On June 8, the final step in the grants-in-aid approval process was completed, formally placing the future of intercollegiate athletics in student hands through an undergraduate vote.
The future of athletic scholarships at UCSD was formally placed in the hands of students with the approval of a grants-in-aid referendum to be held later this quarter.
Grants-in-aid, the proposal that provides $500 to each intercollegiate athlete in order to meet the NCAA regulation mandating athletic scholarships, will appear in a fall referendum to increase the existing fee students pay for intercollegiate athletics.
If the referendum passes, the current fee of $31 per quarter will be increased substantially to provide financial support to the athletics department’s deflated budget, while also including the $6 per student per quarter needed to fund grants-in-aid.
The original proposal drew funds from registration fees; however, last April, the Academic Senate decided switch the funding method to an increased student fee. Athletics Director Earl W. Edwards called the change abrubt, and said that the senate bowed to pressure from graduate students who wanted to opt out of the registration fee-based system. Edwards also cited increased demands on registration fees as another reason for the revision.
According to former Senate Council Chair Jean-Bernard Minster, the change was also made because administrators were unsure if students were willing to pay more to float the department.
A.S. Commissioner of Athletics Kari Gohd interprets the modification as a test but embraces it nevertheless as an opportunity for student empowerment.
“This can show the administration that what [students] want should be under consideration,” Gohd said. “This is a really important time to show that [students] care and are motivated to make student life better and have a say in what goes on at this university.”
While most students believe that athletics is the cornerstone of school spirit and campus life, according to A.S. President Harry Khanna, the Academic Senate isn’t as sure.
This question has been debated so heavily among councilmembers that the objective of the proposal was changed last summer to simply comply with the NCAA mandate rather than confront the complicated issue of student discontent, according to former council member Morton Printz.
“Students’ concerns about their social experience at UCSD is a serious [issue] that is more complex than participation in sports,” Minster said. “The faculty are in strong support of efforts to improve the student experience, but of course there are differing opinions on how to go about doing that in an environment with limited registration fee funding for many worthy causes.”
While the senate aims to use the proposal to sustain the department and remain in Division II, the A.S. Council has more ambitious plans that it hopes will directly enhance student life.
“The goal for the ICA fee increase, including additional grants-in-aid funds, is not just to fix the budget problems,” she said. “[It is also] to form a path of growth so that our programs can do better and have the best opportunities to succeed and win championships.”
The A.S. Council is basing its plan on findings such as those from the Undergraduate Student Experience and Satisfaction Committee, according to Gohd. Among suggestions on ways to enhance the campus environment, the report recommended more focus on athletics.
A stronger program would improve UCSD’s recruitment and reputation, Gohd said.
“I wish students around the country knew about how cool [UCSD] is instead of just how smart the school is,” she said. “College isn’t just about academics anymore. Students, especially those who go to a UC, expect more than just a good, strong academic program.”
Edwards mentioned the way advanced athletics and academics can go hand in hand.
“As soon as we moved to Division II, we started competing for students interested in Ivy Leagues,” Edwards said. “We’re getting more elite students now, on top of better teams.”
No matter how strongly some people feel about the positive impact of a strong athletic program, the final decision depends on the mobilization of students, which has proven challenging in past elections.
The referendum requires a 20-percent voter turnout, with a majority of those students in favor of the increased ICA activity fee.
While 20 percent may seem small, only 17.3 percent of the student body voted in the last A.S. election, even with extensive campaigning and coverage from the Guardian, Gohd said. The A.S. Council and the athletics department still remain positive, however, noting the successful turnout in 2002, which yielded 70 percent of votes in favor of the student-initiated referendum to implement the ICA activity fee originally.
The current vote will occur around eighth week of fall quarter to decide whether supporting intercollegiate athletics is important, according to Khanna.
“[The administration] is saying, if you really want this enough, you need to show you want it,” Gohd said. “If we rise to the occasion, it will say a lot.”
In the meantime, the athletics department will assess its finances in order to decide on a sufficient increase. They don’t have an estimate at this time; however, more details on the dates and terms of the referendum should be available in the upcoming weeks.
