Letters to Editor on the Bond Issue - USM Forum -- Message Board

Date: Nov 7, 2004

Letters to Editor on the Bond Issue

Date: Nov 7, 2004

"However, spending $12 million for sports and other non-academics in these days of teaching-staff losses and drained state budgets simply flew in the face of reality.

Next time, in addition to working with the east Hattiesburg contingent, perhaps the crafters of the bond process will be sensitive to the needs of the entire university and consider using a portion of the bond issue receipts to pay USM faculty, fund teaching positions, support the library, create scholarships for needy Hattiesburg students or meet other educational needs, too.
. . .

Don Woodall"

Kudos Mr. Woodall!

Date: Nov 7, 2004

to arnold and mr. woodall--how little you know about university budgets! bonds can't be used to pay recurring expenses like salaries or periodical budgets. mr. woodall's letter was interesting but showed how little he knows about university budgeting.

Date: Nov 7, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: stinky cheese man
"to arnold and mr. woodall--how little you know about university budgets! bonds can't be used to pay recurring expenses like salaries or periodical budgets. mr. woodall's letter was interesting but showed how little he knows about university budgeting. "

Well, at least he cares about faculty needs, the library, etc. This is not something I've seen much in the H-A.

Date: Nov 7, 2004

arnold--good to know the needs. more difficult to know how to meet those needs budgetarily (is that a word?). it was an uninformed letter to the HA at best.

Date: Nov 7, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: stinky cheese man
"arnold--good to know the needs. more difficult to know how to meet those needs budgetarily (is that a word?). it was an uninformed letter to the HA at best."

I disagree. While the average H'burg citizen might not know much about the intricacies of a university budgeting system, they know an injustice when they see one. Academics must come first, and SFT should be leading the way. Unfortunately, he keeps shooting himself in his wurl' class foot, and he's down to his last toe. This bond issue failed due to poor leadership (Shelboo and Gianniny). Fire the both of them, I say.

NO QUARTER!

Date: Nov 7, 2004

And you gotta love this guy:

"Those monies need to be used to improve a failing education at USM. Didn't you hear that USM has dropped in the educational rankings? And was it because the papers weren't sent in on time? Hardly.

Ravi Kanade,

Hattiesburg"

As Emeril would say: BAM!

Date: Nov 8, 2004

For taxpayers to shell out $12 million dollars to improve athletic facilities is as foolish as spending $12 millilon dollars to rennovate a condiminium you are going to use only seven weekends each year.

Date: Nov 8, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: cost conscious
"For taxpayers to shell out $12 million dollars to improve athletic facilities is as foolish as spending $12 millilon dollars to rennovate a condiminium you are going to use only seven weekends each year."

At least understand the fact when posting......I know most on this board do not.

The $12 mil will be used for much, much more than football. Lets look at how often the facilities are used that would have benefited from the issue:

Football 7 dates
Baseball 32 dates
Softball 27 dates
Men's Basketball 17 dates
Women's Basketball 19 dates
Tennis (virtually everyday considering there are no tennis facilities on campus)
Soccar 15 dates
Volleyball 17 dates
Track and Field 5 dates
Bennett Auditorium 75-100 dates

Now you may still be able to argue that it's still not worth the cost, but please at least try to be somewhat factual.

Date: Nov 8, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Seeker
"At least understand the fact when posting......I know most on this board do not."

So sorry. I forgot that the posters on this board are not nearly as smart, well educated, and well traveled as you are. I really don't know why we even bother to post anything. You could just tell us what we need to know in a newsletter.

Date: Nov 8, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Seeker
"

At least understand the fact when posting......I know most on this board do not.

The $12 mil will be used for much, much more than football. Lets look at how often the facilities are used that would have benefited from the issue:

Football 7 dates
Baseball 32 dates
Softball 27 dates
Men's Basketball 17 dates
Women's Basketball 19 dates
Tennis (virtually everyday considering there are no tennis facilities on campus)
Soccar 15 dates
Volleyball 17 dates
Track and Field 5 dates
Bennett Auditorium 75-100 dates

Now you may still be able to argue that it's still not worth the cost, but please at least try to be somewhat factual."

Seeker, your facts are incorrect: (these are just a few examples)

Football Stadium, 7 dates + potential use: by high schools, intramurals and concerts
Baseball 32 dates, + regional NCAA playoff, potenial use: high school playoffs
Men's & Women's Basketball/Volleyball + graduation exercises for USM, several High Schools, and Science Fairs
Track & Field 5 dates, + High School invitational, Hattiesburg H.S use, etc.
Bennett Auditorium over a 100 dates including Girls State, Concerts , etc.

Date: Nov 8, 2004

How much bond money would have been needed if we had excluded the football stadium?

Date: Nov 8, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: LVN
"How much bond money would have been needed if we had excluded the football stadium?
"

LVN,
Don't know if you were asking me, but I do not have those figures. I do know that the improvements in the stadium were restrooms, plumbing, and concession area and NOT the Sky Boxes which would have been separate from the bond money.

Date: Nov 8, 2004

If the $12 million in question were used for needed academic improvements, those improvements would be used all day, every day, and also during the evenings - not just during athletic events. Moreover, they would serve far more citizens than would athletic improvements.

Date: Nov 8, 2004

football 7 home games??

the improvements on concession areas?? why wouldnt the company that has the contract for concessions spend the $$ to improve the area (unless you consider the present concessionaire is a huge SFT supporter)

Date: Nov 8, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: late
"football 7 home games?? the improvements on concession areas?? why wouldnt the company that has the contract for concessions spend the $$ to improve the area (unless you consider the present concessionaire is a huge SFT supporter) "

Because, Late, that would make too much sense. This is how they waste the day away in the merry old land of polyoz

Date: Nov 8, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Emma
"This is how they waste the day away in the merry old land of polyoz"

Polyoz. Say it again, Emma. Polyoz. If you're really serious about winning the nom d'Aplomb award, Emma, you must use that name as your moniker - not in the body of the posting. Polyoz. I really like that.

Date: Nov 8, 2004

I'm free, free at last, thank Polyoz that I'm free at last!!!

Emma

Date: Nov 8, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Polyoz
"I'm free, free at last, thank Polyoz that I'm free at last!!! Emma "

That's more like it, Emma. Just trying to give you a little advice.