Alan Elder columnist

Located at the center of the university, the Student Union Memorial Center has come to be the nerve center of Wildcat culture, but it is also the subject of continuing controversy as a new $20 student union fee proposed by the University of Arizona Dining Services has spawned fresh debate.

This fee, if approved by the Arizona Board of Regents, may be on the horizon as a student referendum. Proposed as an alternative to the mandatory meal plan, the fee is designed to pay maintenance costs, finance the debt and bonds that the unions were constructed with, and expand the number of programs that the unions offer. But with college costs already soaring, do we really need another student fee?

Ordinarily, any extra student fees should be opposed. But after speaking to Dan Adams, director of the student unions, the fee looks increasingly necessary. As Adams relates the situation, the unions operate almost independently of the university; they receive some assistance, but they are largely self-sufficient. Revenues and income generated from dining sales and other services must cover operation costs, employee wages and benefits.

Revenue levels are currently where they were projected to be, but with the rising costs of operations, employee benefits and interest rates, it is hard to see how these extra expenses will not be passed on to students. Moreover, Adams contends that student demand continues to be high for new and expanded services such as IQ Fresh and Highland Market.

Given the unlikelihood that the union will receive support from the state Legislature or the university, a student fee is a necessary economic evil in order to maintain the services that are currently provided. In Adams' words: "Without the identification of a new revenue source, the unions will not have the financial resources to maintain the quality of either student union or other dining service facilities."

Inevitably, some will be opposed to this measure. After all, this is a consumer choice issue. Much like the Student Recreation Center fee controversy, some students may conceivably not want to dine at the union or use its services.

The distinction here is that everybody seems to benefit from the unions in some way. While some decry it as a distant, sterile monolith, university business is still conducted there. It is a place to meet friends, colleagues and professors. It is a place to work, eat, relax and study. It provides important programs and resources for students, such as leadership, commuter, off-campus housing and career services.

Moreover, as Adams explains, students are able to opt out of campus fees (including the one for the Rec Center). Should this new fee be instituted, he imagines that students would still retain the option of a refund.

But some students feel that they should not be made to pay without guarantees of reciprocity.

This fact is not lost on Cade Bernsen, ASUA student body president, who said, "The student union is a great asset for all students." However, he also contends that we cannot support a fee that has no clear design.

He brings up a good point: Students need to have direction and control over what the fee is used for. While Bernsen believes that providing healthier food services and a parental resource center are desirable objectives, he is ultimately in favor of developing a committee that would allow students to have a say in how the money is spent.

The bottom line is that the unions must be kept running. But the debate should center on what students actually want. Maintenance is certainly a concern, but a candid discussion of the unions' priorities and whether new services are necessary would be useful. Student discussion should reflect the possibilities that the new fee creates - extended operating hours, the construction of another Highland Market location or expanded services are among many choices.

Students should oppose the fee if the objectives are not carefully outlined. But students should vote in favor of the fee if they receive tangible benefits in return; that is, if the proposal reflects expanded services that we all desire. If this is the case, then $20 is a reasonable investment to maintain its quality.

- Alan Eder is a senior majoring in political science and panish. He can be reached at letters@wildcat.arizona.edu.