Minnesota State University Reporter

Issue date: 2/7/08 Section: Campus News

The proposal, above, is a revised version of a $14.5 million proposal from last year. The new plan would cost about $8.5 million, or about $30 per full-time student, per semester.

Media Credit: Raymond Starin Richard Straka, left, and Todd Pfingsten, discuss the campus recreation proposal Wednesday at the senate meeting.

The campus recreation proposal presented Wednesday to student senate by administration was certainly not a first. The difference is, this time it just might pass.

President Richard Davenport, along with Vice President of Student Affairs Patricia Swatfager-Haney, Vice President of Finance and Administration Richard Straka and Director of Campus Recreation Todd Pfingsten presented a much revised campus rec proposal.

The new proposal would cost $8.48 million in student fees, considerably less than last year's proposal of $14.5 million.

"Trying to get the dollars down, the vast majority of this is absolutely recreation-based," Straka said. "We'll look for other sources of funding for additional things."

Specifically, Pfingsten said private funding - not student fees - would pay for lighting the baseball and softball fields, the replacement of lights and the installation of an all-weather surface over Blakeslee.

"We don't view this as an athletic proposal. We've stripped that aspect out of this proposal," Straka said.

The new proposal includes - but is not limited to - new softball fields including flag football fields, fitness trails and new outdoor track and soccer fields, which would be completed in two phases. Construction on phase one would begin spring 2009 and phase two would begin spring 2010 (see graphic on front page for specifics).

Pfingsten also said that aside from the hours of 2 p.m. to 6 p.m. allotted for athletic team practices, the new facilities would be open to the general student population as well as fitness classes.

"There will be student access, no doubt about it," he said.

Aside from the new proposal being intended for general student recreation and intramural sports, it is also much less expensive than prior proposals. Fees would be based on per-credit hours, and full time students would pay about $30. Last spring, however, two proposals were put forward - one costing $43 per semester, thte other $65 - and the proposal now being examined initially cost about $40 per semester.

"I want you to know that we have very much considered student input," Swatfager-Haney said. "We're here today to present a very much revised proposal for campus outdoor recreation and track facilities."

She added student issues were considered when revising the plan throughout the year.

Davenport spoke about his experience in comparing athletic and recreational facilities with those of other universities in Minnesota.

"I am often surprised, even dismayed, that our facilities are often in worse condition than other universities," he said.

Davenport, along with the other administration, stressed their belief that the new proposal would greatly benefit students not involved in athletics.

Straka said he expects the new track and fitness trails to be "heavily utilized," much like Otto Arena and Myers Field House, while Swatfager-Haney mentioned the potential use for homecoming activities and outdoor concerts.

Pfingsten said recreation adds to academics by increasing not only overall health, but focus leading to a boost in GPA, a subject he researched for his master's thesis.

"Athletics brings a lot of spirit and life to campus and so does campus rec," he said.

When the presentation was finished, the senators were each given the chance to ask two questions.

Many gave positive feedback on the new proposal.

"This is really looking like one of the best of all possible solutions," said Casey Carmody, vice president of MSSA.

Senators Andy Wilke and MSSA President Chris Frederick also said they were pleased with the new proposal.

Other senators were not so quick to give their praise.

Senator Abbie Hill asked what proof the administration had that students are more willing to support this proposal than any past proposals.

After a pause, Straka said the administration, "never said we had that evidence or would make an assumption that there is such evidence."

Earlier in the meeting, Straka brought up an editorial written in the Reporter in 2007 on the failed rec proposal, arguing, and read aloud by Straka, "'The students have spoken. They said no to the campus recreation proposal. But it's not like it was resounding. So please, go back to the drawing board, campus recreation.'"

Straka had said this reflected "the voice of the students" and again said this in response to Hill's question. He said a committee was created including five students - along with faculty and bargaining units - which reflected student support.

"The important part of the consultation process is now," he said.

Senator Brandon Ross posed questions pertaining to parking and safety, to which Pfingsten said currently the back of the green lot is available. The first phase of the plan also includes a 40-car parking lot.

Concerning safety, he said intramural sports are always supervised, but not recreation.

"There are enough people out there to notice if something goes wrong," he said.

Senator Matt Lust said students are being "saddled" with 80 percent of the cost and asked if 80 percent of students use the new facilities.

Straka said according to that logic, only 1/12 of students would be able to use Otto because that was the ratio paid directly by students. Pfingsten said there is a demand for these facilities as attendance at Otto has increased by 8 percent since last year.

When asked why the administration presented the plan to the Board of Trustees over break before presenting it to MSSA, Swatfager-Haney explained this was simply meant as a placeholder to be able to move forward with the issue this spring.

"We have not, and would not be allowed to impose a fee on you, nor would we want to," she said. "We didn't want to miss the window of opportunity."

She added that administration is not allowed by the Board of Trustees to impose or increase student fees without student senate permission, meaning the fee will be capped as well.

Should this proposal go into referendum, Davenport said they would wait to see how students vote. If, however, the referendum would take more than a year, he said he would consider using his presidential privilege to move forward.

The administration and senate will hold an open forum to discuss the rec proposal from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. Wednesday in the CSU basement near the fireplace.


Rachel Heiderscheidt is the Reporter news editor

Page 1 of 1

Article Tools