Cal State students vote this week on health fee hike
North County Times 3/19/07
They will vote on two separate health care fee increases this Monday through Thursday on the Internet. The first vote would increase the existing annual health services fee to $130 this fall. Health service fees would increase again in fall 2009 to $140.
The second vote would increase the annual health facility fee to $100.
The measures are separate, so one could fail while the other succeeds. If both measures are approved, total annual tuition and fees at the university would climb from $2,520 to $3,424. The total includes a decision by system trustees last week to hike tuition at the 23 Cal State campuses next year by 10 percent, or $252.
Dr. Karen Nicholson, the university's director of student health for the past decade, said the health services fee increase would help the university cope with rapidly climbing enrollment. Student headcount is expected to increase from the current 9,000 up to 20,000 within five years.
"As our population grows, there will be more and more need for services," said Nicholson.
The new clinic will also be crucial, said Nicholson, explaining that San Marcos is the only campus in the 23-campus system that does not have an on-campus clinic.
The university now operates a 6,000-square-foot clinic across the street from the campus in a building that it leases from Palomar Pomerado Health. The campus master plan calls for a 20,000-square-foot clinic between the campus residence hall and student union.
"We want to be in the heart of the campus where students can easily get access," said Nicholson. "That location would also help us increase outreach efforts on drug abuse, alcohol prevention and sexual assault."
If both measures are approved, students at the San Marcos campus would pay the fifth most for health services among the 23 Cal State campuses. They now pay the 12th most.
Leaving a legacy
Proposed fee increases are rarely popular with students, but leaders of the student government in San Marcos said last week that fee hikes make more sense when they are directly tied to better services.
"Fees like this provide an actual, tangible benefit," said Jeremy Mills, legislative affairs director for the student government on the San Marcos campus. "Unlike (tuition) hikes, this is not students paying money for something that the state should be paying for."
In March 2005, nearly 75 percent of students at the university approved a similar measure that increased athletics fees $80 per year. The goal of that measure was to boost development of intercollegiate athletics on the campus.
Nicholson and leaders of the student government said there has been no organized opposition to either health care measure. Nicholson said she has received positive feedback at a handful of question-and-answer sessions she has held.
One strike against future-oriented measures such as the health facility increase is that the students who approve them will never get to take advantage of the clinic they will be paying for, because it will likely open well after they graduate.
But Nicholson said such a dynamic is inevitable at a growing university that lacks many essential campus services.
"They're leaving a legacy for future students," said Nicholson. "Since we are a growing campus, that is going to have to be the culture and mindset."
A big leap forward
If the new clinic gets built, services provided at the San Marcos campus will be second only to San Diego State, which opened a 60,000-square-foot clinic on its campus in summer 2006. The new clinic, which students paid for with higher fees, replaced a 22,000-square-foot clinic that was outdated, said Nicholson.
"I think it'd be fair to say that San Diego State will have the only clinic superior to the new facility we are planning," said Nicholson.
When officials on the San Marcos campus decided a clinic was necessary a few years ago, they asked students to raise the annual health facility fee from $6 to $50.
Students approved that measure in 2005, but projected costs for the new clinic have skyrocketed since then from $6 million to between $11 million and $13 million, said Nicholson, explaining that higher costs for construction materials are to blame.
The higher facility fee would raise an estimated $3 million by 2008, which would be enough money for the university to sell revenue bonds that would cover the rest of the cost, said Nicholson.
There is added pressure for the university, she said, because its $209,000 annual lease at the Palomar Pomerado Health facility across the street will run out in 2011.
Expanding staff
Health services fees on the campus were increased, by student vote, from $70 per year to $100 per year in 2005.
Nicholson said she regrets asking students for another increase so soon, but she explained that reductions in state support have made it difficult to cover her $850,000 annual budget.
University health services now has 11 employees, but that number will need to expand significantly as enrollment increases, Nicholson said. The number would likely expand to 15 or 16 employees at the current site, and then climb past 20 if a new clinic is built, she said.
The clinic, which is open 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. Mondays through Fridays, now has two doctors, a nurse practitioner, a registered nurse, a licensed vocational nurse, a health educator, a records technician, a budget manager, a pharmacist and three administrative assistants.
During school year 2005-06, there were more than 16,000 student visits to the clinic, Nicholson said. That number is projected to reach 20,000 this school year, which concludes in May.
Free services include family planning, immunizations, testing for sexually transmitted diseases and counseling. The clinic also provides low-cost drugs and lab work, said Nicholson.