Are you for or against the proposed shuttle fees?

Amber Cason-Online Managing Editor

Earlier this year, university administration approached Student Government Association proposing a new fee that would go towards upgrades and additions to the university's current shuttle system.

Several proposals and ideas are being discussed at this time to decide if new fees should be imposed to better enhance the currently free service. These proposals could add around $15 per semester to student bills.

This additional fee has sparked debate among SGA senators, students and the university. You can read more about the specifics of each proposal at southeastArrow.com/shuttles.

Both Jay Forness, and myself, have reviewed both sides of the discussion and have chosen sides (not based on personal opinion, but just for argument's sake) and will be sharing the pros and cons of imposing the fees.

When it comes to the shuttle fees that are being proposed by the university, I can see why students would be for and against them. I believe that the shuttles assist students who have disabilities, help during harsh weather, and are, overall, a great service that is provided by the university.

However, reallocating funding and possibly adding additional charges, while they may not be extreme, do add up and could affect the ability for students to afford things, or in terms of reallocating, could affect the quality of events or speakers that are available on campus.

In a world where everything from the price of tuition to a gallon of milk is rising, students do not want to feel as if their institution is taking more from them for a service that has been free for as long as they can remember.

I think that the university has set a precedent by providing shuttle services for free for so many years, although of course other student fees have in part funded them all along. I believe that they will have a difficult time explaining to students why they suddenly must be charged separately, or have their funds reallocated, in order to pay for a service that has existed for years.

Another possible con is that the reallocation of funds could be going towards repairing the current parking lots and adding to them instead of upgrading and adding to the shuttle services. If students are content with the current state of shuttles but not the current parking situation, that issue should be addressed with the funds received from additional charges and/or reallocation.

There also may be other situations happening on campus that students see as more important to putting funding towards, so I think that the university should find out what that is first before deciding on funding reallocations.

Daniel Eckert

Overall, I think that the shuttle fees could be harmful to students and also the student view of the university because the precedent of a free and working shuttle service has been set for so many years and many students probably see a greater need for funding a reallocation in other areas that is not shuttles such as Internet or WiFi upgrades and more.

An idea to appease both the students who depend on the shuttles and those who do not would maybe be to find out a way to only charge those who use the shuttle services. While it would be a lengthy process, it could be worth it to allow for shuttle continuation and upgrades all while not charging those who have not or do not intend to use it.

--------

Jay Forness-Managing Editor

The proposed shuttle fee has many positives that could outweigh the cons for students.

First, the shuttles currently get their funding from a combined parking and transit fund. One of the major complaints on campus is the lack of quality parking, and it is because those parking fees and tickets that students pay are currently not able to fund parking improvements because they are instead paying for the shuttles.

If the shuttle fee is passed, the money that the university is currently spending on the shuttles would instead be used for parking. It would allow the university to repave the parking lots, add some new spaces and do the basic upkeep that is currently lacking.

An argument that I have heard against the fee is that not every student uses the shuttles and while that is true, not every student uses the Student Recreation Center, the Aquatic Center, the open computer labs, free tickets to River Campus events or goes to the speaker series. These are all events that we as students fund though the general fee, and why shouldn't the shuttles be another service that students fund?

The shuttles are necessary to the university, to accommodate those with physical disabilities and to connect the main and river campuses. They have also been cited as a safety benefit as well, giving students a way to get around campus until 1 a.m. most days.

Maurice Burns

Also, there are just times you don't want to walk from one end of campus to the other. Sometimes you want to be lazy, and the shuttles are there for you.

Plus, improvements will not happen if we don't pay for them. The shuttles will continue to be underfunded and the parking lots will continue not being updated.

Southeast as a whole has continuously updated the facilities and programs, yet parking and shuttles still lag behind. Both have become vital parts of Southeast, and if we want them to be improved we have to help the situation.

The proposed cost for students is somewhere between $15 and $20 a semester and I don't think that is a ridiculous amount of money to improve something that affects the majority of students on campus.

But whatever is your view, be sure to talk to your student representatives in SGA. This is something that will affect you either way, and they would love to know your thoughts on the fee.

Seriously, they want to know what you think, so learn more and find SGA contact info at southeastArrow.com/shuttles. Then you can figure out what you think and make your position known.

A decision will have to be made at the beginning of next semester and has become the major SGA decision of the year. While both sides have valid points, it is time to come up with a decision that will better the school as a whole and be beneficial to students.

Maddie Boemecke