Student fees to be proposed to Board of Governors

Editor’s note: The Collegian‘s parent company, the Rocky Mountain Student Media Corp., has requested a fee increase from the Student Fee Review Board for the 2013-2014 academic year. Neither the reporters nor the editors of this story were parties to RMSMC’s request.

Although certain bylaws were not upheld by the Student Fee Review Board Monday night, the student fee for the next fiscal year will be proposed to the Board of Governors. Wednesday night, the ASCSU Senate voted that despite a change in process due to last week’s snow day, the SFRB followed all necessary processes as outlined by the ASCSU constitution.


The SFRB is in charge of reviewing 16 student fee funded areas and recommends a new fee rate for the next fiscal year to the Board of Governors.

This year, the SFRB proposed to raise the student fee by 3.44 percent, a decision that correlates with President Tony Frank’s recommendations.

The Associated Students of CSU oversees the SFRB and near the end of the semester gives a vote of confidence to ensure that they have done their job adequately.

Monday night, the SFRB broke the bylaws established by ASCSU after the proposed budgets for CSU Athletics, the Rocky Mountain Student Media Corp. (the Collegian‘s parent company) and ASCSU were presented and then voted on that same night.

According to the SFRB bylaws, there must be a week between a budget presentation and the final vote to give board members the time to talk to their constituents about the proposal.

“Because of last week’s snow day, we were unable to give that extra week,” Joe Eden, vice president of ASCSU, said.

Eden said that the SFRB was already limited in time because of the semester’s late spring break and ASCSU elections, but because of last week’s snow day, the SFRB was set back even more.

The budget must be made ready by May 3, when Tony Frank will present it to the Board of Governors to approve. Eden claimed it was essential to have the finalized vote Monday night to ensure this time frame would be met.

Others on the SFRB, however, said that having the week in between voting was more important.

“We would have liked an extra week,” said Matt Dotson, a member of SFRB.


Both Dotson and Lindon Belshe, another SFRB member, said that they would have liked to have the extra week between presentations and voting to talk to their constituents.

“It is real important for us to be able to talk to our constituents and go to Senate to gauge their reaction to any fee area we vote on,” said Belshe. 

Collegian Writer Skyler Leonard can be reached at