University of South Florida St. Petersburg (USFSP) finished in third place at the Southeast Regional Ethics Bowl (SEREB) at the EpiCenter in St. Petersburg. They will be competing in the National Ethics Bowl on Mar. 3, 2011 in Cincinnati, Ohio.
“This is the 7th year we have participated in SEREB. USFSP has qualified for Nationals the 4 years that the regional has been a feeder for nationals. We came in 4th, 3rd, 5th, 3rd in Regionals,” Dr. Deni Elliot, the Ethics professor at USFSP, said in an email interview.
The Ethics Bowl is similar to a debate team. The schools competing receive 12 potential cases that could be topics for any individual round. The teams prepare ahead of time doing a lot of research to back up their arguments, which are usually for or against.
The competition is divided up into three rounds in the morning, a lunch break while the judges tally scores, the afternoon rounds with the top four teams, and finally an awards ceremony.
Teams are scored on how well they argued their point, their response to their opponent’s questions, comments about the responding team’s topic, and finally the response to the judges’ questions. Teams are ranked by score differentials. After the end of the first three rounds, the teams with the greatest sum of differentials win. For example, Eckerd College came in first place. In their first three rounds their differentials totaled 100 points. University of Central Florida, whose team placed second, had a differential total of 60.
The top five teams qualify for the National Ethics Bowl. There are 10 regional competitions in the country.
On Nov. 13, 10 students from USFSP and their coach, Amanda Decker, arrived at the EpiCenter ready to argue ethics on several different hot topic cases. USFSP was just one team out of 24 that arrived to compete. Other local teams were Eckerd College, University of South Florida, and University of Tampa.
Opening ceremony began with several speakers, such as Karen White and Dr. Deni Elliot from USFSP. Dr. Elliot has a long history with Ethics Bowl. She established the Northeast Regional Ethics Bowl as well as the Southeast Regional Ethics Bowl. She has also been involved in the Nation Ethics Bowl since 1997.
The first team USFSP came up against was Palm Beach Atlantic University (PBA). There was a coin toss to see who wanted to have the first chance of presenting and who would respond. USFSP won the toss and chose to respond. The first case was a called Minding Your Ethics. This case spoke about a gentleman sitting in a bar and overhearing a controversial discussion regarding gay’s that he did not agree with. This case was a favorite of Kelsie Vosburgh née McClain, a presenter on USFSP’s team.
“I got married during preparations for Ethics Bowl, and I told everyone,” McClain said. “But as for having the case I worked on be first, I was nervous.”
When it was USFSP’s turn to respond, McClain stated her counterargument. PBA claimed they appreciated her argument and then proceeded to tell her why she was incorrect in her thinking. Then the judges took their time asking PBA questions and trying to find holes in their argument.
Finally, it was USFSP’s turn to present their lead argument for a case. It was called Spanking. Arielle Stevenson for USFSP took the lead on this case. She presented her argument clearly and in a neutral manner.
“I just to be clear,” Stevenson said. “We do not support any type of physical abuse for a child, but in accordance to the American Heart Association, a firm pat to the behind when appropriate is allowed.”
In the end, the judges’ scores were close. USFSP pulled through with a differential of 11.
The next round was against University of South Carolina Aiken (USC). There was another coin toss and USC decided to present first. Their case was Outwitting Insurers and involved brokers scamming people who were terminally ill. Kelsie Vosbrugh took charge of this case as well and presented a good argument on why they did not agree with USC.
The case USFSP presented had to do with Facebook privacy. USFSP had a shaky start on this but Taylor Gaudens pulled herself together and pulled out a strong offense. The judging during this round was interesting though. While the judges are not required to ask questions, the teams were both thrown off when one of them did not.
The differential for this round was even closer. USFSP won by two points.
“I thought my team did great. Of course there were a few areas that could have been worked on, but with the timing and pressure, I am very proud of what they accomplished,” Tara McCarty said. She worked with Gaudens on researching the case.
The final team USFSP went against in the morning rounds was Georgia Military Academy Valdosta (GMA). USFSP presented first. The case was called Real-Life Avatar. The case had to do with the Belo Monte dam and the possible relocation of the natives in the area. Kevin McCarthy presented this case and did so strongly.
GMA presented a case called Spanish Ban on Bullfighting. Their presentation was interesting. Their spokesperson had a very short presentation and his teammates were not pleased by it. Taylor Gaudens took charge of this case for USFSP and made a great argument on why bullfighting was not ethical.
GMA agreed with this argument. This was the first time during this happened during the competition.
USFSP did a great job in this round and it sealed their third place title. They won with a 15 point differential.
During lunch, judges announced the final scores. Eckerd College came in first. University of Central Florida (UCF) came in second. University of South Florida St. Petersburg came in third. The Naval Academy came in fourth. Finally, Samford University came in fifth. However, they did not compete in the afternoon competition.
“I think that our team was very strong, which I find particularly impressive. This was the first year for the undergrads to participate and Amanda's first year coaching alone,” Elliot said when the scores came back.
The first round of afternoon sessions was UCF versus Samford and Eckerd versus USFSP. USFSP had been weary of going up against Eckerd. Their coach and Dr. Elliot had mentioned they were a tough team to beat.
“I was nervous,” Heather Hill, a presenter, said. None of the cases she worked on specifically had been presented yet. There was a good chance one of hers would be next.
Before the match against Eckerd, there was also a presenter switch. Danny McDonald came in for Taylor Gaudens. All of the cases Gaudens had worked on had been presented. There was a good chance that one of McDonald’s cases would come up as well.
The match against Eckerd began with a case called Children of Illegal Immigrants. This case had to do with the 14th amendment. Eckerd presented their argument first. Heather Hill battled her nerves and presented the team’s rebuttal. She stated her points clearly and her team felt she did a good job.
The second case was called CGI Child Porn. This case was presented by Danny McDonald.
“I could have been a lot more prepared and practiced a lot more,” McDonald said.
He had a rough start, but when he found his voice, the argument was very well spoken. It was the judges who really poked through the case. But with teammate Kevin McCarthy, USFSP pulled through.
Although Eckerd won the round by 10 points, Eckerd said USFSP had been the toughest team they had come up against so far.
“The team did great!” Coach Amanda Decker said. “I am so proud of all the hard work the presenters and researchers put in this semester, and very glad they had the opportunity to show that work off. The team remained strong through some tough competition and difficult judge’s questions.”
USFSP was awarded the third place trophy during the award ceremony. It currently resides in the Journalism Department on display.
Thursday, December 9, 2010
Tuesday, November 16, 2010
Relaxation Program Hits the Dust
“The Relaxation Program is cancelled,” Daniel McDonald, a Student Government member, said.
Vice Chancellor Kent Kelso put his foot down when McDonald requested $1,200 for 36 hammocks. This was the first bill from Student Government that he did not approve.
“We purchased the hammocks two times, but then had to cancel the orders,” McDonald said. This was because McDonald did not know he needed a signature of approval. In order for funding to be given for a student government run organization, the Vice Chancellor needs to approve it.
“The program was not denied, just the funding for $1,500 worth of hammocks,” Kelso said. “I thought they were going to do a smaller project with just a few hammocks. Their request was denied under the caveat that they would consider doing a scaled down version to see if there truly was student participation.”
According to McDonald, he had a lot of support from his fellow SG members as well as some of the student body. The point of the program was for students to be able to relax and take a break on campus. McDonald’s vision included a meditation area and the possibilities of even a yoga instructor.
“We’re a laid back campus and we all need time to chill out,” McDonald said.
There is the possibility the hammocks will be purchased. This will only happen if Student Government President James Scott approves the funds from the executive budget. Even then, it would only be about four hammocks.
If they come, students would be able to rent them from the waterfront. The process is the same for a student who would rent a kayak. One goes to the waterfront with their student ID and requests the item they want to rent. The student has a certain amount of time to return it. If they go over a certain amount of time, they have to pay a $5 fee.
“I love and support the hammock idea,” Caitlin Greene, a freshman, said.
But according to Courtney Walker, a freshman, she would not rent one if it was work.
“I think it is a waste of money,” Nicole Cate, a sophomore, said. “They made a Facebook announcement that it was available and it wasn’t. SG needs to tell people things are available when they aren’t.”
Vice Chancellor Kent Kelso put his foot down when McDonald requested $1,200 for 36 hammocks. This was the first bill from Student Government that he did not approve.
“We purchased the hammocks two times, but then had to cancel the orders,” McDonald said. This was because McDonald did not know he needed a signature of approval. In order for funding to be given for a student government run organization, the Vice Chancellor needs to approve it.
“The program was not denied, just the funding for $1,500 worth of hammocks,” Kelso said. “I thought they were going to do a smaller project with just a few hammocks. Their request was denied under the caveat that they would consider doing a scaled down version to see if there truly was student participation.”
According to McDonald, he had a lot of support from his fellow SG members as well as some of the student body. The point of the program was for students to be able to relax and take a break on campus. McDonald’s vision included a meditation area and the possibilities of even a yoga instructor.
“We’re a laid back campus and we all need time to chill out,” McDonald said.
There is the possibility the hammocks will be purchased. This will only happen if Student Government President James Scott approves the funds from the executive budget. Even then, it would only be about four hammocks.
If they come, students would be able to rent them from the waterfront. The process is the same for a student who would rent a kayak. One goes to the waterfront with their student ID and requests the item they want to rent. The student has a certain amount of time to return it. If they go over a certain amount of time, they have to pay a $5 fee.
“I love and support the hammock idea,” Caitlin Greene, a freshman, said.
But according to Courtney Walker, a freshman, she would not rent one if it was work.
“I think it is a waste of money,” Nicole Cate, a sophomore, said. “They made a Facebook announcement that it was available and it wasn’t. SG needs to tell people things are available when they aren’t.”
Tuesday, November 2, 2010
Recycling in the Dorms
“Great in theory, poor in practice,” Nicole Cate said in regards to the recycling program in the Residence Hall.
Last year, the recycling program in the dorms was shut down due to students mixing their trash in with the recyclables. Now thanks to Student Environment Awareness Society, it is back, but students are not thrilled that they are not getting everything they have been promised such as individual suite recycling bins. Unfortunately, only the first and second floors of the RHO have received them.
“The bins in the room would make things easier,” Susan Wanner, a RHO resident, said.
SEAS has partnered up with Waste Services, Inc. They pick up the most recycling items in the city. WSI is also providing free pick up and free bins for the RHO. The dorms are not the only recycling program that has begun this semester. The City of St. Petersburg has joined together with WSI and started a curbside recycling pick up. This has caused a shortage of bins.
When the program was originally cancelled petitions were sent around the dorms to try and get it back. According to SEAS, only three-fourths of the dorm residents signed the petition. Chris Hastings, the Repower America Campus Coordinator and SEAS Campaign Director, took it and a 30 page proposal to various committees including Student Government, but nothing really came from it at the time.
With the new year and the new program, recycling brochures were passed out to all residents and recycling in the dorms has gotten easier, even with the lack of personal bins.
“There are at least three bins on every floor,” Stephanie Lawler, President of SEAS. “They are for glass, plastic, aluminum, paper, and cardboard.”
Recycling rangers are volunteers in the dorms. They are headed by Kate Dworsky, who is also the seventh floor resident assistant. Her job in the dorms is to collect the bins and make sure it is not contaminated with too much garbage. They empty the bins and sort it into the bins that are picked up by WSI. She was not available for a comment.
University of South Florida St. Petersburg saves about $2,000 per year. This is because recycling pick up is free, but the school does pay for trash pick- up. Recycling is campus wide, but there are some restrictions on where bins can be placed. For example, bins in the library need to be placed by the restrooms so they are not considered an eye sore.
If recycling is well received, SEAS is going to try and get other recycling programs started as well.
“We want to also recycle ink cartridges, batteries and cell phones,” said Lawler.
According to Lawler, recycling ink cartridges can be used as fundraisers to raise money. Batteries should not be thrown in the garbage because they can cause long term pollution. Collecting used cell phones can be donated to women’s abuse shelters.
“I like recycling and I think it is good for the environment,” Lexi Parr, a student assistant in the RHO, said.
Last year, the recycling program in the dorms was shut down due to students mixing their trash in with the recyclables. Now thanks to Student Environment Awareness Society, it is back, but students are not thrilled that they are not getting everything they have been promised such as individual suite recycling bins. Unfortunately, only the first and second floors of the RHO have received them.
“The bins in the room would make things easier,” Susan Wanner, a RHO resident, said.
SEAS has partnered up with Waste Services, Inc. They pick up the most recycling items in the city. WSI is also providing free pick up and free bins for the RHO. The dorms are not the only recycling program that has begun this semester. The City of St. Petersburg has joined together with WSI and started a curbside recycling pick up. This has caused a shortage of bins.
When the program was originally cancelled petitions were sent around the dorms to try and get it back. According to SEAS, only three-fourths of the dorm residents signed the petition. Chris Hastings, the Repower America Campus Coordinator and SEAS Campaign Director, took it and a 30 page proposal to various committees including Student Government, but nothing really came from it at the time.
With the new year and the new program, recycling brochures were passed out to all residents and recycling in the dorms has gotten easier, even with the lack of personal bins.
“There are at least three bins on every floor,” Stephanie Lawler, President of SEAS. “They are for glass, plastic, aluminum, paper, and cardboard.”
Recycling rangers are volunteers in the dorms. They are headed by Kate Dworsky, who is also the seventh floor resident assistant. Her job in the dorms is to collect the bins and make sure it is not contaminated with too much garbage. They empty the bins and sort it into the bins that are picked up by WSI. She was not available for a comment.
University of South Florida St. Petersburg saves about $2,000 per year. This is because recycling pick up is free, but the school does pay for trash pick- up. Recycling is campus wide, but there are some restrictions on where bins can be placed. For example, bins in the library need to be placed by the restrooms so they are not considered an eye sore.
If recycling is well received, SEAS is going to try and get other recycling programs started as well.
“We want to also recycle ink cartridges, batteries and cell phones,” said Lawler.
According to Lawler, recycling ink cartridges can be used as fundraisers to raise money. Batteries should not be thrown in the garbage because they can cause long term pollution. Collecting used cell phones can be donated to women’s abuse shelters.
“I like recycling and I think it is good for the environment,” Lexi Parr, a student assistant in the RHO, said.
Tuesday, October 26, 2010
USFSP Awaits Funds for Future Multi-Purpose Student Center
A new age could be dawning on the University of St. Petersburg. Over the past 10 years, USFSP has fought economic pressure. The campus started off as a commuter college, with barely enough parking. The students wanted more. A parking garage was built. Students wanted to live on campus. A residence hall was built. Students want more degrees. A science and technology building was designed. Now, students are calling for more housing and a place to kick back with their friends. So, USFSP administration will be awaiting the approval of funds for the building of a new Multi-Purpose Student Center.
During the next two months or so, the financial proposal of $20 million for the MPSC building will be going through the Board of Trustees and Board of Governors to get approval before any ground can be broken. The ideal date is to have the building up and inhabitable by the Fall semester of 2012.
“We need to get bonds,” Regional Chancellor Margret Sullivan said. According to Sullivan, the new governmental legislation passed does not allow the use of student fees to be used for building purposes.
The new building will be in the lot where the sand volleyball courts stand now. It will consist of a student center and residence hall. If and when construction happens, the courts will be knocked down and possibly relocated.
“These are sacrifices everyone has to make,” Vice Chancellor Kent Kelso said. He does believe; however, the basketball courts will probably remain where they are.
The MPSC will be six stories with the residence hall portion being on part of the second and third floors and entirely on the fourth, fifth, and sixth floors. Kay-Lynne Taylor, Director of Student Services has been an integral part in the design of this area.
Taylor sits on five different committees that are involved in the planning and design of the residence hall.
“My 23 years of University Housing experience allows me to figure out what is missing, the pricing, and to make sure the spacing is operational for the building,” Taylor said.
The plan is to have the dorms be set up in traditional housing style. This means two roommates will share a room and bathroom. They hope to be able to fit about 196 beds in the building. Residence Hall One currently houses about 390 students. This does not count the 43 who are residing in the Hilton.
“We need a new building and more room for kids,” Jamal Wise, a junior, said.
With the possibility of new housing space, one hopes it will alleviate the overflow into optional housing such as hotels. While it should help with putting waitlist students in a bed, the idea is not necessarily to get rid of the list entirely.
“It is always good to have a waitlist because you know you have the demand,” Taylor said.
“It’s a great way to get away from being considered a commuter campus,” Nicole Cate, a sophomore, said.
Besides dorms, the MPSC will have a dining area and student services. According to Kelso, it will have a similar look to the Marshall Center at University of South Florida Tampa.
A meal plan has been discussed, but the details have not been finalized. A traditional meal plan consists of 19 meals with a declining balance.
Matthew Morrin, Director of Student Life has been involved in the planning to make sure the students have what they need in regards to students space in the MPSC. The plan is to have office space for clubs and organizations. This also includes space for leadership programs and meeting rooms. There are hopes, according to Morrin, that Health Services may go into this building as well as administration offices.
“I have been here for five years. When we started there were 14-17 clubs and organizations, now there are about 80,” Morrin said. “I think the growth is wonderful.”
The design might include a type of game area for students, but that has to be a demand from the students. Student Government has been used in this case. A committee has been attending building and planning meetings in order to make sure the estimated 6,000 members of the student body is heard and their needs are met.
If the financial plan goes through, this will just be the beginning of a new University of South Florida St. Petersburg.
“In 10 years, when one says St. Petersburg, they are going to think the MLK Parade and this University,” Wise said.
During the next two months or so, the financial proposal of $20 million for the MPSC building will be going through the Board of Trustees and Board of Governors to get approval before any ground can be broken. The ideal date is to have the building up and inhabitable by the Fall semester of 2012.
“We need to get bonds,” Regional Chancellor Margret Sullivan said. According to Sullivan, the new governmental legislation passed does not allow the use of student fees to be used for building purposes.
The new building will be in the lot where the sand volleyball courts stand now. It will consist of a student center and residence hall. If and when construction happens, the courts will be knocked down and possibly relocated.
“These are sacrifices everyone has to make,” Vice Chancellor Kent Kelso said. He does believe; however, the basketball courts will probably remain where they are.
The MPSC will be six stories with the residence hall portion being on part of the second and third floors and entirely on the fourth, fifth, and sixth floors. Kay-Lynne Taylor, Director of Student Services has been an integral part in the design of this area.
Taylor sits on five different committees that are involved in the planning and design of the residence hall.
“My 23 years of University Housing experience allows me to figure out what is missing, the pricing, and to make sure the spacing is operational for the building,” Taylor said.
The plan is to have the dorms be set up in traditional housing style. This means two roommates will share a room and bathroom. They hope to be able to fit about 196 beds in the building. Residence Hall One currently houses about 390 students. This does not count the 43 who are residing in the Hilton.
“We need a new building and more room for kids,” Jamal Wise, a junior, said.
With the possibility of new housing space, one hopes it will alleviate the overflow into optional housing such as hotels. While it should help with putting waitlist students in a bed, the idea is not necessarily to get rid of the list entirely.
“It is always good to have a waitlist because you know you have the demand,” Taylor said.
“It’s a great way to get away from being considered a commuter campus,” Nicole Cate, a sophomore, said.
Besides dorms, the MPSC will have a dining area and student services. According to Kelso, it will have a similar look to the Marshall Center at University of South Florida Tampa.
A meal plan has been discussed, but the details have not been finalized. A traditional meal plan consists of 19 meals with a declining balance.
Matthew Morrin, Director of Student Life has been involved in the planning to make sure the students have what they need in regards to students space in the MPSC. The plan is to have office space for clubs and organizations. This also includes space for leadership programs and meeting rooms. There are hopes, according to Morrin, that Health Services may go into this building as well as administration offices.
“I have been here for five years. When we started there were 14-17 clubs and organizations, now there are about 80,” Morrin said. “I think the growth is wonderful.”
The design might include a type of game area for students, but that has to be a demand from the students. Student Government has been used in this case. A committee has been attending building and planning meetings in order to make sure the estimated 6,000 members of the student body is heard and their needs are met.
If the financial plan goes through, this will just be the beginning of a new University of South Florida St. Petersburg.
“In 10 years, when one says St. Petersburg, they are going to think the MLK Parade and this University,” Wise said.
Saturday, September 25, 2010
The Hilton, a dorm for students?
Walking into Residence Hall One for check-in was different this year. Students were asked a new question, “Are you on the Hilton list or the RHO one?”
The Department of Residential Life and Housing received more fall housing contracts then they have beds. This was not something new, but this year, administrators decided they were not going to have a wait list. They said yes to all contracts.
“The goal is to house as many students as we can,” Director of Student Services Kay-lynne Taylor said.
The Hilton was one of three alternative housing options administrators were investigating. The Hilton was the cheapest and in a good location for the students to walk to campus. Two floors were rented and a Resident’s Assistant is available on site.
“We were lucky to get the Hilton,” Vice Chancellor Kent Kelso said. Apparently, it is typical practice for universities to look for outside housing.
Unfortunately, staying at the Hilton is a little more expensive than the RHO, Kelso said. It is about $42.50 a day for students to stay at Hilton, versus the $34 a day at the RHO. But the amenities make up for it. Students have full access to the dorms, as well as full Hilton furniture, once a week maid service and access to the pool.
Students are not being held to this option. They were encouraged to look for alternative housing; if found, students were allowed to break their contract with the Housing department without a cancellation fee. This is not a regular option offered to students.
This is only a temporary fix for these students.
“There is no spring contract with the Hilton,” Kelso said. Administrators are relying on students finding alternative housing from the RHO and the Hilton. When beds become available, the rest of the Hilton students will move into the RHO.
According to Kelso, safety was a big factor in choosing the Hilton. They have a full security force on site. The Hilton is not in USF Police jurisdiction, so they are working with St. Petersburg Police, Lt. Reggie Oliver said. They drive by the Hilton on a regular basis to make sure the students walking back to the hotel are safe.
Margret Manzano and Jessica Masucci are two freshmen and roommates at the Hilton. They like having the hotel’s amenities.
“The bed is nice and I do not want to give it up,” Masucci said.
Crystal Mellor, a sophomore, on the other hand, is not happy with her accommodations at the hotel. She had applied for summer and fall housing at the same time, but supposedly the administration did not tell Mellor they did not receive it, so she was forced to the Hilton. Her mom is not happy with the situation either because of the greater cost.
“It’s ok for the most part, but I wish I was in the dorms,” Mellor said.
Olin Meusling, a freshman, said he had allergies from dust and other irritants for the first two weeks of his stay at the Hilton. He would rather be in the dorms, but is looking for an apartment.
One major complaint people have with the Hilton is the lack of a kitchen.
“I am living off fast food, restaurant food, and fruit,” said Mellor.
USF St. Petersburg negotiated a contract with a local restaurant called Café 100. The owner is offering great discounts for students. They can get breakfast, lunch and dinner, for about $6 or less per meal.
Another issue students are having is with the Wi-Fi and internet connections. Students are finding it really slow. Meusling asked the Hilton if they were going to fix the Wi-Fi connection. They told him to “tough it out and use the landline.”
A representative from the Hilton was not available to comment.
Administrators are pleased there are so many students wanting to live on campus. Having the wait list for several years in a row have allowed for the building of another residence hall. It has been projected as the new student center and residence hall construction will possibly begin in December 2010.
The Department of Residential Life and Housing received more fall housing contracts then they have beds. This was not something new, but this year, administrators decided they were not going to have a wait list. They said yes to all contracts.
“The goal is to house as many students as we can,” Director of Student Services Kay-lynne Taylor said.
The Hilton was one of three alternative housing options administrators were investigating. The Hilton was the cheapest and in a good location for the students to walk to campus. Two floors were rented and a Resident’s Assistant is available on site.
“We were lucky to get the Hilton,” Vice Chancellor Kent Kelso said. Apparently, it is typical practice for universities to look for outside housing.
Unfortunately, staying at the Hilton is a little more expensive than the RHO, Kelso said. It is about $42.50 a day for students to stay at Hilton, versus the $34 a day at the RHO. But the amenities make up for it. Students have full access to the dorms, as well as full Hilton furniture, once a week maid service and access to the pool.
Students are not being held to this option. They were encouraged to look for alternative housing; if found, students were allowed to break their contract with the Housing department without a cancellation fee. This is not a regular option offered to students.
This is only a temporary fix for these students.
“There is no spring contract with the Hilton,” Kelso said. Administrators are relying on students finding alternative housing from the RHO and the Hilton. When beds become available, the rest of the Hilton students will move into the RHO.
According to Kelso, safety was a big factor in choosing the Hilton. They have a full security force on site. The Hilton is not in USF Police jurisdiction, so they are working with St. Petersburg Police, Lt. Reggie Oliver said. They drive by the Hilton on a regular basis to make sure the students walking back to the hotel are safe.
Margret Manzano and Jessica Masucci are two freshmen and roommates at the Hilton. They like having the hotel’s amenities.
“The bed is nice and I do not want to give it up,” Masucci said.
Crystal Mellor, a sophomore, on the other hand, is not happy with her accommodations at the hotel. She had applied for summer and fall housing at the same time, but supposedly the administration did not tell Mellor they did not receive it, so she was forced to the Hilton. Her mom is not happy with the situation either because of the greater cost.
“It’s ok for the most part, but I wish I was in the dorms,” Mellor said.
Olin Meusling, a freshman, said he had allergies from dust and other irritants for the first two weeks of his stay at the Hilton. He would rather be in the dorms, but is looking for an apartment.
One major complaint people have with the Hilton is the lack of a kitchen.
“I am living off fast food, restaurant food, and fruit,” said Mellor.
USF St. Petersburg negotiated a contract with a local restaurant called Café 100. The owner is offering great discounts for students. They can get breakfast, lunch and dinner, for about $6 or less per meal.
Another issue students are having is with the Wi-Fi and internet connections. Students are finding it really slow. Meusling asked the Hilton if they were going to fix the Wi-Fi connection. They told him to “tough it out and use the landline.”
A representative from the Hilton was not available to comment.
Administrators are pleased there are so many students wanting to live on campus. Having the wait list for several years in a row have allowed for the building of another residence hall. It has been projected as the new student center and residence hall construction will possibly begin in December 2010.
Monday, July 12, 2010
Golden Gate water most expensive in Southwest Florida
Golden Gate water customers pay the highest rates in Southwest Florida, following a 14 percent rate hike by Florida Governmental Utility Authority. As of July 1, the average bill for a 6,000 gallon user on water and sewer in Golden Gate city jumps from $118 to $133 per month, compared to $55 in the City of Naples and $81 for Collier County users.
“Our residents are already suffering from a bad economy. Many have lost their jobs and are facing the loss of their homes,” said water customer Bill Combs, who also serves on the FGUA citizen advisory committee. “We just gave you (an increase) for operations and maintenance, now we're hit again with a 14 percent increase?”
This is FGUA's second major increase in less than two years. In September 2008, customers were hit with a 7.5 percent rate increase.
The utility, which serves the four-mile square of Golden Gate city, is one of four owned by FGUA, which was formed in 1999 through an Interlocal agreement between Brevard, Lee, Polk, and Sarasota counties. A member from each participating agency sits on the FGUA board. Because Collier County did not own the Golden Gate system, it chose not to participate, leaving Golden Gate customers with no representation on the FGUA board.
“Your rates are high, we can't say they're not,” said Robert Ori, of Public Resources Management Group, a utility management consultant hired by FGUA. “Golden Gate is not alone. Systems all across the state are suffering from falling trends in growth and sales.”
But Golden Gate stands alone in its rate costs, which far exceed those of all other cities and counties in Southwest Florida. As of September 2009, the utility served 3,337 water accounts and 2,139 sewer accounts. Because the system was never built out, many homes in Golden Gate city are served by well and septic. That means the brunt of the utility's losses and debt fall on a small customer base.
In his findings and recommendations outlined during a public hearing, June 16, in Golden Gate, Ori stated the utility is suffering from $36 million debt, loss of customers and an 11 percent decrease in consumption. The final rate increase was approved, June 17, during the FGUA board meeting in Fort Myers.
Under current Florida law, FGUA's board has the ability to approve its own rates without oversight by the Florida Public Service Commission or the Collier County Water and Wastewater Utility Authority.
The only recourse for Golden Gate customers is a clause in an interlocal agreement with FGUA, allowing Collier County staff non-binding review of FGUA rate increases. According to Jamie French, director of Operations and Regulatory Management for Collier County, his office received some information, but did not receive enough data to adequately review the rate hike.
“We did not receive all the information FGUA presented for this meeting,” said French, who attended the final rate hearing. “Some of the numbers presented to the board, Collier staff had never seen before.”
French said it typically takes takes a minimum of 90 days or at most 30 months to review a rate case under National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners (NARUC) regulations, but FGUA is considered a government utility and not subject to NARUC guidelines.
In his presentation, Ori stated the rate adjustment was necessary to meet the debt service on the utility's $36.3 million debt and offset losses in customer base (down 350 customers) and an 11 percent drop in consumption.
Over 49 percent of the utility's $6.2 million budget for 2010 is tied to debt. Another 43 percent to administation and operations and only .96 percent to capital projects and 1.6 percent to professional services. Administrative services for the public-private entity are contracted to Government Services Group and operations are contracted to Severn Trent.
Ori said with three months remaining in the 2009-10 fiscal year, the utility needs a 7 percent increase to meet its bond covenants and break even. He said by setting the rate at 14 percent now, the utility will be able to build some working capital and avoid a request for an additional 7 percent, three to five months from now.
When asked what has been done to lower administrative and operating costs, Government Services Group municipal services director Stephen Spratt said his company voluntarily froze its fees in 2009.
He said Severn Trent, the contractor for operations and billing services, declined requests to renegotiate any reductions in its contract, stating costs had been fixed for five years. In 2006, Severn Trent negotiated a $74 million five-year contract with an additional five year option to operate and maintain FGUA's four water and wastewater systems. That contract comes up for renewal in 2011.
Spratt said several proposed projects have been canceled or deferred for the Golden Gate utility. He said the only project not deferred was the expansion of the wastewater treatment plant, which had been flagged by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection for operating over capacity for several years.
According to Spratt the utility plans to continue talks with Collier County to discuss a buy-out or ways the two entities can work together. It would cost the county more than $36 million to purchase the Golden Gate system from FGUA.
“With that kind of debt, it doesn't seem like they'll every get out from under it,” said water customer Ed Rogan, who also serves on the FGUA Customer Advisory Board. “Sounds like I should just drill a well in my yard and disconnect from their system.”
Water/Sewer rate comparison (high to low) monthly charge on 6,000 gallon usage:
FGUA Golden Gate system, $130
Marco Island, $112
City of Ft. Myers, $108
FGUA Lehigh system, $105
City of Cape Coral, $100
Bonita Springs, $83
Collier County, $81
Lee County, $72
City of Naples, $55
“Our residents are already suffering from a bad economy. Many have lost their jobs and are facing the loss of their homes,” said water customer Bill Combs, who also serves on the FGUA citizen advisory committee. “We just gave you (an increase) for operations and maintenance, now we're hit again with a 14 percent increase?”
This is FGUA's second major increase in less than two years. In September 2008, customers were hit with a 7.5 percent rate increase.
The utility, which serves the four-mile square of Golden Gate city, is one of four owned by FGUA, which was formed in 1999 through an Interlocal agreement between Brevard, Lee, Polk, and Sarasota counties. A member from each participating agency sits on the FGUA board. Because Collier County did not own the Golden Gate system, it chose not to participate, leaving Golden Gate customers with no representation on the FGUA board.
“Your rates are high, we can't say they're not,” said Robert Ori, of Public Resources Management Group, a utility management consultant hired by FGUA. “Golden Gate is not alone. Systems all across the state are suffering from falling trends in growth and sales.”
But Golden Gate stands alone in its rate costs, which far exceed those of all other cities and counties in Southwest Florida. As of September 2009, the utility served 3,337 water accounts and 2,139 sewer accounts. Because the system was never built out, many homes in Golden Gate city are served by well and septic. That means the brunt of the utility's losses and debt fall on a small customer base.
In his findings and recommendations outlined during a public hearing, June 16, in Golden Gate, Ori stated the utility is suffering from $36 million debt, loss of customers and an 11 percent decrease in consumption. The final rate increase was approved, June 17, during the FGUA board meeting in Fort Myers.
Under current Florida law, FGUA's board has the ability to approve its own rates without oversight by the Florida Public Service Commission or the Collier County Water and Wastewater Utility Authority.
The only recourse for Golden Gate customers is a clause in an interlocal agreement with FGUA, allowing Collier County staff non-binding review of FGUA rate increases. According to Jamie French, director of Operations and Regulatory Management for Collier County, his office received some information, but did not receive enough data to adequately review the rate hike.
“We did not receive all the information FGUA presented for this meeting,” said French, who attended the final rate hearing. “Some of the numbers presented to the board, Collier staff had never seen before.”
French said it typically takes takes a minimum of 90 days or at most 30 months to review a rate case under National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners (NARUC) regulations, but FGUA is considered a government utility and not subject to NARUC guidelines.
In his presentation, Ori stated the rate adjustment was necessary to meet the debt service on the utility's $36.3 million debt and offset losses in customer base (down 350 customers) and an 11 percent drop in consumption.
Over 49 percent of the utility's $6.2 million budget for 2010 is tied to debt. Another 43 percent to administation and operations and only .96 percent to capital projects and 1.6 percent to professional services. Administrative services for the public-private entity are contracted to Government Services Group and operations are contracted to Severn Trent.
Ori said with three months remaining in the 2009-10 fiscal year, the utility needs a 7 percent increase to meet its bond covenants and break even. He said by setting the rate at 14 percent now, the utility will be able to build some working capital and avoid a request for an additional 7 percent, three to five months from now.
When asked what has been done to lower administrative and operating costs, Government Services Group municipal services director Stephen Spratt said his company voluntarily froze its fees in 2009.
He said Severn Trent, the contractor for operations and billing services, declined requests to renegotiate any reductions in its contract, stating costs had been fixed for five years. In 2006, Severn Trent negotiated a $74 million five-year contract with an additional five year option to operate and maintain FGUA's four water and wastewater systems. That contract comes up for renewal in 2011.
Spratt said several proposed projects have been canceled or deferred for the Golden Gate utility. He said the only project not deferred was the expansion of the wastewater treatment plant, which had been flagged by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection for operating over capacity for several years.
According to Spratt the utility plans to continue talks with Collier County to discuss a buy-out or ways the two entities can work together. It would cost the county more than $36 million to purchase the Golden Gate system from FGUA.
“With that kind of debt, it doesn't seem like they'll every get out from under it,” said water customer Ed Rogan, who also serves on the FGUA Customer Advisory Board. “Sounds like I should just drill a well in my yard and disconnect from their system.”
Water/Sewer rate comparison (high to low) monthly charge on 6,000 gallon usage:
FGUA Golden Gate system, $130
Marco Island, $112
City of Ft. Myers, $108
FGUA Lehigh system, $105
City of Cape Coral, $100
Bonita Springs, $83
Collier County, $81
Lee County, $72
City of Naples, $55
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)