|
Student
rec. center not worth the cost
In
a misguided effort to improve the lives
of students attending Cal State Long Beach,
Associated Students, Inc. has adopted as
one of its strategic goals the construction
of a multi-million dollar recreation facility
here on campus.
To
that end, ASI has invited the facility planners
and project managers Brailsford & Dunleavy
to conduct preliminary research to determine
what sort of facility would best suit students
at the university. Originally conceived
in 2002, planning for the proposed recreational
facility was put on hold due to the state
budget crisis and the subsequent cutbacks
in spending on higher education.
Fast-forward
three years and the government of California
is still looking for ways to eliminate the
$8 billion budget deficit. Students had
to shoulder the burden of tuition increases
and higher priced parking permits, along
with other fee hikes. Departmental budgets
have also been cut, even as CSULB admits
an ever growing number of students each
year.
It
is the height of fiscal irresponsibility
for our student senate to pursue a costly
recreational facility in the midst of rising
fees and steep budget cuts. It's hard to
estimate the potential cost of building
a recreation center on campus, but you can
count on additional fees each semester to
finance such an undertaking.
Students
at CSULB can take advantage of the existing
facilities at the school which include basketball
and tennis courts, a weight room and the
ample open space that sets our school apart
from other universities in the CSU system.
A
membership at Frogs gym on campus can be
obtained for around $35 a month, and semester
rates are available. Around the city, there
are a number of gyms and fitness centers
to serve the recreational needs of students.
These options aren't free, but neither is
the proposed recreation center. The major
difference is that every student will have
to pay the extra cost of a new fitness center
whether they choose to use it or not.
Proponents
of the recreation center insist that building
a new facility will not mean additional
cutbacks in academics. Spending on a new
gym, however, will limit the extent to which
additional funds for academics can be pursued.
For example, new funds for the purchase
of library books will be constrained if
a fitness center is constructed. Our library
could stand to improve a great deal. There
are countless other ways to spend that money.
CSULB is an academic institution, and academic
initiatives should be the pursued before
all others.
It
seems as though ASI didn't anticipate any
opposition from the student body in their
pursuit of a recreation center on campus.
The firm they hired to conduct "unbiased"
focus groups on the idea specializes in
moving recreational facilities "from
concept to concrete."
Brailsford
& Dunleavy were brought in from Washington
D.C. to go forward with planning for the
recreation center. The insanity has to stop.
We cannot pursue a multi-million dollar
facility that will raise student fees in
the midst of fee hikes and budget cuts.
I urge the student senate to remove the
proposed recreation center from its list
of strategic goals for this year.
Sterling
Harris is a history major at CSULB.
|
