New Stadium-A Let-Down for Some

Today I attended an open forum about the new football stadium that is to open this Fall. The forum was an overview of what students, faculty, staff, the greater Richmond community and visitors can expect from the new stadium. The main topics that were covered surrounded parking, general traffic flow information, student ticketing, and the designated student tailgating area. One thing they did not address until I asked about it is the student seating section.

The students have been given the privilege to sit at the end zone where you can see approximately 1/3 of the field with reasonable accuracy. End zone seating is the worst seating arrangement they could have given the students. When I asked about this...they told me the students chose end zone seating "because it is the only part of the stadium where everyone can sit together." Are there not seats on the sidelines? I am pretty sure there are. And as for those "students" who chose this, they meant a handful of "student leaders" from Pan Hellenic, IFC, Richmond College Student Government, Westhampton College Student Government, and the Richmond Rowdies. Of those five groups listed, the Rowdies are the only one in which it is perfectly clear why they were elected to participate in this "student leaders" group. They are some of the biggest supporters of Richmond Spiders athletics! However, I refuse to accept members of Pan Hellenic, IFC, or either Student Governing body as the only student leaders who deserve input into this matter. There is a plethora (that's my favorite word!) of student organizations on campus with leaders who dedicate a significant amount of their time to their group and I think that all group leaders are student leaders who deserve to be heard. Why is it that the University of Richmond so easily hands greater power to Greek life when it has been repeatedly abused. Now, do not get me wrong. I have nothing against Fraternities or Sororities at the University of Richmond, but I do think that they have given reason for the University of Richmond to at least think twice about giving them more power. And as far as Student Government goes, while elected by peers, some run uncontested and others make it a popularity contest. Just because you are "popular" does not mean that you should be the only ones invited to make decisions on behalf of the entire student body.

I consider myself a hardcore Spider Athletics fan and I especially love football. For me to be told that my $50, 000 tuition is not enough to get me a decent seat in the new stadium, I cannot help but be a bit offended and confused. I do not understand why the University of Richmond has let down the students again. They tell us to get excited about the new stadium that is "retuning to campus." But how can I get excited when I will not even be able to watch the game! I do not get wasted before football games because I love football and I want to watch the game, but I feel as though I may as well since it doesn't matter if I can see straight or not from end zone seating. I mean, I am already going to be at such a terrible angle, that why not just go ahead and get plastered before games. I would end up watching roughly the same game either way.

Another concern that I have is with this fiasco of too few seats for students. Last year's Homecoming Game at 1600 students at it. The new stadium has a maximum capacity of 1500 in the student section. Why is it that the alumnae and the community will be able to get tickets for their seats, while the students who work really hard to be successful at the U of R are left without enough seats. At the forum, they discussed a handful of possible ways to decide who will get tickets. One option is that students will have to make time in their schedules to go to the Robins Center Ticketing Office in order to claim their ticket before their peers do. Thank goodness I am not living in Keller or North Court next year! Other options included online lotteries, and online ticket claiming (first come first served). They may not have to worry about not having enough tickets, however, thanks to the poorly placed student section.

As far as the unfortunate parking scenario in which students assigned to X-Lot will have to move their vehicles on Friday nights before games, it is lower on my list of complaints. Students will be expected to move their cars, you know, the ones they paid $100 parking pass to park in X-Lot, to the Westhampton side of campus. There is also a very confusing map of who can drive where that visitors will need to take a look at before they get anywhere near campus. The reason for these obstacles in the traffic flow and the need to relocate student cars from X-Lot on game days? Obviously, it is because the University is so POOR that they cannot afford to continue to give us an education if they do not resell the parking spots we bought to season ticket holders, and VIPs who deserve to not have to walk across campus. What with the multi-million dollars worth of construction projects (is it 3 new things they are building? while our dorms have a certain stench of mold?!), the University clearly does not have enough money and is forced to sell the parking spaces that we paid for to more important people. After all, the alumnae, I mean students (?), come first!

Thank you University of Richmond to continue to show just how dedicated you are to your student body!

Jessie

Jepson School Forum Over Controversy-A Disappointment

The Jepson School held a forum yesterday in a model of civil discourse that was supposed to be an “open and frank conversation.” Was it? Maybe on the students' part. Many of the faculty that sat in front of the students both attempted to defend and represent Jepson (as I suspect they were instructed to do), while also speaking out against the awarding of Victoria Cobb. Though many students raised very pressing issues, such as the fact that many within the LGBT community feel isolated, unsafe, and unwelcome at the University of Richmond, these greater issues at hand were never really explored. Many of the faculty said plainly that they did not support the awarding of Cobb, yet they also sat in front of a group of about 40 students and defended Jepson's decision.

The faculty that sat on the panel at the forum all had important things to say, however, they didn't really address what the real issues behind the controversy. Despite the avoidance of the issues at hand, I cannot hold it against the Jepson faculty who were sent to be puppets, and not to speak for themselves. Though the process in which Cobb was chosen to receive the award was questioned, Dean Peart, did everything but clear this up. She got the final statement at the forum and provided a brief overview of the process without giving any real detail. She said something along the lines of: Victoria Cobb was nominated along others and when it came down to it Victoria's leadership was the least worse of the remaining nominees, after Elizabeth Hopfinger Thompson was also chosen to receive the award. I think it would make more sense to have only given the award to the worthy candidate and not to the least worse of the remaining nominees. Despite all of this, I would have liked to see the persons responsible for giving Victoria Cobb the award on the panel–not just the face of Jepson, the faculty who felt like they had to say what Jepson wanted them to say or risk losing their jobs.

I was most moved by some of the stories that some of the students chose to share with the group about the terrible hardships they have faced at the University of Richmond because they identify as LGBT. These stories were disheartening though since they resonated the alienation and unwelcomeness felt by many of the LGBT community at the U of R. If the school is so concerned about maintaing its conservative money donors, then I suggest it consider the fact that the current students are the future alumnae (and maybe even donors!). As a future alumnae of this school, I hope that the University will learn to respect its students a little more and to protect them as it proposes to in the Richmond Promise.

Jessie

Jepson School of Leadership Studies Awards Victoria Cobb

The past three weeks at the University of Richmond have been littered with the controversy of an award given to Victoria Cobb, President of The Family Foundation. The Family Foundation lists among its victories "Banned counterfeit forms of marriage such as 'civil unions'" and "passed Constitutional Amendment Defining Marriage". The former "voids any civil union, partnership, contract or other arrangement between persons of the same sex purporting to bestow the privileges or obligations of marriage. Such an arrangement entered into in another state or jurisdiction is void in Virginia and any contractual rights created thereby unenforceable." The latter "protects the definition of marriage and prohibits the Commonwealth or its political subdivisions from recognizing civil unions." Both of these "victories" are oppressive to all who identify as LGBT and work to counter the fight for CIVIL RIGHTS that LGBT people have worked for. These are the same civil rights that various groups of people have worked to achieve, and in the United States have more or less been granted. Why are LGBT people so different that they deserve a separate set of rights from other American citizens.

The big controversy here, however, is not even that Victoria Cobb and the Family Foundation work directly to oppress the rights of the LGBT community. The issue at hand is that the Jepson School of Leadership Studies has decided to honor her, thereby endorsing her foundation and by extension her views. While many students, faculty and staff do not agree with Victoria Cobb's message, the issue here is not about Freedom of Speech: she should feel free to speak her mind about the foundation that she has dedicated her life to. The reason that there is so much controversy is that the University of Richmond, and by extension the Jepson School, have been throwing around this "Richmond Promise" that is supposed to demonstrate the the University is an inclusive community, accepting of all types of diversity, including sexual-orientation, yet Jepson felt it was appropriate to award a woman's "leadership" that goes directly against the Richmond Promise.

The University of Richmond needs to stop pretending it is an inclusive environment on the outside and demonstrate the inclusivity it wants in its actions. This means that is unacceptable for the Jepson, as a part of the larger University of Richmond, to give an award honoring someone's leadership in her community and organization if ALL of the work she has done has been with a Foundation that works ardently against same-sex marriage, same-sex partner benefits, and other rights, that most other people are granted in the United States.

Jessie