Fwst Story/student Senate

FWST · September 25, 2008

To all: I'm posting the full version of today's story that is on-line and in the paper. Because of space limitations, there were various omissions that can be seen here. Please, know this is an exception to normal practice of posting links and not pasting article texts...TP

Students to have say on fees for new UNT facility

By TROY PHILLIPS

tphillips@star-telegram.com

DENTON -- The fate of partial funding for a new football stadium at North Texas now rests with its student body after Wednesday's 29-5 vote by the Student Senate to put the issue to a referendum.

Students will vote next month on a proposed $10 per-semester hour fee to help fund the athletic department and a planned $60 million stadium targeted for 2011. A new stadium would replace 52-year-old Fouts Field.

The measure passed easily despite more than 90 minutes of discussion and debate over wording of the referendum that will appear on UNT's fall ballot. UNT's fall elections are Oct. 13-17.

Senate member Joe McNulty felt the wording -- specifically that a stronger athletic program at UNT “leads to national exposure and increased recognition” -- was too biased on the Senate's part. Two proposed amendments to remove the wording were voted down.

“I didn't think the language was biased,” said Senate member Derrick Murray, one of the bill's co-authors. “Like one of my fellow Senators said, show us a successful athletic program no one's ever heard of.”

If passed by UNT students, the $10 per-hour athletic fee would not be collected until after the stadium's completion. The current student services fee of $14 per hour then would drop by $3, the amount now going to the athletic department from that fee pool.

“Why can't you fund it all [by] yourself?” former UNT kineseology adjunct instructor George Ebertin said to UNT athletic director Rick Villarreal, the two locked in off-and-on debate. “I don't have a problem with a new stadium. I have a problem with who's paying for it.”

Passionate and at times loud, Villarreal argued the bulk of funding for 11 athletic facilities built since 2002 came from the athletic department and/or donations. Villarreal also stressed Fouts Field's current worn condition rules out its long-term use.

“If we could live with this stadium, [asking for a new student athletic fee] would be the last thing I'd do after building 11 facilities,” Villarreal said. “This is not some arms race for us. For 50 years, [Fouts] was left to sit there and rot.”

After the students' portion, Villarreal said at least $40 million of the stadium's cost still must be raised through private or corporate means, as well as game or event revenue sources.

In the end, much debate ended up over the merit of a new stadium fee, rather than the issue at hand of letting students decide on a fee.

“Let the students decide,” Student Government Association president Jeff Kline told the Senate. “That's of the utmost importance. Whether you're for or against the fee, it should be the students' decision.”

Ebertin, who years ago as UNT's SGA president clashed with the athletic department over its funding from student fees, continued to debate Villarreal outside the Senate chamber.

“I know you guys need a new stadium,” Ebertin said, challenging Villarreal to have the athletic department charge fans for personal-seat licenses. “I just want to make sure you've explored every possible way to raise money.”

Answered Villarreal: “Why would you do that? Why would you tax your fans? You talk about excess in college athletics, one of the things we're doing today is driving the family out of college athletics. Families can't afford [PSL's] and buy their tickets.”

Troy Phillips, (817) 390-7760

Edited September 25, 2008 by FWST

untbowler · September 25, 2008

wonder if anyone will ever point out the "bargain" that students get at UNT compared to other schools who are not even D1A or even D1 in some instances.

This 40+ years of apathy has put the University into a deep hole to dig out of.

greenminer · September 25, 2008

Aside from the financial implications of having the students pay for the stadium, I think it's just as important to everyone - inside university and out - to see the students take pride and ownership in this.

flyeater · September 25, 2008

PSLs...what a brainiac. What does this guy think luxury suites are for?

FirefightnRick · September 25, 2008

Any idea what current connection Ebertin has with the university?

Rick

Edited September 25, 2008 by FirefightnRick

UNTflyer · September 25, 2008

Any idea what current connection Ebertin has with the university?
Rick

He's a former adjunct professor. Rumor has it that UNT fired him.

Vendetta?

Edited September 25, 2008 by UNTflyer

September 25, 2008

wonder if anyone will ever point out the "bargain" that students get at UNT compared to other schools who are not even D1A or even D1 in some instances.
This 40+ years of apathy has put the University into a deep hole to dig out of.

I don't think so and I don't know if that would be appropriate for the SGA to point out. However, if someone who was for the stadium could afford an ad in the NT Daily, I think that cost comparisons to other Texas universities (including fees) would be appropriate. In addition, I believe that it should be pointed out some of the athletic fees at Texas universities. I think that would push me over the line if I were indecisive. When Texas State, UTSA, and West Texas A&M have approved a fee that is double what the SGA is proposing, with UTA and Lamar having larger fees as well, I wouldn't stand for it.

flyeater · September 25, 2008

Looks like things between RV and this Ebertin guy got a little heated. Ironic, it seems, that as a kineseology prof at UNT he taught the same football players (not literally) and athletes that he's now in a sense working against. Maybe he's not against a stadium per se, but attempting to hinder an honest & fair effort to build it is puzzling on his part.

Man, this thing's gettin' a lot of media coverage now. Wonder what's next? Someone call Jub.

Censored by Laurie · September 25, 2008

Looks like things between RV and this Ebertin guy got a little heated. Ironic, it seems, that as a kineseology prof at UNT he taught the same football players (not literally) and athletes that he's now in a sense working against. Maybe he's not against a stadium per se, but attempting to hinder an honest & fair effort to build it is puzzling on his part.
Man, this thing's gettin' a lot of media coverage now. Wonder what's next? Someone call Jub.

Not literally taught...or not literally the same players?

Ohh...both are probably true.

flyeater · September 25, 2008

Not literally taught...or not literally the same players?
Ohh...both are probably true.

I meant not literally those players/athletes back then, but players/athletes in general.

Ibleedgreen · September 26, 2008

I want the new stadium, too, but when he says things like, "For 50 years, Fouts was left to sit there and rot,” I think he's being disrespectful to Hayden Fry who made a great many improvements to Fouts some 30(?) years ago.

flyeater · September 26, 2008

I want the new stadium, too, but when he says things like, "For 50 years, Fouts was left to sit there and rot,” I think he's being disrespectful to Hayden Fry who made a great many improvements to Fouts some 30(?) years ago.

What improvements? Really, I'm unaware of any, but maybe there were. I don't think RV meant anything other than to say Fouts is beyond point of no return.