CA: Judge to hear arguments seeking to overturn tuition increases
A California judge has denied a temporary restraining order that would block a tuition increase at colleges and universities in the California State University System (CSU). A lawsuit filed in state court alleges that the university entered into a contract with students by telling them in May that they could enroll at an approved tuition level and then broke the contract by increasing tuition by 20 percent in July. CSU maintains that it gave students adequate notice in May that tuition rates were subject to change. The judge has agreed to hear arguments on the case later this month.
The San Francisco Chronicle (Date posted: August 18, 2009)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Wow, that would set quite a precedence if the students won. I can sympathize with both sides--students need to have sufficient notice as to the amount of money that need to borrow; while, universities have a tough time setting tuition when state budgets are not established until fall. Would this also prevent midyear increases? If the ruling is in favor of the students, then universities will have to lean towards the high side to ensure they were meeting their costs. No one really wins in the end...
ReplyDeleteSo, if the University had an idea already in May that tuition was going to increase, then why would they have gotten into a contract in the first place? So they insured that the student would be going to the school? I don't know very much about states and the univeristy system. I see both sides, but as a studentIi feel sympathetic toward the student....
ReplyDeleteHi all. I posted my comment on WEBCT and was going to copy and paste it here but for some reason it won't let me. Can someone try to copy and paste itcvv` on here so I don't have to re-type it all?? Thanks! -Kahlea
ReplyDeleteThis is a big lesson especially for students. I think an act should be passed, to necessitate such contracts to explicitly stipulate what kind of changes the other party should expect. It should at least say by how much percentage or under which conditions. Twenty percent is way too much.
ReplyDeleteThe recent recession has shaken up many organizations, private and public. Each sector must maintain control over costs and rates to ensure viability.
ReplyDeleteThere are private universities. If students do not like the deal they receive from the public sector, they are free to go somewhere else.
Going forward, it is not wise to tie the hands of these big institutions by setting this sort of precedence.
It is predicted by many financial professionals that the recent stock market run up may, if it continues at its current pace, lead to inflation. Some even have called for potential hyperinflation. Where would this scenario leave these large educational organizations, if they were unable to respond to market forces, when prices soar?
My point, there are many variables that are factored into tuition rates. It should be left up to the college's board of trustees and the president as to how they will adjust rates and when. They know what is best for their organizations and have proven it time and again. DO NOT BE CONFUSED, STUDENTS HAVE CHOICES and will act in their best interest too. The university heads know this.
I sympathize with the students and certainly understand their argument. However, based on the information above that the university did in fact notify students that tuition rates were subject to change then I agree with the university's position.
ReplyDeleteThe students have the option to select another university if they so choose. As a side issue if the argument is that the students entered into a contract by enrolling I would ask them if they would still intend to pay for the classes if they were to withdraw from classes prior to the withdrawl date because of said contract.
Moving forward it is my opinion that it would behoove the university to include the dates that the univesity board reviews tuition rates and make clear that in most instances the tuition rates will increase and that the rates from the previous year are simply a rough estimate to begin their budgeting.
If in fact the University did notify the students in advance, I do not feel the students should move forward with this lawsuit. As a student myself I certainly understand their frustrations with rising tuition prices but the University cannot operate in the red. I think that 20% may be a bit excessive but I'm certain that the University exhausted all other means to balance their budget.
ReplyDeleteMy message to the students who filed this lawsuit, stop complaining and deal with it, take out a student loan like the rest of us.
I find it interesting that on top of increasing tuition some universities are allowing the city in which it resides to tax the students for use of their roads and services. In an article I read not too long ago a city had worked out an agreement with a university to tax the students that reside in the dorms because the theory is they use to roads and other services but they do not pay the taxes for the repair and maintenance. The students who live off campus would not be taxed because most were renters and taxes were paid by their landlords. I imagine many cities will be looking for “creative” solutions to their budget shortfalls.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWith California's budget crisis, CSU's have had to close enrollment for mid year transfer students. Also they have implemented a policy of giving first priority acceptance to students of the surrounding area. So as you can well imagine it has become extremely difficult for students to transfer from community colleges in California to a suitable state university. Tuition is already sky high for these universities, and if students decide to attend community college first to save money, they are facing closed classes and even more obstacles due to these budget cuts in order to attain a degree. The rising cost of tuition and the lack of options for students, along with the mounds of debt they are facing are making it very hard for the students of California. Also the lack of jobs after college due to the blundering economy is leaving students frustrated and helpless. Many students are now looking for out of state options for their degrees, because there are less restrictions on where you come from, at least you can get into universities in Arizona or Oregon without having to wait. In order to attend the school you really want to attend in the CSU program students are facing the choices of having to choose where you want to go and move there, before even being accepted. You have to hope that the CSU will accept you, even after the 2 years you established of residency. Even with the prices for out of state, it is sadly about the same cost to attend Cal Poly San Luis Obispo as it is to be an out of state student at Northern Michigan University. That is horrible.
ReplyDeleteI think they would only have a case if the University sent out bills in May and students had begun to make payments or paid in full. Things do not look to good for CA students. First, the Governator sends out I Owe You's instead of tax refunds and now tuition goes up by 20%. Here we are, forcing 3rd and 2nd world countries to raise academic requirements so that schooling can be affordable for the masses and not just the wealthy yet we turn around and hike up prices and make an education less accessable to our country.
ReplyDeleteIt certainly seems to me that the students were well aware of the tuition increase. It shows that so much of the information that a university tries to provide for the student body is never read, or neglected. NMU for example is very good in my mind about providing information about all kinds of things that pertain to the students. Yet, everytime notices are sent out, posters are put up, and things are announced, only a few people really know about them. In this case I do feel for the students, but the fine print most likely read "All tuition rates are or can be subject to change." I think they took this fine print for granted or didn't read it at all. In my position, working with the students, we always say when we get an unheard of amount of questions pertaining to changes made, "Student's don't read." It is rather interesting that this applies to so many different situations that I've encountered and I think most people would agree that a lot of people simply do not pay attention. Unfortunately for the students, I do not think they have a chance in court.
ReplyDeleteDespite a Judge’s personal opinion in this matter and I don’t think he would have ever made such a rash decision such as that. What I think is ridiculous about this is that a school is raising their rates 20%. I understand times are rough for universities right now, but I think it is a little unbelievable that they don’t consider the feelings of the people that keep them alive, the students. I do think that the university has every right to raise tuition, but this is extreme. They raised their rates 10 percent in May, they were fully aware of an ongoing crisis the university was dealing with. They should have dealt with in a better way than raising it 10 then 30 percent at that point. They had fair warning on extreme circumstances taking place.
ReplyDeleteOn a personal level I think the university has the legal right to do so, but if they want to keep their current students and increase enrollment size, they are just plain stupid or think students are stupid enough to continue to attend their university. They could do this every semester, and why stop now.
This is an interesting post to me. The last time I checked, California's economy was second worst in the nation behind our own. Seeing as Michigan has had to make a lot of tough decisions in regards to higher education tuition, it is no surprise that California has had to do so as well. I read the article in its entirety and although I sympathize with the concerns of the students, I also see where CSU is coming from. It is rough to endure higher costs for tuition, but the state as a whole will be worse off with more people being laid off and the possibility of losing out on some of the courses offered, as well as the possibility that this would then lead to 5 or even 6 years to complete and undergraduate degree. So, although it sucks that students will have to pay higher tuition costs, in the long run it may be to our benefit. It will be interesting to see where the courts take this.
ReplyDeleteA contract is a contract no matter what! I don't understand how a legally signed agreement can be broken and the judge can even consider siding with the university. Once the ink hits the paper and all requirments have been fufilled IT IS FINAL! The university should have realized signing an agreement over tution would be a risk. I do not know whether or not they are having economic problems like the rest of California, if so, it was the game they played and unfortunately they lost.
ReplyDeletePerhaps the university decided it is in its best interest to have fewer students paying more, rather than more students paying less.
ReplyDeletePerhaps CSU anticipate a percentage of students will leave due to the financial strain, but it will save money on numerous line items in its budget, while maintaing its cash flow by increased tuition rates.
Most importantly, however, the university would not increase rates so significantly that it would cause student to leave en masse. Do not be confused, this decision is, in the perspective of the board, in its best interest.