By Stephen George
Debate rages over ACCESS
The Student Government Association held a forum yesterday to discuss its proposal concerning the future of the Adult Commuter Center-Evening Student Services (ACCESS) Center.
SGA President Chris Marlin, Academic Vice President John Daniel, Services Vice President Sarah Carter, and Communications and Marketing Director Rick Curtsinger fielded questions and complaints from students, faculty, and staff about the new proposal, which would integrate ACCESS services and programs with those of REACH, or Resources for Academic Achievement.
Also present were representatives from ACCESS, including Director Barbara King, who remained silent through nearly the entire discussion, speaking only once to say that she had invited SGA senators to discuss the ACCESS budget with her last summer and that they have yet to visit her.
Geography professor John Anderson said that ACCESS provides a place for students and faculty to engage with one another in a comfortable atmosphere outside of the class room. He also said that proximity encourages interaction and, claiming that Davidson Hall, where ACCESS is located, is one of the more consistently populated buildings on campus, said “the geography of it all makes sense.”
Marlin countered by stating the relative proximity of Strickler Hall, where REACH is currently located, which is directly across from Davidson.
As the discussion continued the inherent tension of the issue rose. At one point, non-traditional commuter student Mary Rhodes implied misdoing on the part of SGA, saying, “I think there’s hidden agenda here.”
Former SGA President Jason French, under whose leadership the $3 per semester student fee that currently funds ACCESS was passed, spoke of the original intentions of the fee. French harped on the fact that the fee was originally imposed only to fund ACCESS, although the wording in the legislation is that the fee is “primarily” for ACCESS. Marlin and several SGA senators that were present, including Malana Hartzog and Brian Chan, used the wording issue to counter claims that SGA would be exceeding its powers by diverting the funds from ACCESS, which amount to roughly $90,000 for this year. Daniel expressed that SGA had no current plans to divert the funding.
Christy Ralston, a nursing student and frequent ACCESS visitor, said that a major problem with U of L is the lack of a sense of community. She tied this absence of campus community to the lack of major monetary contributions to the university by alumni, which she said have little affinity for U of L for this reason.
Ralston, along with a majority of those present, emphasized the importance of the ACCESS Center as a family, a second home on campus. “It is essential to my success here,” Ralston said. ACCESS frequenter Charles Anderson agreed, saying, “It’s like a family.” One student employee of ACCESS even came to tears at the prospect of losing the opportunity to work at the center.
Marlin posed to those present the question of whether the familial atmosphere at ACCESS could be recreated at another location. The response was mixed, some claiming no, while others insisted that the staff of ACCESS is more important than its location.
According to Daniel, the proposal has not been given to REACH. The senate will debate the proposal today, after which it is possible that a proposal could be presented. Daniel also gave a 100% gaurantee that nothing would be finalized at tomorrow’s session. A final proposal, if agreed upon, would reach the senate by the December session.
According to Marlin, the popular conception on campus of the dilemma over ACCESS is inaccurate. “The biggest misconception is that our number one goal is to close the ACCESS center,” he said. “Our goal is to provide the highest quality services possible.”
