For All The Talk About A New Stadium

[Guest GrayEagleOne]

Good insight into the inside situation. When I left Advancement several years ago, they were just beginning to talk about hiring DOs for athletics. I always felt like it would have been better for everyone to work on the same project, one at a time...so that you can freekin get something done and see some results. This situation of having all of the academic departments with their own DOs, working on their own little pet projects is not good IMHO. If everyone would be charged with working on a new stadium until you get the job done, I think we would see some progress. The problem is: Most of the academic departments see athletics as a nuisance at best and as a competitor for their dollars at worst. They never could get the vision that if athletics rise, we would all benefit. I could not stand that aspect of advancement at North Texas. They sure don't have that problem at Baylor do they? Or A&M?

I think that you're right about working together, one project at a time, instead of each College, School, or Department having their own DOs. You can probably blame the faculty for that. As you said, they are the biggest detriment to working collectively due to their pet projects. I have hope that they'll at least soften their criticism, due in part to the stance on athletics taken by Dr. Pohl and continued by Dr. Bataille.

[Quoner]

I think that you're right about working together, one project at a time, instead of each College, School, or Department having their own DOs. You can probably blame the faculty for that. As you said, they are the biggest detriment to working collectively due to their pet projects. I have hope that they'll at least soften their criticism, due in part to the stance on athletics taken by Dr. Pohl and continued by Dr. Bataille.

Most of the faculty hated Dr. Pohl, so not sure if Dr. B. is building off of anything in that respect...

[Stan R]

Oh ok I didnt know that happened. When was that vote? What was the whole proposal? If it failed then THATS ABSOLUTELY SORRY.

Basically, if I can remember all the facts correctly, RV drafted a proposal to increase the student athletic fees by a large amount, maybe $150 per year more or something close to that. There was a vote, hardly any students voted, and the small handful of voters narrowly voted it down. About 6 months to a year later, RV came back with an amended draft for an increase that was half as much as the original amount. That one passed. That money has been used to buy the Liberty Christian school buildings over by the new Athletic center. It also has helped to build the new women's facilities to ensure title nine compliance. I'm sure I didn't get all the numbers or time frames exactly correct but basically that was what happened. RV was giddy that the first amount he proposed would enable us to build the new stadium in a number of years no problem. That fell apart and now we are kind of stuck raising that money ourselves without the fee.

Next time there is a rate increase there may be no vote at all. It may just be imposed, like it or not. If I got any of these facts wrong, anyone feel free to correct me.

[Green Mean]

Basically, if I can remember all the facts correctly, RV drafted a proposal to increase the student athletic fees by a large amount, maybe $150 per year more or something close to that. There was a vote, hardly any students voted, and the small handful of voters narrowly voted it down. About 6 months to a year later, RV came back with an amended draft for an increase that was half as much as the original amount. That one passed. That money has been used to buy the Liberty Christian school buildings over by the new Athletic center. It also has helped to build the new women's facilities to ensure title nine compliance. I'm sure I didn't get all the numbers or time frames exactly correct but basically that was what happened. RV was giddy that the first amount he proposed would enable us to build the new stadium in a number of years no problem. That fell apart and now we are kind of stuck raising that money ourselves without the fee.

Next time there is a rate increase there may be no vote at all. It may just be imposed, like it or not. If I got any of these facts wrong, anyone feel free to correct me.

Man thats awful that it got turned down. Cant RV propose a higher fee again? I know quite a few people voted for the health center and 70% approved it. Surely RV will propose it as many times as it takes to get it passed. Am i right? Well I hope I am atleast.

[PHSCoach]

About 6 months to a year later, RV came back with an amended draft for an increase that was half as much as the original amount. That one passed.

That money has been used to buy the Liberty Christian school buildings over by the new Athletic center. It also has helped to build the new women's facilities to ensure title nine compliance. I'm sure I didn't get all the numbers or time frames exactly correct but basically that was what happened.

It was not voted on again the BOR just approved the increase

None of the money is giong into the capital expansion all $4,000,000 plus some change is going to support the ath. program

[CMJ]

I archived a basic summary from the Daily in April 2002.

Controversy erupted on the NT campus when students protested the Student Governments Association's decision to approve an increase in Student Service Fees for athletics days after students voted down a similar proposal in the spring elections.

The fee increase is $3 per credit hour per student, to be capped at $45 for 15 hours, and will be used to work toward gender equity in athletics.

The referendum that the students voted against was $4.50 per hour, capped at $67.50, and specified $3.50 for gender equity improvement and $1 for athletics facilities.

The SGA's approval of the fee led to an emergency Board of Regents meeting to accept the increase on March 31, just hours before students began early registration for the summer and fall semesters.

Despite an SGA-sponsored forum to address the reasons behind voting for the athletics fee, members of the newly formed group Students for an Accountable SGA gathered more than 1,000 pages of petitions to oust 21 senate members who voted to approve the proposal as well as a general vote of no confidence in the SGA.

Of those, 19 senate members received more than 300 signatures and were put on the recall ballot. The recall elections began Wednesday and end today. Results will be released at 3 p.m. Saturday.

Before the petitions started, leaders of the SGA and the Students for an Accountable SGA expressed their opinions on the issue to the Daily.

Marty O?Neill II, who worked to organize the petitions, said the petitions are symbolic.

"We're trying to send a message," O'Neill, Longbeach, Miss., senior, said. "We?re not trying to get revenge."

SGA President Brandon Daniels said he thinks the SGA senate members did their jobs properly.

"I'm standing behind every single senator 100 percent," Daniels, McGregor senior, said.

"They've done what they've been called to do."

-Cristina Rodriguez

[UNT_playmaker]

How about doing an increase to fund our stadium....now that is equality at its best.