Tuesday, March 4, 2008
United Students announced Sunday the addition of a swimming pool to the Student Recreation Fitness Center as its first platform.
Adam McGonigle, Wichita sophomore and United Students presidential candidate, said there was not enough funding for the pool if his coalition did not make it a platform. He said his coalition, if elected, would not raise student fees to pay for the addition, which is projected to cost $20 million.
Courtesy of UT RecSports
The Gregory Gym Aquatic Complex at the University of Texas. Photo courtesy of UT RecSports.
McGonigle said the coalition had students fill out surveys about what they wanted to see happen on campus. He said many people said Robinson Center, the building with the University’s only pool, was not open often enough. Robinson is open to students for less than three hours per day.
McGonigle said he was exploring different options to fund the building. In spring 2005, Student Senate agreed to give up student seats at Allen Fieldhouse so the Athletics Department could charge more money from ticket holders. That money is funding the recreation center expansion. McGonigle said one possibility would be diverting extra money earned from giving up student seats at basketball games to the addition of the pool.
Another option, McGonigle said, was to redirect the $15 fee students currently pay to fund the boathouse to pay for the new pool, after the construction of the boathouse is finished. The Athletics Department is $4 million away from paying off the boathouse.
Adding a 50-meter NCAA competitive pool to the recreation center was originally proposed in 2002. McGonigle said he wanted to explore the options and see if students wanted a competitive pool, a lap pool or a combination of both.
“The idea was inspired by students and visits to other Big 12 universities,” McGonigle said.
McGonigle said the pool area at the University of Texas, which he visited on a Student Senate conference, combined a recreation pool and competitive pool as well as hot tubs and fountains.
Mary Chappell, director of recreation services, said a project like McGonigle’s would take a long time to get started, and 2010 would be a good goal to have all the planning and design finished for an addition. The addition being built onto the recreation center was proposed in spring 2004 and was scheduled to be finished in June, she said.
Chappell said that because the center was built on 6.5 acres of land, there was lots of space to make additions.
“The good thing is that when we built this building, we thought about the future,” Chappell said.
She said pools were expensive to build and operate, and McGonigle would have to survey students to find out exactly what they wanted built on the south side of the recreation center. She said pools could also bring in funds for the University, but that it shouldn’t forget the primary purpose of the recreation center. The public would pay a fee to use the pool, which would be free for students.
“We have to keep remembering why we’re here and who we’re here for — students are first,” Chappell said.
nutgraf
McGonigle said the pool area at the University of Texas, which he visited on a Student Senate conference, combined a recreation pool and competitive pool as well as hot tubs and fountains.
Jim Marchiony, associate athletics director, said McGonigle approached him about the option to expand the recreation center. The University currently has a women’s swimming and diving team but no men’s team. He said the department would not pursue building a pool simply to bring back a men’s swimming and diving team.
“Our philosophy is that we need to take care of the sports we have now,” Marchiony said. “For the kind of swimming program we want to be, we need a better facility.”
Marchiony said the department would listen to any ideas, but the proposal for a new pool would have to come from the students. He said a new pool would help student athletes and the student body in general since Robinson is more than 40 years old, and it would also attract potential students to campus.
— Edited by Katherine Loeck
University postpones aquatic center plan
Because of budget cuts next year, McGonigle calls plan “not the responsible ...
Student Senate gets report card
The Kansan takes a look at the current administration’s promises and achievements.
Student Senate discusses plans for KU aquatic ...
Student Senate is looking at three different plans for a possible aquatics ...
Platforms discussed in Student Senate debate
United Students, Connect KU and Students of Liberty debates issues such as ...
Campus fees will not increase next year
Student Senate will review current fees to ensure that overall campus fees ...
Coalitions offer their platforms to campus
ConnectKU, Students of Liberty, and United Students hope to appeal to students ...
United Students wins Student Senate with 48 ...
Adam McGonigle and Michael Gillaspie received 2,005 votes, securing the positions of ...
United Students meets, discusses plans
The coalition describes their plans for election season, and its vice presidential ...
Boathouse dedication on Saturday
The new 16,000-square-foot building provides a home for the varsity and club ...
Fee continues amid controversy
Senate votes to continue $80-a-year charge to subsidize KU athletics budget.
Enrollment overhaul on agenda for candidates
The United Students senate coalition want to make the Enroll and Pay ...
Student Recreation Fitness Center addition to open ...
The add-on will feature a virtual golf simulator, martial arts studio, four ...
Student Senate reviewing fees
To keep overall fees the same, some individual fees will have to ...
Student Senate notebook
Commission approves boathouse permit
The Lawrence City Commission approved a special use permit that would allow ...
A look at Student Senate hopefuls
A glance at presidential candidates before the Student Senate debate: Austin Kelly, ...
Student athletes focus on Students of Liberty, ...
The debate revolved around Adam Wood’s proposal to cut women’s and non-revenue ...
University to review piracy policy
Student senate and University administration have a one-month period to research the ...
Executive Committee votes to uphold Porte’s suspension
President’s ability to remove executive staff members one of the issues debated.
Brown: Suspension should alert lethargic student body
Student Senate controls a lot of student money and students should care ...
United Students makes garage parking a priority
The coalition wants to have parking at the Kansas Unions’ parking garage ...
Recreation Center offers lockers for $40
The Ambler Student Recreation Fitness Center has 40 of 100 reserved for ...
Student Senate Notebook
Student Senate committees met last night to vote on legislation concerning large ...
Student body president suspends treasurer
Suspension comes after treasurer releases memo to The Kansan.
Students praised for making boathouse a reality
Students and University officials endured snow Friday to celebrate the construction of ...
Senators question student body president’s vetoes
The vetoed legislation concerns Gmail technology, a sustainability fee and the Multiculural ...
Students should take interest in new administration
Chancellor, Provost ‘shape mission and vision of University’
Freshman elections begin
Student Senate needs five representatives from the freshman class. Campaigning for Student ...
Editorial: Cutting campus media fee would reduce ...
Senate should think about the consequences before eliminating the student media fee.
Student Rec Center nears completion
The University rec center is being renovated to keep up with national ...
Senate leaders working with new administrators
Mason Heilman and May Davis are focusing on recruitment and setting groundwork.
Changes proposed for student parking
Students without yellow parking permits may be allowed to use parking spaces ...
Student Senate to vote on fee increase
The Student Senate could raise student fees for the third time this ...
Student Senate leaders claim compensation under new ...
Six Student Senate leaders will receive between $1,500 and $3,000 per semester ...
Rec center addition to be dedicated today
New spaces include golf simulator, extension of running track and more rooms ...
Rowing team one step closer to boathouse
First drawing released for rowing boathouse to be built near Kansas River
Student Senate Notebook
Here is what happened at the Student Senate meeting on Wednesday
Recreation center roof leaking
Senate votes on buying clickers
Although a faculty member has had problems with the clickers, Student Senate ...
Senate treasurer out for finance talks
Alex Porte was suspended Tuesday for leaking a confidential senate budget proposal ...
From left: Kimberlee Hinkle, Libby Johnson and Hannah ...
1 comment
Kansas Jayhawk fans hold aloft a reproduction of ...
2 comments
Erin Saupe, a Ph.D. student from St. Cloud, ...
1 comment
0 comments
Armed robbers continue to threaten.
3 comments
Lecture from Greg Mortenson, co-author of New York ...
0 comments
Comments
United Students propose pool for Recreation Center
Or even better yet, why don't we just eliminate the $15 fee altogether once the boathouse is finished?
United Students propose pool for Recreation Center
This is frickin' amazing. I still don't like coalitions - but props to United Students on this one.
United Students propose pool for Recreation Center
Since when is $20 million "free for students"?
United Students propose pool for Recreation Center
I wish United Students luck with this and agree we need a new pool. But I take issue with this platform for two reasons. First, this idea is not unique to United Students and really doesn't require them to get elected for it to happen. Second, $15 of the athletics fee was originally supposed to sunset once it paid for the boathouse. Technically speaking, extending that fee would be like increasing student fees for students in those years. But I like the idea as a whole and look forward to finding a way to get this done.
United Students propose pool for Recreation Center
I think the funding on this proposal is one of it's biggest problems, but certainly not the only cause for concern. Consider the fact that United Students said that they decided to include this proposal in their platform in response to student surveys that the coalition conducted. According to the coalition, numerous students complained that Robinson gym wasn't open long enough. However, instead of creating a 20 MILLION dollar proposal for a new pool facility, which wouldn't even be completed by 2010, why doesn't United Students just move to keep Robinson open longer? Doesn't that seem to be a more practical solution than building a brand new multi-million dollar pool facility. Secondly, I would almost guarantee that at least some if not most of the students the coalition surveyed bemoaned the rising cost of tuition, books, or extra student fees. Proposing a new pool that would perpetuate the increased student fee for womens and non-revenue producing sports, which the Student Senate finance committee nearly voted to eliminate, would be ignoring the financial concerns of many members of the student body. 15$ of the 20$ fee increase for non-revenue producing sports was allocated to funding the building of the new boathouse, following the completion of the boathouse this portion of the student fees should be eliminated, not continued to fund a project that students didn't vote to fund. By creating a campaign platform that proposes a new pool that coalition members irrationally concluded students want and then use existing student fees that should be eliminated following the completion of the boathouse, United Students shows their complete disregard for the true desires of the students.
United Students propose pool for Recreation Center
I agree with awphawk, though this issue has two different sides to consider. First of all, it's true that Robinson Center has terrible hours for students and the facilities are crowded enough as it is. It's nearly impossible to find a lane especially right when the pool opens in the evenings at 5:30. However, it should also be noted that the vast majority of people using the pool are either staff/faculty or some sort of sports team (swim team, diving team, water polo). The question here is do students really use the pool often enough to justify the building of a larger facility? Or is it because we don't have a better facility to suit them that students don't go swimming?
In any case, as someone who once worked there as a lifeguard, I think there are more factors to take into account here than just the ones presented above. If a pool is to be built in the recreation center, it should be a competitive pool for lap swimming. You go to any gym here in town that has a pool and you'll see that it's for lap swimming or other aerobic purposes. Having a pool just to have a pool seems pointless and unnecessary. In order to run the pool you would have to hire more lifeguards and if you plan to keep the pool open for longer then that's even more money used to not only run the facility but to pay the increased number of people working there.
We need to cut spending, not increase it. And while it's fine and dandy to say that student fees wouldn't rise as a result of implementing this plan, it's unrealistic to really believe that because you're not taking into account the costs for running and maintaining a pool.
United Students propose pool for Recreation Center
Okay, this one finally just pushed me over the edge. They are claiming the Rec Center pool as a platform issue?!
THE STAGE THREE OF THE REC CENTER CONSTRUCTION INCLUDING A POOL HAS BEEN IN THE WORKS FOR YEARS. YEARS.
And the backing of this "platform" issue (I'm going to throw up) by a coalition who claims that they will not be raising student fees (!!!) and the administration who refuses to comment on the platform issues of Connect.
Is Big Mac paying the administration with the same fat pockets that have him kicking off at the Eldridge?
waits for reply from richie09
United Students propose pool for Recreation Center
sorry about the random caps... i guess i know what "==" does now...
United Students propose pool for Recreation Center
I would just like to draw attention to what it takes the University of Texas to keep up the Gregory Gym Aquatic Complex. == Aquatics complex fee. The fee of $0.85 a semester credit hour finances construction, renovation, operation, maintenance, and improvements of the Gregory Gym Aquatic Complex.
Gregory Gymnasium renovation fee. The fee, not to exceed $1.90 per semester credit hour ($0.95 per semester credit hour for a six-week summer term), defrays the cost of financing, renovating, operating, maintaining, and improving Gregory Gymnasium. ==
This shouldn't be an issue for this year's election... plans will take time, and when they are proposed, students should be able to vote on the project.
United Students propose pool for Recreation Center
OldGoldLegs beat me to it. This is going to happen anyway. U.S. can't just slap their names on it and say it is happening because of them.
United Students propose pool for Recreation Center
I've worked at the rec center for the past 2.5 years and I have not once heard about a pool. This is news to me. I'm not necessarily excited about it, but I have a friend on the swim team and she says that Robinson pool is well overdue for a renovation. I hear its past its warranty. Whatever happens, at least this group is taking a pro-active approach.
United Students propose pool for Recreation Center
congratulations... you are one of 26,000 students out of the loop.
United Students propose pool for Recreation Center
So let's vote for United Students so that they can propose something that is already planned on being done? Let's vote for United Students so that they can make huge promises that won't even see fruition until far after we've all graduated? Let's vote for United Students because they're supposedly working with the Athletics Department on this issue which essentially means that they have no control over this issue anyway?
This has got to be the most absurd, sensationalist elections platform I've ever heard outside of putting a Chipotle in the Underground.
So what if the Athletics Department says yes? Then United Students takes credit for the project (even if the Department completely ignores them) and can get back to business as normal and disappear for ten months until they need to get reelected again.
And if the Athletics Department says no? Then we've elected a bunch of lame-duck student politicians who will just get back to business as normal and disappear for ten months until they need to get reelected again.
Shame, UNITED STUDENTS, for assuming a "project" for which you have overstated your causal significance in the outcome. Shame, UNITED STUDENTS, for insulting the intelligence of the student body. You think people are going to vote for you because you make a sales pitch about a swimming pool for which you haven't even presented publicly the logistical requirements?
Sign in to comment
Or login with:
OpenID