On April 22, Republican Sen.Jeffery Denham’s “Student Protection Act of2004,” got a boost by having essential elements of itslanguage amended into Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s own feepolicy bill in the state senate.

Denham’s SB1329 required the California State University system to provide a90-day waiting period between the time when the system approved afee increase and when it was actually implemented. The bill alsocapped fee increases at 10 percent per year.

Denham said in aFeb. 18 press release that he was against fee increases but wantedstudents and parents to at least have “proper notice”if the CSU officials raised them anyway.

“I ampleased that we could forge this bipartisan agreement,”Denham said in an April 22 press release. “The most importantthing is that we protect students against emergency fee increases,and allow students and families to properly prepare for collegeexpenses.”

The newly amendedbill is SB 1535 authored by Democratic State Sen. Betty Karnette,which has now been re-referred to the Senate AppropriationsCommittee and will list Denham as a co-author.

TheSchwarzenegger connection hasn’t come without compromise forDenham. SB 1535 already had language capping fee increases at 10percent, but Denham’s original bill applied the cap to bothundergraduate and graduate students. Karnette’s wording onlycapped fee increases for undergraduates.

Karnette’slanguage would still allow fees to be raised on graduate studentsas high as the board of trustees deemed appropriate until theyreached 50 percent of undergraduate fees. After that point theycould only increase at the undergraduate rate of 10percent.

“It’sa bipartisan bill,” said Nicholas Rappley, press secretaryfor Denham. Rappley said that bipartisanship comes with these kindsof compromises.

He said languagerequiring that students be allowed to take a leave of absence for asemester or quarter after any fee increase will also survive theamendment process.

UniversityPresident Alexander Gonzalez said he wasn’t yet aware ofDenham’s legislation but that he is not sure how a 90-daywaiting period would help the system or students. He said he wouldprefer to see the governor and legislature work with the CSU systemto stabilize funding so that schools aren’t forced to makeradical fee increases, program cancellations andlayoffs.

“The stateneeds to think about developing endowments or some other fundingthat will reduce the dramatic swings in funding we have faced overthe past two decades,” Gonzalez said.

Marlon Cuellar,director of governmental affairs for Associated Students Inc., saidhe can’t yet speak to whether ASI supports the bill or notbut that he’s personally supportive of a 90-day waitingperiod.

Cuellar said hehas many friends who have felt blindsided in the past by notlearning about fee increases until the day they received theirbills.

He also said a90-day waiting period would give ASI more time to organize studentdemonstrations against such fee increases.

SB 1535 lays norequirements on the University of California governing board butrequests that they adopt an identical policy.