Related sites:

Click here for more information on the Alex G. Spanos Sports and Recreation Complex

President Alexander Gonzalez told students he could make one guarantee regarding the recreation wellness and events center: to continue raising money for the project.

Gonzalez made the pledge at an April 19 Associated Students Inc. meeting, where he added that he has already raised an additional $1.05 million for the project, which is now named the Alex G. Spanos Sports and Recreation Complex.

Additionally, Gonzalez said the $56 summer fee hike has been postponed because of uncertainties surrounding the project.

A proposal written by ASI President Barajas asks Gonzalez to pledge to raise an additional $10 million to offset the $8.9 million construction cost of the Broad Athletic Facility, which will replace the athletic field house. The request is being made because construction of a new athletic facility was not part of the original referendum, Barajas said.

The referendum, which was passed by 55.2 percent of student votes in spring 2004, calls for the construction of a recreation center, wellness center and events center totaling 236,000 square feet. The referendum did not mention replacing the field house.

Gonzalez said destruction of the field house and the construction of the new athletic facility, which is slated to break ground in fall, was an “unintended consequence” of the project and that he saw it as “just another phase of the project.”

Gonzalez said another factor causing confusion is that an arena may be constructed separately from the recreation wellness and events center ?” with the events center to be located in the recreation and wellness center and the arena to be placed east of Hornet Stadium.

Gonzalez said a “public-private partnership” is the only way to pay for the arena because it cannot be built with student fees. He said he has already been in contact with three different parties who are interested in developing a public-private partnership to build the arena.

Nicki Croly, former ASI director of education, said she campaigned for the facility in 2004 under the impression that features like a bowling alley, movie theater and arena were a part of the project.

John Kincaid, ASI graduate director, said he needs clarification on what the facility will consist of.

“What we voted on is different than what we’re seeing now,” Kincaid emphasized.

Kincaid said the students voted on the referendum based on information handed out during its campaign. He said the originally estimated $73 million construction cost and amenities were included in pamphlets.

Gonzalez said information given to students was from two separate campaigns, neither of which was affiliated with administration.

Gonzalez said the figure came from consultants hired by the University Student Union ?” a six-person committee including members from ASI, the University Union board and recreational sports.

The committee’s role was to provide student input for the amenities to go in the center, but it was disassembled sometime within the 2004-05 school year.

“I think you’re misconstruing what the $73 million means,” Gonzalez said. “We don’t know what $73 million means. It was based on the consultants, based on the referendum and based on what the (University Student Union) put together. This is what they came up with it. It wasn’t my figure. I have to rely on what they did on the referendum.”

Leslie Davis, director of the University Union, said the original estimated cost was determined by square footage, inflation rates and cost of steel. Davis said the price has gone up because of recent events, including the high demand for steel in China and the damage of Hurricane Katrina.

However, Clifford Hawley, ASI director of natural sciences and mathematics, said the project still does not seem to feature what was “sold” to the students during campaigns. Hawley said one of the major selling points of the campaigns was that a facility would be constructed for the university’s Division I basketball team.

Gonzalez quickly assured that he did not sell anything to the students.

“I didn’t sell anything,” Gonzalez said. “The only thing I did was say ‘the students need this and I’m going to be behind the students. Not only that, I’ve been out raising money, and now I’m being accused of selling something to the students.”

Davis said neither the University Union nor the administration sold anything to the students. Davis said there were two separate campaigns: “Get a (Campus) Life,” which was student run and “Educate Yourself,” ran by the University Union.

“The University Union never took a position ?” pro or con ?” on any part of this project because we ran an ‘educate yourself’ campaign,” Davis said. “We could never promise anything.”

According to the University Union’s pamphlet, the slogan stated, “The choice is yours.” The pamphlet provided information on what “features of the facility are likely to include,” such as an indoor pool, a rock-climbing wall, movie theater and bowling center.

A 6,500- to 8,000-seat arena was set to be a part of the events center. The event center, according the pamphlet, was likely to include other features, such as athletic locker rooms and offices and an auxiliary gym.

“The Crew,” a group that was made up of students from ASI, Campus Recreation and athletes, headed a separate student-run campaign, Davis said. Barajas said he did not know about this.

The Crew handed out fliers that stated, “If you want a better sense of school pride, to improve the future of Sac State, increased campus life, more student jobs on campus and a greater recreational opportunities, plus” amenities such as a bowling center, movie theater, arena and indoor pool, “vote for RWEC,” which was the original name of the project.

Graduate student James Banyai raised a question regarding the money allocated for the Broad Athletic Facility. Banyai said it should be questioned whether or not it is legal for Gonzalez to state he has risen $25 million for the recreation wellness and events center since $8.9 million of those funds will be allocated toward the athletic facility.

Gonzalez said Banyai raised a good question, and that he would look into the legality of it and let the students know. But he stated all these questions will delay the project.

“(ASI is) not trying to stall the project,” said LizetteTovar, director of undeclared. She said the reason why the questions were being raised is because ASI wanted to keep the student voice open.

Gonzalez said he is willing to come back to ASI when the details of the project are finalized.

Nika Megino can be reached at [email protected]