PHOENIX - Well into its third month, Arizona's lawmaking session will likely last into the summer. But many campus-related bills have already taken a permanent spring break.
Bills that would have increased the amount of state-funded financial aid, given fraternity houses on privately owned land property tax exemption, mandated tuition installment payment plans and required university admissions to be equitable for students who were charter- or home-schooled have all been held or voted down by the Legislature.
Some were held because they lacked support. A bill drafted by UA student Chris Dang was withdrawn by its sponsor because the universities had already made the changes it proposed.
Dang, a political science senior, sought to establish tuition payment plans with no additional charges to help students cope with last year's steep tuition hikes.
By the time his bill reached the Senate Education Committee, all three state universities had instituted payment plans on their own, thereby eliminating the need for legislation, said the bill's sponsor Sen. Slade Meade, R-Phoenix.
While Dang is disappointed that his bill didn't eliminate the fees schools charge students on the tuition installment plans, he said watching his bill die has not been without fulfillment.
"I am satisfied that the pay plans were installed," Dang said. "I am extremely satisfied that a few e-mails and telephone
conversations can lead to the creation of a bill that makes its way before the education committee."
Dang said he hopes that the bill's early demise won't dissuade students from contacting legislators and fostering trust and support that has been lacking until now.
"On the part of the student, (the bill's progress) shows that legislators aren't quite as out of touch as they are made out to be," Dang said.
Other defunct legislation did not meet as rosy a death as Dang's bill.
A bill backed by student lobbyists from the Arizona Students' Association that would have increased the amount of money the state puts into the Arizona Board of Regents financial aid trust fund was withdrawn when ASA learned that the bill lacked support from Gov. Janet Napolitano.
"We chose to hold the bill because the bill didn't have the support it needed to make it through the Legislature," said Amy Hicks, ASA associate executive director.
The governor's proposed budget didn't include state matching funds for the financial aid trust, which essentially doomed the bill from the start.
There are dozens of reasons that bills that affect the universities never make it off the ground, said UA lobbyist Greg Fahey.
"It's not easy for a bill to make it all the way through," Fahey said.
In most instances, the board of regents and university lobbyists will work with lawmakers to resolve their concerns without state mandates, Fahey said.
Sen. Andy Biggs, R-Gilbert, recommended that two of his own bills be held. One mandated faculty fingerprinting and ordered faculty to be fired if they'd been convicted of certain violent felonies.
Biggs suggested the bills be held because the board of regents agreed to draft more stringent criminal screening processes at an upcoming meeting.
"If a bill adversely affects us, we try to work with the bill's sponsor to address (his or her) concerns without legislation," Fahey said. "Sometimes, if there is a problem, it's a problem that takes a small fix."
A bill sponsored by Sen. Tim Bee, R-Tucson, which called for equal admissions standards for students from home and charter schools, was pulled when the board of regents agreed to discuss the matter at its April meeting.
Bills are sometimes used to pressure the universities to make changes, but most legislators would rather have the board of regents make changes without state intervention, Bee said.
"That was actually what we wanted. It's better for them to handle it than for us to have to pass it into statute," Bee said.
Sometimes, legislators will draft a bill without consulting the universities only to find that their proposed changes have already taken place, as in the case of the tuition installment bill, Fahey said.
Ultimately, the universities aim to keep the policy-making decisions in the hands of the board of regents while paying close attention to the issues that emerge in the legislative session, Fahey said.