Weeks after its opening, hundreds of students flow in and out of the Recreation Center daily, and new users can still be seen admiring the 21,000 square-feet of usable space. But some individuals on campus are having a harder time seeing the beauty behind the center.
Cal Poly’s faculty and staff, who are offered non-student priced memberships to the Recreation Center, saw a steep increase in pricing when the facility opened. Their memberships, which formerly cost $45 per quarter, are now priced at $48 per month or $488 for a full year.
Students also pay $432 per year now as part of their regular student fees.
University Union Advisory Board (UUAB) chair and philosophy senior Karen Mesrobian said the approximately 270 percent increase in non-student membership makes the faculty and staff price comparable to that of students.
“I don’t think I would ever feel comfortable having students come up to me and say, ‘Why are staff paying less than us when they have a choice to join, and we don’t have a choice?’” Mesrobian said. “I don’t know how I could justify that to the student body.”
But some faculty said they feel the price jump hit them disproportionately hard and has forced them to find gym membership off campus. David Mitchell, a physics professor at Cal Poly for seven years, frequently used the Recreation Center before its renovation. Now, he said, he cannot afford to work out there.
“I’ve looked at different gyms in San Luis (Obispo) and Morro Bay, and I actually haven’t been able to find anything as expensive as Cal Poly,” he said.
Mitchell said several faculty and staff saw the previously low prices at the Recreation Center as a benefit to working at Cal Poly. In response to the new pricing, some professors wrote letters to the offices of the university president and provost, asking them to force Associated Students, Inc. (ASI) and UUAB to reconsider the pricing.
“(The Recreation Center) is a big selling point because it’s actually kind of hard to hire faculty here because we can’t afford to buy houses,” Mitchell said. “So it was actually like a perk, that we were getting to use it.”
ASI programs director Marcy Maloney said the price increase all comes down to a 2008 decision where students voted to increase tuition by $65 per quarter to renovate the Recreation Center. She said with an increase in student fees, an increase in faculty and staff fees was necessary, too.
“How do you charge the faculty and staff less than you charge the students?” she said. “The students don’t get a choice, (the professors) get a choice. Ethically, I don’t see how you could do that.”
The revenue brought in by outside membership fees, Maloney said, “barely puts a dent” in the cost of operating the Recreation Center. The facility budget, which was created more than a year before the opening, projects outside memberships (including faculty and staff) will bring in just 6 percent of the Recreation Center’s revenue. Student fees will bring in 86 percent, according to Maloney.
In response, Mitchell’s colleague, physics professor Katharina Gillen, said it does not make sense to her why the prices were raised if it does not substantially aid ASI.
“The hardship to us is huge, where the benefit to ASI is, percentage-wise, very small,” she said.
The physics department traditionally holds sporting events at the Recreation Center where students and professors have the opportunity to interact outside the classroom. Since only the kinesiology department can use the center for instruction for free, Gillen said these kinds of interactions will be lost when faculty are not able to afford memberships.
“You have more of this community feeling between faculty and students, whereas, with prices like this, if we can’t go anymore we lose some of that,” Gillen said. “And I think that’s a pity.”
Despite the criticism from faculty and staff, Mesrobian said the value of the Recreation Center is among the best in the nation.
“I don’t think you can go anywhere on the Western Coast where you can get this level of the facility for that price,” she said. “Even here in (San Luis Obispo), state-of-the-art equipment, the views, the service, the student employment, all of that put together is pretty remarkable.”
…“I’ve looked at different gyms in San Luis (Obispo) and Morro Bay, and I actually haven’t been able to find anything as expensive as Cal Poly,” he said….
It’s real easy prof, if it’s too expensive go elsewhere. Note: there’s nothing in Morro Bay or in any other local town that comes close to the Rec Center offerings.
Quit complaining!
First of all, it’s not even fair that students are forced to pay for the Rec Center. I never even went to it once during my 3 years at CP, except for maybe during WOW. A membership should be an option for everyone!
Then maybe I’d be in just a little less debt.
My understanding is that the University Union Advisory Board (UUAB) has oversight of the Rec Center and the policies that are established for it–among the policies the fee policies for non-student members. Ironically, though, the faculty representative position on the UUAB (a voting position!) has been vacant since September 2009–2.4 years! Faculty can complain all they want, but if they have refused to be a part of the process and business UUAB has dealt with for the last 2.4 years they missed their chance and can only blame themselves!
“How do you charge the faculty and staff less than you charge the students?”
“Why are staff paying less than us when they have a choice to join, and we don’t have a choice?”
Fine, you don’t need to charge the students more than faculty and staff, but why do you want to charge the faculty and staff more than the students?
Faculty/staff didn’t even get to vote on the fee increases. Faculty and staff don’t get any additional benefit, so why should their fees be more?
As a faculty member, I can’t afford any other gym either, even ones that are both cheaper and nicer like Kennedy Fitness. And I can no longer participate in recreational activities with my students – that community aspect of the university has deteriorated. And as for students … it is equally ridiculous that they are forced to pay such a high price – and they don’t even get a choice!
Another thing to consider – as far as I can tell, faculty memberships at the Rec Center have dropped to basically zero. Pricing us out of the Rec Center not only sucks for us, but it means less money coming into ASI from memberships, which means students pay more. Doing “the right thing” by charging faculty so much actually *costs* students money.
Sean forgot to quote the part where I said that I think it is an outrage to make student fees for the rec center so high, and to make them mandatory. Student tuition and fees have increased so much since the students voted on the rec center project years ago already, and the steep $432 fee will cause some students to have to drop out of Cal Poly. I am sure they would rather opt out of a gym membership and finish their degree…
When Sean asked us whether we think we should pay less than the students, my answer was that I think both fees are too high and should be lowered. Also students that can demonstrate a financial hardship should be able to opt out. (In fact, every student should have the option to opt out.)
I thought I was very clear about this point, but somehow there was no mention of it in this article.
Also, in the interview I mentioned that maybe if the Board were to explain the reasoning behind their fee schedule, including the loan amounts and interest rates etc., maybe people would understand better why the fees were made so high for *everyone*. Who knows, they might be giving all of us some huge discount over what it costs to pay off their loan and run the rec center…?!?
It seems strange to me that when the loans are paid off the fees won’t be lowered (from the FAQ section previously available on the ASI rec center website). Interesting: Somehow it will cost a lot more to operate the rec center after the loans are paid off. How is this possible?
My current impression is that ASI is trying to make a profit off of students and faculty/staff alike, and considering the sacrifices that both students and faculty/staff have had to make during the recent budget crisis, I think this is an absolute outrage!
People are so naive. Do the research. Students cannot “opt out” of this category fee. ASI referendums are binding and we should all turn our anger to the students who voted on the new building in 2008.
I agree with Mesrobian that faculty/staff should not pay less than students. They can go somewhere else if they want. This building is the nicest place they will find.
Faculty/staff also pay less for parking on campus. Why can’t students get that same rate? O ya, unions!
Life isn’t always fair. Let’s realize that and make the best of it.