D-rc Article On Stadium (sunday Paper)

[SUMG]

http://www.dentonrc.com/sharedcontent/dws/...03.c0b0306.html

[Guest GrayEagleOne]

Assuming Vito quoted her correctly (and I have little doubt that he did) I couldn't be more disappointed at Gretchen Bataille's actions. He quotes her as saying that neither she or Rick would ever tell students what they need to do, Yes, Dr. Bataille, you do tell students what the university needs....it's called LEADERSHIP!!!

When I left last night, I was feeling pretty good about how things were going. Now I read from the Record-Chronicle's and Star-Telegrams's interviews and I am totally flattened. Unless a separate athletic fee is necessary to issue bonds for the stadium, we don't need an athletic fee. If she were misquoted on the athletic fee then I apologize but Troy Phillips has usually gotten it right.

I will be writing her an e-mail voicing my disappointment with her posture on the student fee INCREASE. Hopefully, she was merely misunderstood. She does need to influence the student body to accept an item that has been in the Master Plan for about ten years that I'm aware of. Time is of the essence if we ever have any hopes of moving forward. Without leadership, we will forever be stuck in place.

I encourage others to also write a courteous but firm denouncement of her lack of leadership.

[Huff]

I agree 100 per cent with GreyEagleOne's comments. The president of the university and the athletic director should make a decision about what is needed then work like crazy to get that done. That includes doing their dead level best to see that the student election (when held) comes out the right way for the university's best interests. To do otherwise is just stupid.

Now, having said that, our Athletic Director finds himself in a tough spot. He has to do as he is told by the president of the university even if he strongly disagrees with her instructions. This is similar to how a Superintendent of Schools finds himself in a school bond election. It is illegal for a Superintendent to try to convince people to vote for a bond package. He can only give information. That is where the membership of this board comes in. Superintendents will often find a group of people in the community that believe that a bond package needs to be passed and contact them. It is legal for a group of citizens to organize and work toward a bond election passing. That might be what the leadership of this board needs to do. Some of our more active members need to contact Rick V and start to get organized. It is possible to provide students with information that would cause them to vote for a funding package that would pay for a new stadium. It is legal for people not employed by the university to actually encourage the students to vote FOR the issue. It won't be easy, but it can be done. Anyone interested ?????

[UNTflyer]

It is legal for people not employed by the university to actually encourage the students to vote FOR the issue. It won't be easy, but it can be done. Anyone interested ?????

Careful, there... the student Constitution states that "The University and all parties/organizations may spend up to $1,000 campaigning in regard to a student referendum."

This is ambiguous, and if someone really has an axe to grind then they can call the student referendum into question and the Student Supreme Court can strike it down.

[emmitt01]

I think Dr. Bataille is doing two things...

1)By forcing this fee to be sent to the legislature there is a built in "out". Should it fail then the entire administration can throw up their hands and exclaim "Hey, we tried but those darned legislators foiled us...again."

2)Being politically savvy in the eyes of the apathetic masses at NT (be they students or, perhaps more importantly, faculty). Rather than taking a hard-line approach, which she should be doing to improve all facets of the university, she is putting this entirely in the hands of students and faculty to debate it out and can therefore play the "passive observer" role regardless of how it shakes out. If it passes then she is the President who resided over the dawning of a new athletic age at NT. If it fails, well then she catches no stray bullets from the faculty senate because she took a real leadership role.

Let's make no mistake ladies and gents. The status quo is what keeps many, many at our fine university fat and happy.

Edited August 3, 2008 by emmitt01

[UNTflyer]

Good point Emmitt. When it's your ass on the line, it's either going to get kissed or kicked. She may just be playing it cool, but in the end the decision is in the hands of the students. I will certainly push for a simple increase in the current student service fee rather than a separate athletics fee. I think it has the best chance for success.

IF it does go the way of a dedicated athletics fee, we need to get Senator Jane Nelson to champion the bill. She is experienced, she's a UNT alum, and she has political clout in Austin. I'm sure there are quite a few people who owe her big favors.

[NT80]

Good point Emmitt. When it's your ass on the line, it's either going to get kissed or kicked. She may just be playing it cool, but in the end the decision is in the hands of the students. I will certainly push for a simple increase in the current student service fee rather than a separate athletics fee. I think it has the best chance for success.

IF it does go the way of a dedicated athletics fee, we need to get Senator Jane Nelson to champion the bill. She is experienced, she's a UNT alum, and she has political clout in Austin. I'm sure there are quite a few people who owe her big favors.

I believe part of the student's who voted against the fees last time felt it was being forced on them by the administration. This may be a different way to get it done. Let it be student suggested and then student passed. I do not know the current makeup of the student body or student leadership but I will hope for the best and expect the worst.

[Huff]

I am sure that UNTflier is right....we should just stay out of this important election and let our campus leaders handle it. I mean, that has worked so well in the past that we will all be confident in the outcome of that election, won't we? I wonder what would happen if a group of folks known as Friends of Football took out ads in the North Texas newspaper giving the advantages of building a new football stadium? I wonder what would happen if this same group bought air time on KNTU?.....or printed fliers to be posted on off campus locations where students gather? .....or any of several other activities that might cause students to see the benefit of a new football stadium? It is probably a bad idea. That's okay, I really do not mind seeing games at Fouts Field. I've been doing it since I enrolled there in 1960. I can make it a few more years.

[Mad Hatter]

I think that over the next few years, there should be a student vote at least once a semster to get the fee increase passed. The people who WANT the stadium know that it's in their best interest, long term, to vote for it. The folks that support it also have a very active alumni group that will support them to that end. The folks that oppose it will lose interst the 3rd or fourth time, and will have a hard time sustaining the level of opposition. Plus the oppostion groups won't have the alumni backing/pushing that the support group will have.

[UNTflyer]

Huff, sarcasm aside, there are rules to student referendum to keep outside parties from influencing the vote. Your suggestion would be like a relative, say a rich uncle, skywriting or running newspaper ads for a candidate for student body president.

Let the Senate and President do their job, and leave the vote to the students. After all, they will be the people paying for it. Alumni would do better to spend the money on trying to raise MGC donations for the stadium.

[untphd]

Huff, sarcasm aside, there are rules to student referendum to keep outside parties from influencing the vote. Your suggestion would be like a relative, say a rich uncle, skywriting or running newspaper ads for a candidate for student body president.

Let the Senate and President do their job, and leave the vote to the students. After all, they will be the people paying for it. Alumni would do better to spend the money on trying to raise MGC donations for the stadium.

I tend to agree with Huff and his suggestion has nothing to do with ads for a student president.

[ADLER]

Assuming Vito quoted her correctly (and I have little doubt that he did) I couldn't be more disappointed at Gretchen Bataille's actions. He quotes her as saying that neither she or Rick would ever tell students what they need to do, Yes, Dr. Bataille, you do tell students what the university needs....it's called LEADERSHIP!!!

Huff Posted Today, 04:27 PM

The president of the university and the athletic director should make a decision about what is needed then work like crazy to get that done. That includes doing their dead level best to see that the student election (when held) comes out the right way for the university's best interests. To do otherwise is just stupid.

emmitt01 Posted Today, 04:58 PM

Rather than taking a hard-line approach, which she should be doing to improve all facets of the university, she is putting this entirely in the hands of students and faculty to debate it out and can therefore play the "passive observer" role regardless of how it shakes out. If it passes then she is the President who resided over the dawning of a new athletic age at NT. If it fails, well then she catches no stray bullets from the faculty senate because she took a real leadership role.

Let's make no mistake ladies and gents. The status quo is what keeps many, many at our fine university fat and happy.

Wow, where is the leadership for the university when it's needed. How come nobody has posted about this? I hate to say "I told ya' so", but.......

Look, here's the cold hard fact. Even if the student fee is increased by a minimal amount during the first 4 years after the stadium is completed (just enough to partially cover the cost of bonding the stadium) it could be the proverbial nail in the coffin for North Texas athletics. This will be the first increase since the minimal 2002 emergency refendum because underfunded North Texas couldn't even comply with NCAA Title IX restrictions. Increasing enough to only cover the bond guarantees that all athletics will be held to those same underfunded 2002 levels though 2014. If you think North Texas has had limited success lately....

There needs to be a long term plan for athletic excellence, there needs to be a commitment to match the student investment being made at other schools that are competing for the same goal (successful mid-major status 'CUSA membership'), and there needs to be leadership from campus 'leaders' to help the university reach it's potential.

Once again, I hate to say "I told ya' so", but.......

[UNTflyer]

Once again, I hate to say "I told ya' so", but.......

[UNTFan23]

Wow, where is the leadership for the university when it's needed. How come nobody has posted about this? I hate to say "I told ya' so", but.......

Look, here's the cold hard fact. Even if the student fee is increased by a minimal amount during the first 4 years after the stadium is completed (just enough to partially cover the cost of bonding the stadium) it could be the proverbial nail in the coffin for North Texas athletics. This will be the first increase since the minimal 2002 emergency refendum because underfunded North Texas couldn't even comply with NCAA Title IX restrictions. Increasing enough to only cover the bond guarantees that all athletics will be held to those same underfunded 2002 levels though 2014. If you think North Texas has had limited success lately....

There needs to be a long term plan for athletic excellence, there needs to be a commitment to match the student investment being made at other schools that are competing for the same goal (successful mid-major status 'CUSA membership'), and there needs to be leadership from campus 'leaders' to help the university reach it's potential.

Once again, I hate to say "I told ya' so", but.......

You missed something:

There also needs to be a commitment from the fan base and alumni.

I giggle like a little girl every time I see an alum calling to raise the student fee to the max and not say they're willing to step up to plate and do what it takes to help elevate this program. When we open the new stadium, I hope to no longer see the days of $100 season tickets for the 50 yard line. To me this screams of small time program. That section should be a minimum $200 for 5 games. Depending on the layout of the new stadium, there shouldn't be a season ticket package if there is a lower bowl section that is below $150 for 5 home games.

[UNTflyer]

Hear, hear!

I ask you Adler, are you willing to match the fee increase dollar for dollar? Will you show unity with the students who already pays thousands of dollars a year? You ask these students to pay $600 a year for athletics and they aren't even guaranteed a seat at the game.

Edited August 4, 2008 by UNTflyer

[emmitt01]

Hear, hear!

I ask you Adler, are you willing to match the fee increase dollar for dollar? Will you show unity with the students who already pays thousands of dollars a year? You ask these students to pay $600 a year for athletics and they aren't even guaranteed a seat at the game.

First off, you're throwing down a hollow gauntlet. I think I can speak for Adler when I say that paying "$600 a year" is something that he is not only willing to do...but already does. If $600 is what each student is being asked to do then I already have them beat by a couple hundred bucks and haven't even begun to budget for tailgating, travel to away games, etc. Let's not forget, also, that you're calling to task a guy who (along with several others on this board) used to feed several hundred students a game out of his own pocket just to get them out there to tailgate. Adler didn't have to do that, he wanted to.

So, no, the question isn't whether or not the alums are willing to put their money where their mouth is...we've been doing it for years! Now let's see if our administration is willing to make everybody involved in NT athletics, students included, "pony up."

Edited August 4, 2008 by emmitt01

[UNTflyer]

Fair enough.

I will say that there is a lot of work going on behind the scenes, and this continued calling out of the administration, the SGA, and students is not productive. We have linked to GoMeanGreen.com from the Facebook page, and these negative posts and demands for a $14/hr increase may hurt our chances to get the referendum passed and the stadium built. I've already received a couple emails on Facebook from students asking if we are secretly planning to raise the fee to the state maximum. The last thing we need is some anti-stadium group of students to get the wrong information out there about the fee increase.

Adler, I think you have made it clear how you feel about this issue. I respectfully ask that you take it to the private part of the board.

[Guest Aquila_Viridis]

The problem with leaving big decisions about the university's future to the students is that, if they are like me when I was a student, they really don't have much of a clue about what is going on. I know now many of you are saying I don't have a clue now either; well just imagine what it was like back then!

[NT80]

The problem with leaving big decisions about the university's future to the students is that, if they are like me when I was a student, they really don't have much of a clue about what is going on.

I have a hard time putting the fate of funding my college football program into student's hands who may have been at UNT for all of 4 weeks. How about if they will commit to support athletics for 40 years after they graduate then I'll let them vote?

[ADLER]

I have a hard time putting the fate of funding my college football program into student's hands who may have been at UNT for all of 4 weeks. How about if they will commit to support athletics for 40 years after they graduate then I'll let them vote?

I find it funny that I am painted as the bad guy for not only protecting the best interest of the students, but for also suggesting the method for creating and maintaining a successsful athletics program which will significantly raise the value of the degree that those students receive.

[untphd]

Hear, hear!

I ask you Adler, are you willing to match the fee increase dollar for dollar? Will you show unity with the students who already pays thousands of dollars a year? You ask these students to pay $600 a year for athletics and they aren't even guaranteed a seat at the game.

I pay 1,000 a year and I am not given a seat, I buy season tickets. If you do not understand the situation by now, I doubt you ever will.

[Green to the Bone]

First off, you're throwing down a hollow gauntlet.

Actually, all gauntlets are hollow.

[Quoner]

Fair enough.

I will say that there is a lot of work going on behind the scenes, and this continued calling out of the administration, the SGA, and students is not productive. We have linked to GoMeanGreen.com from the Facebook page, and these negative posts and demands for a $14/hr increase may hurt our chances to get the referendum passed and the stadium built. I've already received a couple emails on Facebook from students asking if we are secretly planning to raise the fee to the state maximum. The last thing we need is some anti-stadium group of students to get the wrong information out there about the fee increase.

Adler, I think you have made it clear how you feel about this issue. I respectfully ask that you take it to the private part of the board.

If you are so concerned about misinformation, why are you linking to a message board?

Unless they make you a mod, I doubt your effort to go all Guliani on the posts here are not going to pay off.

[UNTflyer]

If you are so concerned about misinformation, why are you linking to a message board?

Unless they make you a mod, I doubt your effort to go all Guliani on the posts here are not going to pay off.

I linked over here so they could hear the Rick V podcast.

And Adler, I just don't see how you can push for the state maximum and claim you are looking out for the students' best interest. You are also throwing in a lot of hyperbole, implying that if they DON'T maximize the fee, that we will end up in the Southland conference, which is absurd.

I certainly don't want to suppress opinion, but you also need to be smart about this. We're going into a very delicate phase of this project. We need unity, not division.

[flyeater]

Assuming Vito quoted her correctly (and I have little doubt that he did) I couldn't be more disappointed at Gretchen Bataille's actions. He quotes her as saying that neither she or Rick would ever tell students what they need to do, Yes, Dr. Bataille, you do tell students what the university needs....it's called LEADERSHIP!!!

When I left last night, I was feeling pretty good about how things were going. Now I read from the Record-Chronicle's and Star-Telegrams's interviews and I am totally flattened. Unless a separate athletic fee is necessary to issue bonds for the stadium, we don't need an athletic fee. If she were misquoted on the athletic fee then I apologize but Troy Phillips has usually gotten it right.

I will be writing her an e-mail voicing my disappointment with her posture on the student fee INCREASE. Hopefully, she was merely misunderstood. She does need to influence the student body to accept an item that has been in the Master Plan for about ten years that I'm aware of. Time is of the essence if we ever have any hopes of moving forward. Without leadership, we will forever be stuck in place.

I encourage others to also write a courteous but firm denouncement of her lack of leadership.

Lack of leadership? I didn't necessarily get that. She was pretty clear that piggybacking on the student services fee to run at athdept. is penny-ante crap, and that a new athletic's fee was the way to go, not only to help fund a stadium but to budget for athletics yearly. I don't think she's just ready to sit back and watch the students decide our fate in athletics for the next 25 years; there's too much at stake for her legacy as UNT prez. Read again, and she's clear about what she wants and her vision, and now it's up to her to impart that on the student body. Give her a chance to do so.

I think in Vito's deal, she was just truthful about the process, which says she nor other officials can't "institute" a fee without giving the students a voice in the process. I'm sure she was asked something to the effect of, "So, are you considering raising fees to pay for the stadium?" She can't just "raise" the fee herself in some arbitrary, sweeping act. Like it or not, we need a dedicated athletics fee, because it's what every sensible athletic department in the universe uses. You're wrong about the need not being there. Just because hiking the student-services fee is the perceived easiest route to bypassing the students doesn't make it best in the long run. An athletics fee will be more attractive to the private and/or corporate entities needed to come on later or potential suite buyers. I don't know much about bonding a stadium, but a permanent athletics fee strikes me as way more forward-thinking as a means to an end. It's time to do it a different way, and like it or not, the students will have a say. Yeah, it bugs me, but if it passes, we're golden.