Editorial: Stott Center fees, rec club woes

In January, lines to the new student recreation center were around the block as people flocked to the shiny, new building. On the other side of campus, however, a different building was preparing to lose a significant source of revenue: Campus Rec.

The Peter W. Stott Center was built in 1966 as a space for physical education classes, as well as for the growing Athletics Department. The facility is no longer home to the Campus Rec program, however. Since the program moved to the new Athletic Student Recreation Center, the Stott Center administration has had to come up with an alternative source of funding.

The source: increased prices on room rentals.

The Stott Center currently charges rec clubs to use most of their facilities. Before, when Campus Rec was located in the Stott Center, they didn’t have to pay room rental fees. Now, some rooms cost more and some rooms cost less, but the average that rec clubs are spending amounts to around a third of their budgets on a space from their own university. Considering that on average rec clubs were allocated less than $9,000 this year, that’s a lot of money to be spending on facilities alone.

This is a funding problem that won’t be easily fixed. Campus Rec’s move to the ASRC—and with it the rec clubs funding—wasn’t news to the Stott Center administration. The ASRC had been under construction for over two years; however, a plan to keep the Stott Center financially afloat was not implemented.

Instead, when the ASRC opened, the Stott Center had to raise their rental prices to make up for the lost revenue. Rec clubs complained. Some paid the fees, some took their business elsewhere and some just stopped practicing.

The fix for the Stott Center is tri-fold. First, outreach needs to occur to attract promoters and organizers for events such as dances, powwows and performances. The space, however, is perfect for some of the events that happen all around campus, but is rarely used for events like these. For instance, at Party in the Park, they could host the rec clubs and athletic teams in the gym with signs directing students there. This would also increase the number of groups that know about the space and might use it in the future.

The second fix to this problem is to convert more of the space into classrooms. Currently the Stott Center only has a few traditional classrooms, while the university has a shortage of classrooms and could use more space. This solution would better utilize the building and also draw students and group leaders into the building, increasing visibility and room rentals from outside venues and other student groups.

Finally, the Stott Center needs to recognize that rec clubs are an integral part of the university and should be offered a discount when they register for building rentals. Most services at the university provide a discount for students and student groups. Reducing the cost—maybe even having pricing competitive with the new ASRC—would increase their rentals because they are once again affordable.

This isn’t by any means the fault of any one person or department, but it does negatively affect particular parties: the rec clubs and student groups.

The Stott Center has a wonderful history of promoting and maintaining athleticism on this campus: Seeing it suffer financially and then hurt others isn’t acceptable. Changes need to be made to bring it back to the way it was.