The proposal to increase tuition by 9.9 percent at Iowa’s three regent universities was a topic of much discussion during the state Board of Regents meeting Wednesday. The proposal would increase the inflation factor, called the Higher Education Price Index, by 5.2 percent to maintain quality, and add 2 percent to improve quality. Board members will be deciding on the final percentage during their October meeting. The regents are also proposing splitting fees and tuition at Iowa State and the University of Northern Iowa, which would redirect fees for selected student services and activities out of tuition into separate mandatory fees. The tuition and fee split began last year at the University of Iowa. University presidents from Iowa State, the University of Iowa and the University of Northern Iowa gave presentations to the board during the meeting, in addition to student government members from each school. ISU Interim President Richard Seagrave supported the increase and said the proposed quality factor would be used for projects such as learning communities, freshmen retention, modernizing technology and more electronic resources for the Parks Library. “The bottom line for us is this is a very appreciated recommendation for the board,” Seagrave said. ISU’s Government of the Student Body and the UNI Student Government asked to decrease the proposed tuition increase to 6.74 percent. The University of Iowa Student Government was originally going to present with the ISU and UNI governments, but members changed their minds Monday night and supported the regents’ proposal. ISU and UNI student governments learned of their support Tuesday night. Dan Sterenchuk, president of the UNI Student Government, said the proposed inflation factor was “excessively high.” He recommended an increase of 4.6 percent, saying it would be more in the “median range.” GSB President Ben Golding said the 2 percent quality increase was unnecessary. He said quality is important, but accessibility and affordability are equally important. “The margin students and families are the ones that would be impacted by the increasing cost of the universities,” Golding said. “This is a tremendous blow to the financial situation of freshmen and sophomores just coming into our university.” He said more tuition money would still be available for the quality increase without an additional 2 percent. “The fee splits are already making up for that quality increase,” Golding said. The U of I Student Government presented after student leaders from Iowa State and the University of Northern Iowa. “UISG `cautiously supports’ a 9.9 percent increase in resident tuition and fees, and an 8 percent increase in nonresident tuition and fees based on the board office’s recommendations,” UISG President Andy Stoll said. Stoll said UISG members believed the reason for the difference of opinion among the three regent universities was a result of the different needs of the University of Iowa compared to Iowa State and University of Northern Iowa. Examples of these differences are in the various programs, facilities and outreach initiatives at the universities, he said. The University of Iowa also had different shortfalls from the drop in legislative funding than the other two state universities. Stoll said UISG members talked with U of I President Mary Sue Coleman and decided there was a difference between the quality increase and the mandatory fee split at Iowa. He said UI students support the tuition increase as long as there is a positive outcome. “In the end, the student assembly came to the conclusion that the numbers are just, based on the evidence given,” Stoll said. Stoll concluded the presentation by asking why the tuition rates between the universities have to be the same when they have different needs. Owen Newlin, president of the Board of Regents, said he thought the students did well. “They were very thorough.” Some members of GSB were not happy with the UISG’s change of mind. “We are `cautiously’ pissed off,” said Matt Welk, director of student life. GSB senator Will Tinder also wasn’t impressed with UISG’s performance. “Their resolution, in my opinion, did not show very much logic,” he said. Andy Tofilon, GSB director of intergovernmental affairs, said he thought GSB did well, considering the change in plans. “We feel [UISG’s] efforts were very counterproductive,” he said. “We gathered ourselves very well and gave the best presentation we could under the circumstances.”