A state Senate bill crafted this week would require state universities to enact a waiting period before newly approved tuition hikes could take effect.

The author of Senate Bill 786 said the legislation would protect families and students from being blindsided when fees take a sudden leap, as they have in the past two years when universities approved hikes just weeks before the school term began.

"I don't agree with the fee increases in the first place, but if the Legislature as a whole is going to approve those increases, then I think that students and parents should have the opportunity to plan for that," said Sen. Jeff Denham, R-Merced, the bill's author.

The bill would require California State University and University of California, once they approve fee increases, to wait a full school term -- either a semester or a quarter, depending on campus schedules -- before they begin collecting money.

The governing boards of CSU and the UC have final say over whether the fee increases in their systems will ultimately be adopted -- as well as how high those fees would go -- but, according to the Los Angeles Times, Schwarzenegger is expected to call for a 10 percent increase in CSU and UC fees and as much as a 44 percent increase in community college fees.

The increases would likely offset state cuts to higher education budgets.

Denham's bill, if ultimately approved, would go into effect Jan. 1, 2005 -- probably too late to apply to any of the newer increases, although any proposals that come out of the governor's office today will still have to go through several months of debate and discussion.

Still, the bill is indicative of recent attention to soaring college fees. In his State of the State address earlier this week, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger said he supports a 10 percent cap on the amount universities can can raise their fees each year. CSU and UC raised their fees 40 percent in the past two years to make up for deep cuts in state appropriations. CSU's annual fees are$2,409 and UC fees are $4,984. A 10 percent increase would add $204 to CSU's base fees and $498 to UC fees.

Denham said his bill would also apply to community colleges, but it would be included as a recommendation to the Legislature, which sets fee policy at the community colleges.

UC spokesman Hanan Eisenman said the system hasn't yet taken a position on the bill, but "we would have some serious concerns about it."

"We think there needs to be a linkage between the fee policy and the overall level of funding being provided to the university by the state," Eisenman said. "So, for example, if there is a mid-year budget cut with immediate impact on the university, and we couldn't consider a fee increase as part of the response, it could be a problem for the university."

Clara Potes-Fellow, a spokeswoman for the CSU system, said the reason families and students aren't given more notice of impending fee increases is that the state nearly always overruns its July 1 deadline to adopt a budget. If universities had more notice of final cuts, then officials could better plan for fee increases and notify families, she said.

Regardless, Potes-Fellow said CSU's governing Board of Trustees is already working on its own fee policy that will be predictable every year, regardless of what the state budget calls for.

"Otherwise, we will always be in the same cycle of not knowing what our budget is by the time students are already beginning (the school term)," she said.

Sen. Bruce McPherson, R-Santa Cruz, vice chairman of the Senate Education Committee, said the bill includes a promising concept, although he wasn't familiar Thursday with many details.

"I really would like to talk with some folks (from CSU and UC) myself to get their take on it," McPherson said. "I think the concept is good, to allow awareness and for families and students to prepare for the cost of their higher education is a legitimate goal, but whether (CSU and UC) are going to accept it or not, I'm not sure what it might do to force them to act on their own."