As the Sacramento State athletic department continues to grow under new Athletic Director Terry Wanless, Hornet Gym continues to show more and more rust.

On Dec. 14, 2002, 1,667 fans jam-packed the 1,500-seat gym against Oregon State, and many more were turned away at the door. If the Hornets were to win a Big Sky Conference Championship, it has yet to be determined whether it could host the Big Sky Championships at the gym.

The 50-year-old building located on the west side of campus is home to Sacramento State men’s and women’s basketball, volleyball and gymnastics.

“If we had a 5-to-6,000 seat arena it would be a very good fit for this campus, this community, this program, and I think the kind of fan interest we could generate,” Wanless said.

Hornet Gym is tied with Portland State’s Stott Center for the lowest seating capacity in the Big Sky, holding 1,500 people.

Weber State’s Dee Events Center leads the Big Sky in capacity at 12,000. Their facility was built in 1978 and funded by private donations.

The other five Big Sky schools range between 7,500 and 3,241 in capacity.

Hornet Gym was renovated in 1999 under the authorization of former Athletic Director Debby Colberg, installing chair-back seating and upgrading the locker rooms.

But, according to Wanless, there is only so much you can do with an outdated gym, and Sac State is in dire need of a new facility.

“I think we obviously will have to be involved in the corporate structure in terms of potential naming rights, signage, luxury boxes,” Wanless said. “Also, I think there is going to be some private fundraising involved in this project, and in all probability a student referendum.”

Associated Students, Inc. President Eric Guerra remains skeptical about sponsoring a referendum, which would increase student fees for athletics. Students currently pay $52.50 to the athletic department.

“First of all, I’d like to see support from the university and the community before students go out and say we need to contribute,” Guerra said. “We’re not at that level where we could bring in thousands and millions of dollars.”

Athletic referendums aren’t new to the Sac State campus.

In 1995, Sac State students voted to increase their fees towards athletics by $10 increments over four years.

In 1998, the student population voted against a referendum for a new recreational facility, which would have housed both basketball programs.

In order for an athletic referendum to get on the ballot any time soon, Guerra believes that the student body will need a clear understanding of what the new facility will be used for.

“We just don’t need an arena,” he said. “But if we can build it in a way where we can use it for multiple reasons, then that’s how I feel we can get the best bang for our buck.”

Wanless has marked two locations as possible sites for a new venue.

One is in the overflow parking lot across from the football stadium, while the other is where the football fieldhouse currently stands, adjacent to the stadium.

“You can’t let anything be built on this campus without student input,” Guerra said. “And it’s going to happen. The administration wants to do it. There is nothing we can mandate, but obviously they need our support if students are going to go out and vote.”

Wanless stresses that the department is not merely looking to build an arena, but rather a facility that could host concerts, graduation and other events along with athletic events.

“It’s much more than a basketball gym,” Wanless said. “It’s a way to enhance the quality of student life.”