Debate on the natatorium issue is really starting to heat up now that plans for both renovating and re-tasking the debilitated building have been presented. As the University family, both students and the community, prepare to move forward, the Save the Natatorium cause should reassess their approach because right now they are losing this fight.
So far the group has been very one-sided in its approach, repeatedly citing how keeping the building benefits them. Over and over we’ve heard “What about swimming competitions the city could hold?” or “What about senior citizens who could use it for rehab and exercise?” Several comments on the Facebook group talk about swimming lessons for young children. More still talk about the nostalgia the building holds for them because they used it when they were kids.
The glaring problem in this approach is that a key demographic is being completely overlooked or at the very best minimized. That demographic is the students who are paying for the building.
What about the students? Why should the 7,980 students continue to pay for a building they don’t use so that 20 students and a handful of community members with ideas of how the building might be used in the future can keep it? Or a better question: Why should they pay to renovate it?
At the meeting Monday, several members of the community expressed downright indignation at the very idea that a bunch of college kids should decide what’s best for their own campus. They berated President Bruno with question after question about why the students and not the community are deciding this issue.
The students sat and patiently watched the community’s presentation, and then with equal patience and consideration, they watched architect Nick Middleton’s presentation. They questioned both presenters on things such as funding, feasibility and usage.
The community members loved the YMCA’s presentation but made it very clear they hated Middleton’s renderings. They interrupted Middleton on several occasions. When his talk was over, they shouted out things like “I don’t like it” and “I’ll never support something like that.” They came up with insightful questions like, “Don’t you think a fence along the bayou would be ugly?”
Based on the behaviors at the meeting, who behaved more like rational adults: the college students who considered all possibilities and asked tough questions or the community who attacked anyone saying something slightly out of line with what they want?
Members of the community need to realize ULM’s students are not children. We are adults capable of making tough decisions. We are adults capable of deciding what is best for our campus. We are adults who understand funding issues apparently better than many of the “mature” people in the audience Monday.
The time for sob stories about the past are over. Community: If you want to win this fight, you need to give us facts, figures and sustainability. Prove to us that the financial burden will not be totally levied on us. Convince us through evidence, not emotion, that a natatorium is best for this campus.
But more importantly than any of that, you need to start treating us with respect. If the behavior in Monday’s meeting is any indication of how the rest of this debate will play out, you will alienate all of the people you need.
If you continue to behave like children while treating us, the students, like children, you will definitely lose your fight.
Old Student • Nov 5, 2011 at 9:13 am
I’ve been at ULM for almost a decade. As few regular students use the Nat now as they did all those years. I’m not including the former ULM swim team, they were obviously an exception. And as the Nat stands now, as few students will use it in the future.
I don’t believe “the community” when they say we aren’t thinking about future students and only ourselves. We are thinking of what new generations will want, not a pool for laps but either something more practical (to us) or nothing at all. Swimming is no longer exercise but a social activity, the pool currently serves the former purpose but not the latter.
“The community” needs to present a serious solution to the funding issue if they want to keep the Nat as is. A little fundraiser at Bayou Desiard Country Club isn’t going to raise anywhere close to $1 million. Try looking at private bonds, municipal bonds or get Hakim to make a tax-deductible donation (something he should have no problems doing, just ask Sheriff Toney).
Ted Jones • Nov 4, 2011 at 8:35 am
Last things first:
“When you insult me your only exemplifying that you have nothing else logical to say.”
I did not insult you, but if you would be so kind as to explain where you believe I have done so, it would be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance.
As to the rest of your comment, I’m pleased to see that I have been vindicated in my assertion that we both want stronger ties between the community and the university. However, it appears to me that your approach is particularly counterproductive. We have here an opportunity to strengthen this bond, but your response is to (figuratively) tell the community to go to hell. My approach is to work together to achieve our shared goals. I am confident my approach will better serve the university and the Monroe area both in the long term and the short term.
John, if you or anyone else would like to see just how wrong the claim that the community wants the students to pay for what the community uses is, come to the Bayou Desiard Country Club on November 14 between 5:30 and 8:30. This event is intended to help raise funds for renovating the Nat. All are welcome.
Please, be a part of the solution, not a part of the problem.
Ted Jones • Nov 4, 2011 at 12:17 pm
My apologies. The event is Tuesday, November 15th, not the 14th. Sorry about that.
John • Nov 3, 2011 at 7:35 pm
Here is the truth. I have been here a couple of years but I am originally not from here. Other schools have their community behind them. We do not. The only reason the community cares now is because we are taking something they feel they use. Otherwise it would be the same thing of us doing our thing and them doing theirs. That was not said by anyone that is how it is. Go to Baton Rouge. Almost every house has an LSU something or other, and they care about the campus. Look at Monroe. Hmmm wait they want the students to pay for something for them. Hmm where is the support from them. Nope nothing. You want student support do not try to win us with sob stories give us facts. Best way to win our support (which you need) is to actually show up to university functions. I can tell you now not enough do for any department at this school. Want my help, then support us or go away so we can support ourselves and not worry about leeches.
Also to point something out. When you insult me your only exemplifying that you have nothing else logical to say. So try to be more factual and perhaps your point will get across better.
John • Oct 31, 2011 at 8:52 pm
Ted Jones.
I think you missed the POV part which stands for point of view. Furthermore I will tell you what when the “community” who care so much about this university as seen in attendance at their events such as football games, Wait I am sorry they do not show up to that. So why are we catering to those who do not support the university they want things from?
Ted Jones • Nov 1, 2011 at 6:34 pm
“I think you missed the POV part which stands for point of view.”
I didn’t miss it, but thanks for pointing it out! Perhaps you would be so kind as to explain how it is relevant? Thanks in advance.
“Furthermore I will tell you what when the “community” who care so much about this university as seen in attendance at their events such as football games, Wait I am sorry they do not show up to that. So why are we catering to those who do not support the university they want things from?”
I am saddened, though not surprised, to see this attitude expressed by, it seems, a student of ULM. For the last several months, people who should know better, including, it must be said, the university president, have tried to pit the students against the community and the community against the students. That the students are hearing and repeating this message is, though lamentable, to be expected.
John, what you perhaps don’t understand yet, but I hope you will in time, is that the community is an important part of the university, and the university is an important part of the community, as “T” pointed out above. Our interests are the same as yours. Instead of weakening our commitment to each other, let’s use this situation as a catalyst for forming a *stronger* bond between ULM and the larger community. Let’s make the most of this opportunity we’ve been given.
Ted Jones • Oct 26, 2011 at 7:48 pm
This editorial is disappointing on a number of levels. Among them:
First, and most obviously, the argument that your maturity and judgment should be trusted is undermined by the snide, juvenile insults.
Second, it is misleading in a number of respects. Most disappointing is the piece’s suggestion that student concerns are not taken seriously by the community. This is simply not true. When community members point out how closing the Nat will affect them, it does not mean they don’t care about current students; they are simply pointing out that the decision affects them too. The members of the community that I have spoken with in person and interacted with on the Facebook page are, without exception, interested in finding a resolution to the issue that is best for EVERYONE in both the near-term and the long-term. To suggest otherwise to your readers is to misinform them.
Third, and related to the second, there is a glaring omission: the *substance* of each of the three presentations. The group that you lambaste for allegedly disregarding the concerns of students also happens to have presented the only proposal that respects the needs and desires of both the current student leadership and the community at large. Did you notice anything missing from the university’s presentations?
The final, and most important, disappointment is that this editorial represents yet another missed opportunity. From the beginning, this situation has been portrayed by irresponsible parties as a battle between students and the community, each with divergent goals. This is a false choice that this editorial, sadly, perpetuates. The students, faculty, administration, and the general community can, and should, all benefit.
Hawkeye staff, the issue is what is the most appropriate use of the university’s resources, not who is “winning” and who is “losing” your affection.
The time for a decision is drawing near. It would be immensely helpful to this process if the Hawkeye’s editorial writers would lead the way by focusing their reader’s attention on the substance of the choice at hand, not on the writer’s feelings.
A Student • Oct 25, 2011 at 12:48 am
The last time I checked…the Nat was for STUDENTS. The community should have NO SAY WHATSOEVER IN THIS! The fact that we open the Nat and the Act Center to the public is a gift and they should act like guest…not like they own it. I (the student) pay fees, I (the student) am funding this building…and from what I hear through the grapevine many of the “patrons”– a team of golden color per say don’t even pay to use the Nat.
At the end of the day the Nat needs some serious work done to fix it, and I personally am open to a pool that I can do more than swim laps in.
So how about another meeting (at a more student friendly time Say 7pm?)…in which you need a valid student Id to get into.
kristina • Oct 25, 2011 at 2:28 pm
The team of golden color pays out the nose to rent the lanes and have memberships to boot. Better get your facts from reliable sources.
T • Oct 31, 2011 at 12:17 pm
Be careful ‘A Student’! This university cannot operate on student fees alone! This university needs this community & this community needs this university!
black mamba • Nov 5, 2011 at 4:23 pm
If you knew anything about the nat you would know that every person that uses the NAT pays more than what the students pay! they have to have memberships to be able to swim there. the same thing at the rec..they have to PAY to use it! if they build a pool outside do you really think you are going to use it all year round? I mean seriously, things like this should be considered! How many students who think they will usie the pool actually live on campus during the summer? I’m not putting down the idea of updating the NAT or even adding on, keep the lap pool open and just add on!