ISU Rec upgrades...

[SplitIdentity]

Well, now that you are "The Man" in the all-powerful GSB, vote to defund the GSB, and all the clubs and special interest groups some of those fees support.

There's a difference.

1 - the GSB didn't have a say in this.

2 - They spent thousands of dollars on advertising to get this thing passed

3 - here are some interesting articles on why the entire thing was fishy:

Critics call for new vote on ISU rec center - News

Director had early access to rec votes - News

Note, they spent nearly $14,500 on marketing alone for this project. Add in the fact that they were able to revise their marketing strategies as the votes came in, and this entire voting thing was virtually rigged.

Do a revote, and it fails by a landslide.

 

[clone2011]

There's a difference.

1 - the GSB didn't have a say in this.

Other than, you know, voting for it.

2 - They spent thousands of dollars on advertising to get this thing passed

Yep. They used department funds to promote something that would better their department. What a shocker.

3 - here are some interesting articles on why the entire thing was fishy:

Critics call for new vote on ISU rec center - News

Director had early access to rec votes - News

I don't really know what to think about the early access. Although an article I read mentioned that they could NOT alter the votes, and that anytime there is an online campus vote the people running it have access to results.

Note, they spent nearly $14,500 on marketing alone for this project. Add in the fact that they were able to revise their marketing strategies as the votes came in, and this entire voting thing was virtually rigged.

Do a revote, and it fails by a landslide.

As somebody with TWO roommates who work at the rec, let me fill you in. They had a staff meeting the week before the vote--they were given more info on what the proposed renovations were so they could accurately answer questions, and something about picking up their t-shirts. The student employees didn't have any sort of meeting during the vote where they were informed of the status of votes. They didn't find out until everyone else did.

I was NEVER told to "Vote Yes"--I was asked to vote, but never to vote yes. I was informed of all the information available, and even read and listened to those who were opposed to the renovations.

Show me ONE promotional piece that says "Vote Yes". You can't. There aren't any. There are items out there that describe what the new renovations will be, facts about the fee increase, etc. Nothing saying "Vote Yes". Look at the t-shirts or water bottles. They say "VOTE" not "Vote Yes".

If the proposal had not passed, would any of this be an issue? No. The nay-sayers wouldn't care, they would just celebrate their victory.

 

[SplitIdentity]

Other than, you know, voting for it.



Yep. They used department funds to promote something that would better their department. What a shocker.



I don't really know what to think about the early access. Although an article I read mentioned that they could NOT alter the votes, and that anytime there is an online campus vote the people running it have access to results.



As somebody with TWO roommates who work at the rec, let me fill you in. They had a staff meeting the week before the vote--they were given more info on what the proposed renovations were so they could accurately answer questions, and something about picking up their t-shirts. The student employees didn't have any sort of meeting during the vote where they were informed of the status of votes. They didn't find out until everyone else did.

I was NEVER told to "Vote Yes"--I was asked to vote, but never to vote yes. I was informed of all the information available, and even read and listened to those who were opposed to the renovations.

Show me ONE promotional piece that says "Vote Yes". You can't. There aren't any. There are items out there that describe what the new renovations will be, facts about the fee increase, etc. Nothing saying "Vote Yes". Look at the t-shirts or water bottles. They say "VOTE" not "Vote Yes".

If the proposal had not passed, would any of this be an issue? No. The nay-sayers wouldn't care, they would just celebrate their victory.

That's all fine and dandy. However, the problem still stands that they spent $14,000 on marketing, and had early access to the votes to change their marketing plans. Whether or not they did is yet to be seen.

The point is, opposition did not get $14,000 to spend in marketing against the measure. And for a $53 million project that involves student funds, I'd expect both sides to be represented equally. And they were not.

I'm all for rec center upgrades. That's cool - they're old. However, given the fact that all of the money is coming out of student fees, I would have liked to see more information made more easily available, rather than the proponents receive most of the spotlight.

 

[SplitIdentity]

Oh, and I'm not talking about altering votes, I'm talking about altering marketing techniques to get the voting outcome they want.

 

[clone2011]

Altering marketing techniques?

They presented the FACTS of the proposed renovations. No group that is promoting something is going to go out of their way to point out the negatives. I visited the rec every day of the vote. Each time I swiped in I was asked if I'd voted yet, nothing less nothing more, as the vote went on. I didn't see any changes in banners or in the type of freebies given away.

The "opposition" deserved money to support their case? You mean the Facebook group that was thrown together? Or is there some other, more organized group out there?

Signs were up in the rec since winter break, and renovations have been mentioned on campus ever since that survey done a few years ago. People knew it was coming.

I still don't understand why everyone complains about the fee increase when they WON'T be paying for it unless they get to use it. Like someone else posted earlier, you can drop $20 on a dinner out on the town. Skip one steak meal at Legend's, and you'll have saved the equivalent of your rec fee. Your body will thank you anyway.

 

[jaretac]

I'm a student at Iowa State. I'm receiving NO financial help from any of my family and it irritates me that year after year they come up with new ways to nickle and dime me- and it's not even helping my education. If you want a workout, do what I do and use the sidewalk, I've never used the Rec and I run 3+ miles everyday. I'm not saying that we should have no recreation facilities, but I don't see why a new Rec building or renovating Beyer Hall is needed worse than renovating buildings like East and Physics that desperately need help.

I'm usually all for progress, but I don't want my tuition to increase just for a luxury that we don't need. Oh, did you know that summer school students in the 20's had to sleep in tents. It makes you feel a bit better about what we have.

 

[ajk4st8]

I guess I dont understand the concept of 'altering marketing techniques'.

Anyone care to explain?

 

[Bader]

I'm a student at Iowa State. I'm receiving NO financial help from any of my family and it irritates me that year after year they come up with new ways to nickle and dime me- and it's not even helping my education. If you want a workout, do what I do and use the sidewalk, I've never used the Rec and I run 3+ miles everyday. I'm not saying that we should have no recreation facilities, but I don't see why a new Rec building or renovating Beyer Hall is needed worse than renovating buildings like East and Physics that desperately need help.

I'm usually all for progress, but I don't want my tuition to increase just for a luxury that we don't need. Oh, did you know that summer school students in the 20's had to sleep in tents. It makes you feel a bit better about what we have.

That's fine that you don't use it, however do not try and use the argument "I don't need this and neither and do you".

And you're really kidding yourself if you don't think these upgrades have an impact on students choosing whether or not they wish to attend the university. No, I don't think someone won't choose ISU because the rec facilities are lacking, however there are high schoolers who would choose ISU over another school with similar academic situations because we have a brand new building addition on one of our rec centers.

 

[IOWASTATE]

On a side note.... Please do not call it "The Lied", either just call it a) Lied, or b) The Rec.

Carry on

 

[SplitIdentity]

Altering marketing techniques?

They presented the FACTS of the proposed renovations. No group that is promoting something is going to go out of their way to point out the negatives. I visited the rec every day of the vote. Each time I swiped in I was asked if I'd voted yet, nothing less nothing more, as the vote went on. I didn't see any changes in banners or in the type of freebies given away.

The "opposition" deserved money to support their case? You mean the Facebook group that was thrown together? Or is there some other, more organized group out there?

Signs were up in the rec since winter break, and renovations have been mentioned on campus ever since that survey done a few years ago. People knew it was coming.

I still don't understand why everyone complains about the fee increase when they WON'T be paying for it unless they get to use it. Like someone else posted earlier, you can drop $20 on a dinner out on the town. Skip one steak meal at Legend's, and you'll have saved the equivalent of your rec fee. Your body will thank you anyway.

This is exactly my point. No other group, organization, or marketing team presented any reasons as why somebody should vote no. All we heard was why this renovations are a positive, how they can help, yada yada yada. We get it. It'll be cool to have.

However, for people like me (and the poster I'm about to respond to), there are a lot of people who do not use the Rec centers. I walk, bike, and do other things to keep myself healthy. I don't want to have to cut back on one steak dinner at Legends to pay for everybody else to have a better time playing pick up games.

There are much better things that this $53 million could be going to. For example: Helser. Anybody live there? I walked through it the other day and felt like I needed to get a tetanus shot. The dorms are over-crowded, and the original plans to abandon and tear down Helser have been abandoned due to the fact that each year we admit more and more students.

How about much needed renovations to other buildings on campus? Gilman has seen better days, the Armory is a complete dump, Davidson is horrible, etc...

But instead, we put the money towards this.

I'm a student at Iowa State. I'm receiving NO financial help from any of my family and it irritates me that year after year they come up with new ways to nickle and dime me- and it's not even helping my education. If you want a workout, do what I do and use the sidewalk, I've never used the Rec and I run 3+ miles everyday. I'm not saying that we should have no recreation facilities, but I don't see why a new Rec building or renovating Beyer Hall is needed worse than renovating buildings like East and Physics that desperately need help.

I'm usually all for progress, but I don't want my tuition to increase just for a luxury that we don't need. Oh, did you know that summer school students in the 20's had to sleep in tents. It makes you feel a bit better about what we have.

1st of all - the tents would be fun.

2nd of all - I agree with everything you said. There are other buildings that need the help much more than activity centers.

That's fine that you don't use it, however do not try and use the argument "I don't need this and neither and do you".

And you're really kidding yourself if you don't think these upgrades have an impact on students choosing whether or not they wish to attend the university. No, I don't think someone won't choose ISU because the rec facilities are lacking, however there are high schoolers who would choose ISU over another school with similar academic situations because we have a brand new building addition on one of our rec centers.

There are far more students who would choose ISU over other schools based on the shape that the classrooms and educational buildings are in rather than what the shape the rec centers are in.

It's nice to have those things, but seriously, there are so many more things that I'd rather see my fees increased for.

 

[HiltonMagic]

This is exactly my point. No other group, organization, or marketing team presented any reasons as why somebody should vote no. All we heard was why this renovations are a positive, how they can help, yada yada yada. We get it. It'll be cool to have.

However, for people like me (and the poster I'm about to respond to), there are a lot of people who do not use the Rec centers. I walk, bike, and do other things to keep myself healthy. I don't want to have to cut back on one steak dinner at Legends to pay for everybody else to have a better time playing pick up games.

There are much better things that this $53 million could be going to. For example: Helser. Anybody live there? I walked through it the other day and felt like I needed to get a tetanus shot. The dorms are over-crowded, and the original plans to abandon and tear down Helser have been abandoned due to the fact that each year we admit more and more students.

How about much needed renovations to other buildings on campus? Gilman has seen better days, the Armory is a complete dump, Davidson is horrible, etc...

But instead, we put the money towards this.



1st of all - the tents would be fun.

2nd of all - I agree with everything you said. There are other buildings that need the help much more than activity centers.




There are far more students who would choose ISU over other schools based on the shape that the classrooms and educational buildings are in rather than what the shape the rec centers are in.

It's nice to have those things, but seriously, there are so many more things that I'd rather see my fees increased for.

If you feel/felt so strongly against it, why didn't YOU form some sort of opposition, instead of complaining that no one else did??

 

[jaretac]

The fact is you can get your exercise a different way which, by definition, makes these improvement a luxury.

Further, I don't really care if it brings in more students. If this is such a selling point for the University than why don't the alumni get involved and help pay for it. What irritates me the most, is not the extra $20 or $100 a semester, it's that this is another item on the long list of fees that make attending ISU so expensive. And your only kidding yourself if you don't think that cost of tuition and fees has a impact on where someone attends college.

 

[SplitIdentity]

If you feel/felt so strongly against it, why didn't YOU form some sort of opposition, instead of complaining that no one else did??

This is a lame argument. Sorry to sound like a douche, but it is. Just because somebody feels strongly about something doesn't mean they need to go out and change the world.

I'm just saying I would have liked a little less bias in the marketing. The university should have provided us with the information publicly, rather than supporting the proponents 100% and forgetting about the opponents.

The fact is you can get your exercise a different way which, by definition, makes these improvement a luxury.

Further, I don't really care if it brings in more students. If this is such a selling point for the University than why don't the alumni get involved and help pay for it. What irritates me the most, is not the extra $20 or $100 a semester, it's that this is another item on the long list of fees that make attending ISU so expensive. And your only kidding yourself if you don't think that cost of tuition and fees has a impact on where someone attends college.

+ rep. Couldn't agree more.

The fact of the matter is, there are already so many other things we're being charged for. I don't want to be charged for more luxeries, because in all likelihood, the renovations mentioned earlier will be something that the University feels is necessary, and will therefore add those to our fees.

Pretty soon, if we're not careful, ISU could be just as expensive as a private school.

 

[superfan]

This is exactly my point. No other group, organization, or marketing team presented any reasons as why somebody should vote no. All we heard was why this renovations are a positive, how they can help, yada yada yada. We get it. It'll be cool to have.

So where were the people telling everyone to vote yes? All the media I saw simply said, "Vote." No bias one way or the other. If there were so many people so vehemently opposed to the renovation, why didn't they organize and put out their own publicity? Why wasn't it voted down by a landslide? Voter apathy is still voter apathy.

There are much better things that this $53 million could be going to. For example: Helser. Anybody live there? I walked through it the other day and felt like I needed to get a tetanus shot. The dorms are over-crowded, and the original plans to abandon and tear down Helser have been abandoned due to the fact that each year we admit more and more students.

How about much needed renovations to other buildings on campus? Gilman has seen better days, the Armory is a complete dump, Davidson is horrible, etc...

But instead, we put the money towards this.

Wait, so it's not OK to spend money on something that might not affect you, but you have no problem raising tuition for projects you deem acceptable? I never lived in Helser (although I did spend around 4 years in Friley), why should my tuition go up? Why should everybody who lives off-campus pay for Helser? I haven't been in Gilman since Chem 167 in Fall of '03. Why should I pay for its renovation instead of the Chemistry department? I've never used the Armory, and I don't even know where Davidson is. Why should I pay to help those buildings out?

Honestly, I probably would vote yes for improvements to all those buildings, as well. The point is you can make the same kind of argument you're making about the Rec for anything else. It just gets back to how selfish we as Americans have become. "It won't affect me, so why should I care?" Same reason I think JP has to scratch and claw to get people to donate to the athletics department.

 

[superfan]

This is a lame argument. Sorry to sound like a douche, but it is. Just because somebody feels strongly about something doesn't mean they need to go out and change the world.

So we all should just wait for other people to take care of our problems for us? That reeks of laziness to me...

 

[SplitIdentity]

So where were the people telling everyone to vote yes? All the media I saw simply said, "Vote." No bias one way or the other. If there were so many people so vehemently opposed to the renovation, why didn't they organize and put out their own publicity? Why wasn't it voted down by a landslide? Voter apathy is still voter apathy.



Wait, so it's not OK to spend money on something that might not affect you, but you have no problem raising tuition for projects you deem acceptable? I never lived in Helser (although I did spend around 4 years in Friley), why should my tuition go up? Why should everybody who lives off-campus pay for Helser? I haven't been in Gilman since Chem 167 in Fall of '03. Why should I pay for its renovation instead of the Chemistry department? I've never used the Armory, and I don't even know where Davidson is. Why should I pay to help those buildings out?

Honestly, I probably would vote yes for improvements to all those buildings, as well. The point is you can make the same kind of argument you're making about the Rec for anything else. It just gets back to how selfish we as Americans have become. "It won't affect me, so why should I care?" Same reason I think JP has to scratch and claw to get people to donate to the athletics department.

Apples and oranges.

People live in Helser, and a lot of incoming Freshman get placed in there. People don't live in the Rec, and nobody is forced to go there. It's a luxery.

Academic buildings and residence halls should always come before activity centers. This is an educational institution, not a recreational institution with education on the side.

And these aren't projects that I deem acceptable. They benefit the entire student body far more than rec center renovations ever will.

 

[SplitIdentity]

So we all should just wait for other people to take care of our problems for us? That reeks of laziness to me...

No. The university should have presented both sides.

I know, I know. They didn't say "Vote yes". Instead, they listed the positives of the renovations, and after listing all the positives, encouraged people to vote.

I did not see anywhere that student fees were one of the main bullet points, or the fact that other buildings are in worse shape, or the fact that these renovations are going to be finished several years down the road when it doesn't even affect half the students currently attending here.

 

[Benny34]

There are much better things that this $53 million could be going to. For example: Helser. Anybody live there? I walked through it the other day and felt like I needed to get a tetanus shot. The dorms are over-crowded, and the original plans to abandon and tear down Helser have been abandoned due to the fact that each year we admit more and more students.

How about much needed renovations to other buildings on campus? Gilman has seen better days, the Armory is a complete dump, Davidson is horrible, etc...

You could easily add State gym to this list and while your at it throw in Lied with the A/C addition...Like the guy before me I would vote Yes to any of these.

 

[jaretac]

Wait, so it's not OK to spend money on something that might not affect you, but you have no problem raising tuition for projects you deem acceptable? I never lived in Helser (although I did spend around 4 years in Friley), why should my tuition go up? Why should everybody who lives off-campus pay for Helser? I haven't been in Gilman since Chem 167 in Fall of '03. Why should I pay for its renovation instead of the Chemistry department? I've never used the Armory, and I don't even know where Davidson is. Why should I pay to help those buildings out?

Honestly, I probably would vote yes for improvements to all those buildings, as well. The point is you can make the same kind of argument you're making about the Rec for anything else. It just gets back to how selfish we as Americans have become. "It won't affect me, so why should I care?" Same reason I think JP has to scratch and claw to get people to donate to the athletics department.

I can't believe that SouthernHawk and I agree on something, but it is nice to know that there is someone else with half a brain. Everyone else sees a shiny object and they have to have it. Did your parents teach you no restraint?

 

[HiltonMagic]

:arghh: I'm out, I remembered who I was arguing with (a hawkeye) and realized they can't have sense talked into them, no matter what the argument.