The state Board of Regents and the Utah Student Association both work on behalf of higher education, but after Regents squashed a student-proposed tuition cap, student leaders began wondering if their relationship with the Regents should change.
Student leaders went about their work quietly. USA President Steve Palmer met with Rep. Ron Bigelow, R-Salt Lake, and asked him to sponsor intent language to cap tuition increases at all of the state’s institutions of higher education to 8 percent.
In a year where tax revenue shortfalls forced lawmakers to cut millions of dollars from higher education’s budget, student leaders feared the weight of the financial problems would be placed on the students’ shoulders in the form of large tuition increases. Student body presidents at all state institutions approved the 8 percent cap.
As Bigelow began gathering support for the tuition cap, he found out the Regents were working against him.
“Once I made a motion to have the intent language approved, there were several legislators who had dropped their support,” said Bigelow, who is also vice chair of the executive appropriations committee.
Regents managed to persuade legislators to vote against the tuition cap before it was formally presented and killed the tuition cap.
The student leaders were saddened to find out it was their own adviser who told the Regents about the 8 percent cap.
As adviser to the student leaders, Edie Mitko, received a couple of bulk emails concerning the cap. One day in a casual conversation, she asked Regent spokesman Dave Buhler what he thought of the students’ intent language.
Buhler said that was the first he or any of the Regents had heard of the plan. However, he admits he quickly contacted Republican leadership and soon after, lawmakers’ support for the tuition cap dwindled.
“Rather than tie the hands of the Regents and institutional presidents with an artificial cap, the Regents should have the power to set tuition after the budget has been approved by the Legislature,” Buhler said.
When Palmer found out the student adviser told the Regents about the legislation, he said he was very “disheartened.”
“I don’t think [Mitko] understood what she was doing,” Palmer said.
As director of student services and minority affairs for the Commissioner’s Office of Higher Education, Mitko works in the same office as the Regents.
The leak of information raises a few questions including why student leaders have an adviser from the commissioner’s office, Palmer said.
“She’s a great lady, and we have nothing against her personally, but I can’t understand why student leaders would have allowed the system to be set up this way. Students and the Regents have different priorities,” Palmer said.
Mitko admits that her position as adviser to the student leaders creates a conflict of interests.
“I feel really bad that [the students] feel betrayed by me. I thought the students and Regents were working together,” Mitko said.
The question now is whether or not the rules regarding advising of student leaders will be changed, Palmer said. He said that in the future he would like to see continued open communication between the students and the Regents but maybe change the position of the student association so that it is no longer under the commissioner’s office’s jurisdiction.
Mitko says that at times it is essential to have an adviser. “I would like to see the two groups stay together. At times I do feel between a rock and a hard place, but it is important to keep the organizations tied closely.”
Before lawmakers abandoned the tuition cap, students used what bargaining power remained behind the legislation to strike a deal with the Regents.
Palmer, in a conversation with Buhler, agreed to pull the 8 percent tuition cap legislation if Regents agreed to place a direct link between tuition increases and increases in state financial aid funding as well as involving students more fully in discussing and setting tuition increases.
Buhler agreed and discussions are set to take place in the near future, Palmer said.
“I trust Buhler will keep his word. I hope he realizes that he will have to stick to his word or the students we will go straight to the legislators to pass the legislation they want passed,” Palmer said.
Palmer describes the current situation between the Regents and the student leaders as “sticky.” He said that the commissioner of higher education has only called him once to get student feedback on an issue, while legislators often ask his opinion of legislation affecting higher education.