San Antonio Express:
For more than a month since UTSA athletics unveiled its proposal to increase the student athletics fee, athletic director Lisa Campos and Dean of Students LaTonya Robinson have been visiting with a variety of student groups on campus, aiming to promote the benefits of the proposal.
They’ve also been joined by university president Taylor Eighmy for two public information sessions this month, trumpeting the potential boons of boosted enrollment and increased value to UTSA through brand recognition. The funding would help the Roadrunners keep pace competitively in the American Athletic Conference while also providing immediate gains to student groups like the band.
Students have responded both in person and on social media with a range of issues they view as a greater priority for the university, including areas well beyond the scope of athletics such as on-campus parking and the university’s fluctuating WiFi network. They point to aging classrooms that fail to match the luster of the new Roadrunner Athletics Center of Excellence and salaries for faculty and staff that fall well short of football coach Jeff Traylor.
While Campos has stressed that addressing those concerns and supporting the athletics fee is “not an either/or” decision, she has at times faced an uphill battle convincing a student population that is often financially strapped and may have only limited engagement with athletics.
The fate of the proposal will be decided through a student vote Wednesday and Thursday, potentially marking the first athletics fee increase since the 2007 approval vote that spawned the creation of the football program.
“It’s really an investment by students,” Campos said. “We want to be nationally recognized. We want to have a national brand, and that’s all through athletics. We’re the front porch of the institution, and we want to continue bringing that national exposure to UTSA and San Antonio.”
The proposal would raise the university’s fee by $1.50 per credit hour each year for five years beginning in spring 2024. The current charge per credit hour is $20. If the measure passes, it would eventually end up at $27.50 for the 2027-28 academic year and beyond. The fee is capped at 12 credit hours per semester, meaning a full-time student would pay $660 annually in 2027-28 compared to the current $480.
If passed, the full fee increase in 2027-28 could generate about an additional $5 million annually for UTSA's athletics department. Current student fees generated $14.05 million during the 2021-22 academic year, and UTSA’s total athletics expenses of $37.6 million for the year ranked 10th of 13 reporting schools in the AAC, per data from the U.S. Department of Education.
Comments on UTSA athletics Instagram posts and the UTSA Reddit community have been mostly negative, highlighting students’ needs for better parking, wireless internet service and academic facilities. Some even poked at the football team’s 1-3 record at the time the proposal was announced.
UTSA’s student newspaper, The Paisano, stands opposed to the fee, editor-in-chief Laynie Clark and opinion editor Jake Mireles said. Last week, the paper’s editorial board published a piece headlined “Vote NO on increasing the student athletics fee,” writing that the measure is “tone-deaf, vague and fails to provide an actual, tangible reason why Roadrunners should support it.”
Mireles said the daily experience of leaving class at the McKinney Humanities Building — built in 1974 as one of five buildings comprising the original campus — and passing the recently opened $40 million Roadrunner Athletics Center of Excellence during his walk home reinforces the feeling of a growing divide between athletics and the student body.
“The stance the university is taking in favor of athletics is alienating students,” Mireles said. “It’s making them feel like they are put on the bench. They’re the second choice when it comes to the administration.”
Campos stresses that a large part of her process has been about education. While athletics may be viewed as the university’s favorite son, only about 6 percent of UTSA’s overall budget is devoted to the department. State-appropriated and tuition funds cannot be used on athletics, necessitating student fees at UTSA and other young FBS programs.
One of the slides in Campos’ presentation to student groups notes the total audience for UTSA athletics last year was 5.5 billion, which she equated to more than $200 million in advertising.
“Our sense is students really understand the impact of athletics,” Campos said. “I don’t think it’s a reflection of not supporting athletics, it’s just harder to pay more for tuition and fees.”
While UTSA’s current athletics fee covers travel, event costs and administrative costs among a variety of funding areas, the new fee is also earmarked for programs including the Spirit of San Antonio marching band, ROTC, cheerleading and spirit groups. The “Everyone Wins” campaign website also highlights pay for student workers and game-day events such as concerts.
But Mireles described the proposed benefits as “a lot of fluff and buzz phrases,” joining many students clamoring to see more specific data on the tangible ways the new money will be spent.
“There’s a lot we don’t know and a lot they won’t commit to saying about where that funding will be allocated,” Mireles said. “It’s very much, ‘Give us your money and trust that we’ll know what to do with it.’ There’s not a lot of transparency.”
Campos said rising costs create difficulty projecting how much funding will be required to maintain the current status quo, and shifting priorities make flexibility advantageous over more specific earmarks.
Even the full increase to $27.50 does not cover inflation since UTSA last approved a student fee increase. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, $20 from September 2007 has the same buying power as $29.53 today.
“It’s hard to project how every penny is going to be spent,” Campos said. “What I can say is that we’ve made commitments to different areas, and we're going to uphold those commitments if the fee passes.”
When UTSA last voted on an athletics fee increase in 2018, 76.7 percent of students voted to reject the proposal, and Mireles said he envisions another “resounding no” this week.
From the perspective of Mireles and Clark, UTSA students are often occupied with jobs or other responsibilities rather than embracing athletics.
According to data from U.S. News, UTSA ranks third-highest among FBS schools with 52 percent of students receiving federal Pell Grants, which are awarded based on significant financial need.
Seeing the number of donors who turned out to the Roadrunners Kickoff Luncheon in September or the $2 million commitment Harvey Najim made to the football program in August, Clark and Mireles have sensed students wondering why they need to contribute an extra $90 per semester.
“They’re just focusing their efforts in the wrong areas,” Clark said, “And I don’t see it benefiting students universally like they want it to.”
For more than a month since UTSA athletics unveiled its proposal to increase the student athletics fee, athletic director Lisa Campos and Dean of Students LaTonya Robinson have been visiting with a variety of student groups on campus, aiming to promote the benefits of the proposal.
They’ve also been joined by university president Taylor Eighmy for two public information sessions this month, trumpeting the potential boons of boosted enrollment and increased value to UTSA through brand recognition. The funding would help the Roadrunners keep pace competitively in the American Athletic Conference while also providing immediate gains to student groups like the band.
Students have responded both in person and on social media with a range of issues they view as a greater priority for the university, including areas well beyond the scope of athletics such as on-campus parking and the university’s fluctuating WiFi network. They point to aging classrooms that fail to match the luster of the new Roadrunner Athletics Center of Excellence and salaries for faculty and staff that fall well short of football coach Jeff Traylor.
While Campos has stressed that addressing those concerns and supporting the athletics fee is “not an either/or” decision, she has at times faced an uphill battle convincing a student population that is often financially strapped and may have only limited engagement with athletics.
The fate of the proposal will be decided through a student vote Wednesday and Thursday, potentially marking the first athletics fee increase since the 2007 approval vote that spawned the creation of the football program.
“It’s really an investment by students,” Campos said. “We want to be nationally recognized. We want to have a national brand, and that’s all through athletics. We’re the front porch of the institution, and we want to continue bringing that national exposure to UTSA and San Antonio.”
The proposal would raise the university’s fee by $1.50 per credit hour each year for five years beginning in spring 2024. The current charge per credit hour is $20. If the measure passes, it would eventually end up at $27.50 for the 2027-28 academic year and beyond. The fee is capped at 12 credit hours per semester, meaning a full-time student would pay $660 annually in 2027-28 compared to the current $480.
If passed, the full fee increase in 2027-28 could generate about an additional $5 million annually for UTSA's athletics department. Current student fees generated $14.05 million during the 2021-22 academic year, and UTSA’s total athletics expenses of $37.6 million for the year ranked 10th of 13 reporting schools in the AAC, per data from the U.S. Department of Education.
Comments on UTSA athletics Instagram posts and the UTSA Reddit community have been mostly negative, highlighting students’ needs for better parking, wireless internet service and academic facilities. Some even poked at the football team’s 1-3 record at the time the proposal was announced.
UTSA’s student newspaper, The Paisano, stands opposed to the fee, editor-in-chief Laynie Clark and opinion editor Jake Mireles said. Last week, the paper’s editorial board published a piece headlined “Vote NO on increasing the student athletics fee,” writing that the measure is “tone-deaf, vague and fails to provide an actual, tangible reason why Roadrunners should support it.”
Mireles said the daily experience of leaving class at the McKinney Humanities Building — built in 1974 as one of five buildings comprising the original campus — and passing the recently opened $40 million Roadrunner Athletics Center of Excellence during his walk home reinforces the feeling of a growing divide between athletics and the student body.
“The stance the university is taking in favor of athletics is alienating students,” Mireles said. “It’s making them feel like they are put on the bench. They’re the second choice when it comes to the administration.”
Campos stresses that a large part of her process has been about education. While athletics may be viewed as the university’s favorite son, only about 6 percent of UTSA’s overall budget is devoted to the department. State-appropriated and tuition funds cannot be used on athletics, necessitating student fees at UTSA and other young FBS programs.
One of the slides in Campos’ presentation to student groups notes the total audience for UTSA athletics last year was 5.5 billion, which she equated to more than $200 million in advertising.
“Our sense is students really understand the impact of athletics,” Campos said. “I don’t think it’s a reflection of not supporting athletics, it’s just harder to pay more for tuition and fees.”
While UTSA’s current athletics fee covers travel, event costs and administrative costs among a variety of funding areas, the new fee is also earmarked for programs including the Spirit of San Antonio marching band, ROTC, cheerleading and spirit groups. The “Everyone Wins” campaign website also highlights pay for student workers and game-day events such as concerts.
But Mireles described the proposed benefits as “a lot of fluff and buzz phrases,” joining many students clamoring to see more specific data on the tangible ways the new money will be spent.
“There’s a lot we don’t know and a lot they won’t commit to saying about where that funding will be allocated,” Mireles said. “It’s very much, ‘Give us your money and trust that we’ll know what to do with it.’ There’s not a lot of transparency.”
Campos said rising costs create difficulty projecting how much funding will be required to maintain the current status quo, and shifting priorities make flexibility advantageous over more specific earmarks.
Even the full increase to $27.50 does not cover inflation since UTSA last approved a student fee increase. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, $20 from September 2007 has the same buying power as $29.53 today.
“It’s hard to project how every penny is going to be spent,” Campos said. “What I can say is that we’ve made commitments to different areas, and we're going to uphold those commitments if the fee passes.”
When UTSA last voted on an athletics fee increase in 2018, 76.7 percent of students voted to reject the proposal, and Mireles said he envisions another “resounding no” this week.
From the perspective of Mireles and Clark, UTSA students are often occupied with jobs or other responsibilities rather than embracing athletics.
According to data from U.S. News, UTSA ranks third-highest among FBS schools with 52 percent of students receiving federal Pell Grants, which are awarded based on significant financial need.
Seeing the number of donors who turned out to the Roadrunners Kickoff Luncheon in September or the $2 million commitment Harvey Najim made to the football program in August, Clark and Mireles have sensed students wondering why they need to contribute an extra $90 per semester.
“They’re just focusing their efforts in the wrong areas,” Clark said, “And I don’t see it benefiting students universally like they want it to.”
Last edited:
