The lead editorial on Sept. 10 (“All or nothing”) is misguided in its commentary on the pending resolution for part-time athletics access. It is true that a complete proposal including the specific means of access does not yet exist, however, that does not mean that all compromise solutions are unfeasible.
The solutions suggested by the editorial, “all,” or “nothing,” are unfeasible. “All” suggests a structure where these students would pay full fees and receive full access. Even the athletic department recognizes the impracticality of mandating a full fee upon a part-time student. “Nothing” suggests a structure where these students pay nothing and receive no access. The athletic department isn’t likely to approve a revision that takes away revenue, and, as the resolution notes, Council should be working toward helping part-time students feel included in the community. Neither of these solutions exist now; neither should exist in the future. It’s confusing, then, why the editorial concludes that the policy should not be re-examined when the solution in the title (“all” and “nothing”) are not those in place at present.
The editorial’s main argument against a proportioned access structure are the logistical challenges and anticipated costs. The logistical challenges have not been too great for a peer institution in the ACC to overcome, where part-time students receive a “coupon book” of sorts with tickets to a certain number of games. Further, I’m not sure what data supports this idea of tremendous cost. Certainly there will be some money required to improve the system, but there is no evidence that the cost would be, as the editorial notes, “prohibitively expensive.”
Finally, the editorial seems to encourage part-time undergraduate and graduate students to lie to those that check ID’s at the gate, cheat the system and steal their admission to games. As a member of the community of trust since 2003, something doesn’t sound quite right about that to me.
Again, the editorial is correct in one regard. There must be a specific, tangible proposal to present to those that will improve the access structure. Council’s support will accelerate the development of this proposal. I urge my fellow Council members to remain open-minded and optimistic that we can create a better solution and improve the quality of life for a portion of the student body.
David Hondula
GSAS
Read More
LETTER: Your U.Va. Health System coverage lacks important context
September 9, 2024I understand this event could be seen as “breaking news,” but your reporting left out relevant, easy-to-find, publicly available data to give it proper context.
LETTER: U.Va.'s relationship with the University Guides
By Stephen Farmer | August 30, 2024We are grateful to the leaders of the Guide Service for being open to working with us to improve the reliability and consistency of their tours.
LETTER: It is critical to hold individual hazers accountable
By Todd Shelton | May 10, 2024But while education is absolutely integral to hazing prevention, we must also hold individuals accountable for their hazing behavior.
