7



      Ms. Weaver stated that the $25 fee is going to be added to
student health; however, the general fund support for student health is
going to be removed and put back into the general fund. She pointed out
that the effect is the same as if you were increasing student tuition by
$25.

      Ms. Weaver then reported that the Council on Higher Education had
set up hearings at every college in the state when it considered raising
tuition, and asked that the same level of consideration be given to
students when considering an increase in fees.

      Ms. Weaver concluded by saying that there is a serious question
to be raised about the political dynamics involved.  When the $25
student health fee became mandatory, the students supported making the
$25 fee mandatory. She stated that the students were consulted when the
fee was put in motion but were not consulted about doubling the fee.
She emphasized the importance of student involvement.

       Dr. Pisacano stated that Ms. Weaver had some valid points and
recommended that the students be involved in consideration of health fee
increases before submitting to the Board for action.  He then moved that
PR 3C be tabled.

       Mr. Hershey stated that if the fees have not been raised in eight
years, he does not see it to be alarming that there be an increase.  He
pointed out that health costs have gone up considerably over this
eight-year period.

       Mr. Carter stated that maintaining the existing level of student
health service is the highest priority of the committee which represents
the student body in this matter.  He explained that the purpose of this
recommendation is to maintain the level of student health service and to
move $900,000 of general fund money into the academic programs.  He then
pointed out that many of the student fees have been imposed by the Board
without any discussion with students.

       Judge Stephens was sympathetic to Ms. Weaver's request and stated
that he did not think Ms. Weaver's request was unreasonable.

       Professor Betts added that Ms. Weaver's comments were clear,
articulate and forthright. He expressed his feelings that she is
perfectly correct in that a previous procedure was not followed in this
particular instance.

       President Roselle pointed out that the University has a serious
budgetary problem and to take $1,000,000 out of the budget presents a
difficult problem. He explained that the proposal arises from a need
for additional revenue at the University. The alternative will be to
reduce the medical services provided to the students or reduce the
academic programs so as to continue the supplement for those programs.

       Mr. Bates stated that if the hearing process is followed, he
feels the good judgment of the student body would realize that in eight
years increases have to be made.  Further, he would rather have it done
now and have a full blown student health fee and services.