments, for example, is that UTEP continues to have a relatively low tuition rate, ranked 16^th among public institutions in 2008 with $3,048. This, however, disregards the fact that El Paso also ranks 849^th in per-capita income in the state, with $14,388, or that almost a third of UTEP students live below the poverty line.

This coming March 10 and 11, the university is asking the student body to vote on the “Student Life and Athletic Enhancement Initiative.” The proposal is set to “strengthen campus life” and “support UTEP Athletics” by shifting around the way that student services and athletics are funded.

Currently, UTEP students pay a “Student Service Fee” of $15 per every credit hour they take – the cap amount set by the state legislature, which can only be increased with the approval of the student body. Currently, a large amount of the revenue from that fee goes to athletics programs, the rest going to student programs.

If the referendum passes, that fee would decrease by $2 and a new fee would be created, the (sic) “Athletic Fee,” initially of $10, which would then increase every year by $2 for the following three years.

Again, we are getting offered a neatly packaged deal by the administration. Both UTEP’s YouTube video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PY-GdC_JRGo) and the Student Government Association’s website (http://studentaffairs.utep.edu/sga) offer a case that sounds good on paper, but that in my opinion fails to detail the true implications of this tuition increase.

Among many things, for example, the proposal offers to enhance student life by “increasing opportunities for participation in clubs and organizations,” meeting space for student organizations, money for the start-up of new clubs, more service awards and even funds for student travel.

Sounds good, doesn’t it? Yet, what the information does not seem to emphasize enough is that the money offered for this purpose is only “an additional $1 million,” which would have to be spread out for all the purposes stated.

Another question is how much is student life really gaining from the initiative. According to UTEP’s Center for Institutional Evaluation Research and Planning[i] (CIERP), in Fall 2009, there were about 11 thousand full-time undergraduate students at UTEP. With their more than 150 thousand credit hours put together, they would have paid about $22 million in Student Service fees. When put against that amount, an additional $1 million does not seem like a lot.

Bundled with the additional funds for student life is also the proposal to create a new fee of $10 per semester credit hour, which when added to the $2 reduction in the Student Services fee would result in an $8 increase per credit hour. While many people would say “I would throw in eight bucks if it helps UTEP,” what this increase really amounts to is an increase of about $100 to $170 per semester.

Also, taking into account that the fee is set to increase $2 for the three following years after the increase takes effect in the Fall of 2011, approving the referendum means that every student at UTEP (including those who are freshmen today) would be paying around $400 a year for our athletic teams, their members’ scholarships and the services exclusive to them.

The money would then be used for increasing the funds of the Athletics department, increase the teams’ budgets and hiring top level coaches and paying them at “current market rates” and increase the funding of game-day entertainment. All of these things, the video says, will increase UTEP’s athletic success and visibility, somehow making UTEP a better university and contributing towards its vie for tier-one status.

Additionally, in what seems to be a lack of marketing creativity, Athletics has also pledged to provide UTEP students “the full campus ‘athletics’ experience –  the marching band, cheerleaders, homecoming, tailgating and Miner Maniacs,” offer affordable entertainment for students, enhance UTEP’s image and continue building UTEP pride –  all of which we already have, without having to increase our tuition.

Last fall, President Natalicio said during her Convocation remarks: “We clearly aren’t Harvard on the Border, nor should we ever aspire to be that.” I could not agree more.

While many tier-one universities have outstanding athletics programs, I do not see the reason why UTEP should aspire to be like other universities while disregarding the reality of the region’s students.

As a member of several student organizations, I am not against increasing funding for campus life, or even improving our athletics program. What I am against is deception from our administrators in order to sell us a vision of institutional growth many of us cannot afford.

---

[i] http://cierpdata.utep.edu/OnlineFactBook/FAC_Enroll_SCH.aspx