Concerns about the future of funding for athletics, faculty recruitment and student services occupied the Board of Regents last week.

The regents voted 7-2 last Wednesday at their monthly meeting in Iowa City to oppose a bill in the Iowa Legislature that would limit state spending.

Some regents say the bill, House Joint Resolution 2002, could be “devastating and disastrous” to state universities.

“I don’t think there was one regent there that was happy with that bill,” said Nancy Pellett, Board of Regents member from Atlantic.

The bill is a constitutional amendment which would limit state spending, including spending at the three regent universities, to the rate of inflation. Because of the limit on university spending, Pellett said the bill would remove “any autonomy the Board has to govern on its own,” including setting dorm fees and tuition.

John McCarroll, director of University Relations, expressed the concerns of the Iowa State administration about the proposed legislation.

“[The bill] would have a negative impact on the efforts we have at Iowa State,” he said.

McCarroll said the bill could hurt ISU’s ability to field competitive division I athletic teams because the ticket fees would be subject to limitation by the Iowa Legislature. He said the amendment would be “putting a cap on revenue.”

McCarroll also said the bill would jeopardize the university’s recruitment and retention of the country’s best faculty. Because of reduced funds available for salary, ISU would be limited in this “very competitive market,” according to McCarroll.

Finally, he said the bill could affect ISU in adding student services, such as the new Student Health Center, and depletion of a “rainy day” fund, which helps the university deal with unexpected problems.

However, Representative Charles Larson, R-Cedar Rapids and chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, said the legislative action would not necessarily hurt the three universities.

“In the past, the legislature has always been extremely supportive of higher education,” Larson said. “We want to keep [Iowa education] top in the nation.”

Larson said the regents acted hastily in opposing the bill because they did not have all of the necessary information.

“It was unfortunate that they decided to take that position,” he said.

David Fisher, regent from Des Moines and one of two dissenters on the Board, echoed Larson’s feelings on Wednesday’s action.

“At that point in time, I didn’t feel I had the information or background to make a comment or to vote [for] it,” he said.

Fisher said the Board should have simply agreed to study and monitor the legislation.

“I think that’s all we need to do at this point,” he said.

Pellett agreed that the Board members need to know more about the bill but said the regents’ lobbyists will be monitoring the bill’s progress through the House.

Larson said he will meet with members of the Board of Regents to discuss the legislation.

The bill is currently in the House Ways and Means Committee. Because it is a constitutional amendment, it would need to be passed by two consecutive general assemblies of the Legislature and then in a state-wide general vote.