Referendum 15th Nov

freyners

that result is hard to stomach

Polar Ice

Do I win something for calling it correctly?

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=81760534&postcount=182

freyners

I see an alumnus of here now has a FB page who is quite delighted

Ill say it again, Its hard to stomach that result. A 60% majority of people voted for the motion. However rules are rules and the result is one we will all have to live with.

what needs to be done now is to sit down and look at what went wrong, the student centre seems to have been the main sticking point for many so look there. Personally I was in favour of all three motions but I realise that nearly 40% of people werent. hopefully they will express their reasons in the coming days to see if something can be done to change their minds.

Polar Ice wrote: »

Do I win something for calling it correctly?

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=81760534&postcount=182

here ya go

Chimaera

I can't help wondering how much of the no vote is a protest vote against the Students' Union?

Interest in, and engagement with, the union is at a very low level among the student population, based on the attendance at recent general meetings. Last year's problems among the sabbat team can't have done much to help matters, at least among the 2nd-4th years.

Nockz

What a fantastic turnout though. I personally don't think the SU can be blamed for any wrong doing here. They campaigned hardest when it mattered. I know I encouraged as many people as I knew to get informed and vote.

chrislad

freyners wrote: »

. Personally I was in favour of all three motions but I realise that nearly 40% of people werent. hopefully they will express their reasons in the coming days to see if something can be done to change their minds.

Ah, the old Nice Treaty plan. Get them to vote again until the result is what you want. Classic. :pac:

Chimaera

There's nothing necessarily with holding a second vote, but work has to be done by the union in the meantime.

Why did people vote no?

What can be done to assuage people's fears/grievances?

Would the philanthropist fund just the sports facilities if those were passed individually?

Are there other funding opportunities that can be investigated to ease the burden on students?

MajesticDonkey

Chimaera wrote: »

There's nothing necessarily with holding a second vote, but work has to be done by the union in the meantime.

I don't actually get why there should be another vote. Should the SU not worship students' opinions this time round? Would they be so quick to hold a second vote if this one was passed, I dunno, maybe to see if all the yes voters wanted to change their minds?

Agent_99

I voted Yes, not for me as hopefully will be graduating in 2014 but I have 2 sons who I hope will attend UL in the next few years and I would have liked to see them get the use of the new facilities. For an extra €58 a year it would have been a small price to pay.

Chimaera

I don't actually get why there should be another vote. Should the SU not worship students' opinions this time round? Would they be so quick to hold a second vote if this one was passed, I dunno, maybe to see if all the yes voters wanted to change their minds?

A no vote indicates the electorate didn't approve of the motion as presented. It's reasonable to allow the union to investigate the underlying issues and see if they can be resolved.

Simply turning around and presenting the same motion again will not be good enough.

freyners

chrislad wrote: »

Ah, the old Nice Treaty plan. Get them to vote again until the result is what you want. Classic. :pac:

not really, because if it's changes it aint the same thing being voted on;)

MajesticDonkey

Well here's my suggestion: spend Chuck's €20m on extending the library and improving the ulwireless network around the college - things that really need to be done at this time.

reunion

MajesticDonkey wrote: »

I don't actually get why there should be another vote. Should the SU not worship students' opinions this time round? Would they be so quick to hold a second vote if this one was passed, I dunno, maybe to see if all the yes voters wanted to change their minds?

According to the SU constitution a similar referendum can't happen this academic year and you are only allowed 1 referendum per semester.



Either way, record turnout which is a positive regardless of which side you went for.

J_E

The turnout is a step in the right direction, but it's still clear there needs to be a much stronger push, and more time before voting day to make this work. They only really drove the campaign on the original date of the referendum! It's a shame and frankly embarrassing that it didn't reach any sort of conclusion.

wnolan1992

Brilliant to see the turnout so high, even though part of me wonders how many of those knew the details of what they were voting for and how many just saw the "increase the levy" and voted No.

But there's nothing you can do about that really.


Some things I think could help it pass:

- Split the projects: Personally, I'd prefer if the pitches and Arena were one project, and the centre as a separate one. I think if you said that people could vote to retain the €72 and get the pitches and Arena done, or increase to €130 and get all three done, you'd likely at the very least get the pitches and arena done.

- Negotiate with the Arena: A nice incentive for people would be that the arena would offer either free or heavily discounted membership to UL Students. The argument was made earlier in the thread that even after paying the €130 you'd still have to pay €X gym membership to use facilities you in effect are paying for every year anyway.

- Added clarification: Try and get specific answers to questions like what'll happen to the current SU (only ever saw vague answers to that), CSIS (I know Polar Ice in particular thinks this isn't an issue, but I know for a fact that some CSIS students voted No today based on the fact there was no clarification given by the SU on this [not defending it, but it happened]). If specific answers aren't available (like on the CSIS issue for instance), try and give possibilities or communicate WHY there isn't a definite answer.


I'm sure there are more, and I'm aware there are probably problems with all of them, but those are the main ones that spring to me right now anyway.

Polar Ice

wnolan1992 wrote: »

I know Polar Ice in particular

When you originally commented you appeared concerned about the equipment in CSIS and made it sound like it was going to be disposed of. I said that wasn't an issue.

With regards to where exactly CSIS would go, that would be a question for the University and not the SU. It would be within the University's remit to field that question... but keep in mind they're hardly going to dump you out on the road. It's just you're kinda seeking info that isn't important. CSIS would be housed in a more than suitable other location on campus. The problem is once someone gives you a precise location, you'll probably over analyse the feasibility of the location & logistics involved in moving. It's in the University's best interest to accommodate CSIS properly - or they'd have more than just angry students.

Chimaera

- Split the projects: Personally, I'd prefer if the pitches and Arena were one project, and the centre as a separate one. I think if you said that people could vote to retain the €72 and get the pitches and Arena done, or increase to €130 and get all three done, you'd likely at the very least get the pitches and arena done.

Agreed.

- Negotiate with the Arena: A nice incentive for people would be that the arena would offer either free or heavily discounted membership to UL Students. The argument was made earlier in the thread that even after paying the €130 you'd still have to pay €X gym membership to use facilities you in effect are paying for every year anyway.

Yes, or even just reduce the casual rates further. Also, work with the university to bring in flexible payment options for annual fees. For some people the issue is simply having to find another €58 at the start of the year for this, on top of the other increases that will probably be added next month. Being able to spread that over multiple payments would at least soften the blow and might turn some no votes into yes votes. Even if it doesn't it'd be the SU doing something good for its members.

- Added clarification: Try and get specific answers to questions like what'll happen to the current SU (only ever saw vague answers to that), CSIS (I know Polar Ice in particular thinks this isn't an issue, but I know for a fact that some CSIS students voted No today based on the fact there was no clarification given by the SU on this [not defending it, but it happened]). If specific answers aren't available (like on the CSIS issue for instance), try and give possibilities or communicate WHY there isn't a definite answer.

The funding proposal for this project includes provision for the relocation of CSIS within the university. I believe that the university has discussed the issue but they have not publicly stated the plan. More than likely they were holding off until the referendum was complete.

wnolan1992

Polar Ice wrote: »

When you originally commented you appeared concerned about the equipment in CSIS and made it sound like it was going to be disposed of. I said that wasn't an issue.

With regards to where exactly CSIS would go, that would be a question for the University and not the SU. It would be within the University's remit to field that question... but keep in mind they're hardly going to dump you out on the road. It's just you're kinda seeking info that isn't important. CSIS would be housed in a more than suitable other location on campus. The problem is once someone gives you a precise location, you'll probably over analyse the feasibility of the location & logistics involved in moving. It's in the University's best interest to accommodate CSIS properly - or they'd have more than just angry students.

I agree with you completely. I'm sure that CSIS will be rehoused properly (maybe even in better surroundings than we currently have? :P), and that it's the Uni's responsibility. (my original posts on this were badly worded and misleading, but we've discussed this already :P)

But, I saw someone post on the Ed. Officer's FB page last night asking about it, and a few people were wondering about it this morning as well. I think a statement from Buildings and Estates as to what the likelihood of where it would go would make it a slightly easier sell to some people I know.

But of course that's a miniscule issue really, the other two I posted are the main ones to me.

Red Silurian

That's a lot more "yes" votes than I expected! Sudents being asked to dig into their pockets would have never been met with a favorable response in my day!

Slugs

Not sure what the hell I voted [Don't ask..], but the plan was a no. While I'm for the idea of reparations to Maguires and an arena extension, the new students centre was not only too ambitious, but completely unrealistic. I was also unamused by the fact that rather than asking students which of the projects they would like to see done, they lumped them all together in the hope they would help each other through. Not on. Perhaps if you hadn't done so, at least one of the ideas would have been successfully passed!

Nockz

Slugs wrote: »

Not sure what the hell I voted [Don't ask..], but the plan was a no. While I'm for the idea of reparations to Maguires and an arena extension, the new students centre was not only too ambitious, but completely unrealistic. I was also unamused by the fact that rather than asking students which of the projects they would like to see done, they lumped them all together in the hope they would help each other through. Not on. Perhaps if you hadn't done so, at least one of the ideas would have been successfully passed!

Could you elaborate the bolded?

Also, I don't think any of those things would have passed on their own.

Slugs

A cinema? For what exactly, there is one 10 minutes away that is perfectly feesible. If it's not going to be used for films, what is it going to be used for? AGM/EGM? They can't even meet quorum.

The retail outlets? As it currently stands, there are two vacant retail spots in the Current SU area, one of which has been taken up by "First 7 weeks", not to mention the vacant spots in Drumroe and Cappa. I know that has nothing really to do with SU as I believe it's own by the Plassey crowd [tired, leave me :P], but still, perhaps these spots should be filled before endeavouring on such a project.

I understand the need for more space, but those features are just, in my view, unrealistic. Concert hall is surely more than enough to use, if it can't be used get onto buildings about it. It was, I feel, both a weak and too ambitious a project, and that's why it was lumped in with the other two in order to try and pass it. Having said that, perhaps a lot of the students were the other way around to me, voted yes purely for the SC and may think Mag and Arena Ext. were weak, but whatever, that's my view on it.

Nockz

Slugs wrote: »

A cinema? For what exactly, there is one 10 minutes away that is perfectly feesible. If it's not going to be used for films, what is it going to be used for? AGM/EGM? They can't even meet quorum.

The retail outlets? As it currently stands, there are two vacant retail spots in the Current SU area, one of which has been taken up by "First 7 weeks", not to mention the vacant spots in Drumroe and Cappa. I know that has nothing really to do with SU as I believe it's own by the Plassey crowd [tired, leave me :P], but still, perhaps these spots should be filled before endeavouring on such a project.

I understand the need for more space, but those features are just, in my view, unrealistic. Concert hall is surely more than enough to use, if it can't be used get onto buildings about it. It was, I feel, both a weak and too ambitious a project, and that's why it was lumped in with the other two in order to try and pass it. Having said that, perhaps a lot of the students were the other way around to me, voted yes purely for the SC and may think Mag and Arena Ext. were weak, but whatever, that's my view on it.

Well I know for me personally, my society runs screenings weekly. We've had to have them in Kemmy, in Schuman and in the Main Building over the last few years. We're like a volleyball at a Nickelback concert. It'd sure be swell to have one location so that we could run screenings in the same place year in, year out.

In fact, we have three weekly activities. They have never all been locatd in the same building, ever. Room 3 in the SU is being booked by a lot more Clubs and Societies after the Main Building became off limits. Kemmy wouldn't let us book rooms there anymore so we have our screenings on the top floor of Schuman. We are a decently sized society and we try to get a lot of people going to activities. You know what sucks about having to have those activities on the top floor of Schuman at 6.30? They lock the main entrance to Schuman at 6 meaning you have to go in from Kemmy and meander around the deserted building.

That's two of three weekly activities we run in Schuman currently. This is absolutely something a Student Center would alleviate entirely. They could have only built empty rooms and already it would be more of a benefit to us. Having one cohesive space for any one society's activities is such a benefit, it can't be stated enough.

The Concert Hall is so far out of the reach of any society or club. That's been my exprience in the last few years. If you have to go further than the SU, you're immediately climbing a very steep hill. I have not heard of a single club or society that has successfully used the Concert Hall, ever.

Of course these things aren't necessary. My society will just have to hope there is a spot free on campus next year to run events. We'll get by, no doubt about that. Do I want anyone in the next 10 years to have to sort it out from scratch every year? Nope. Every year, every single year, brings another layer of uncertainty to our core events. We started with next to nothing and C&S have helped so much, so very much. At some point I have to look around and say I wouldn't be happy with my society if it kept growing but in 5 years, we're still stuck in awkward spots around campus. Why should we have to settle like that when there was a fantastic plan there that would have benefitted us and just about every other scoiety, hands down?

I voted yes. I reached out to my members to vote. I told them what a yes would do for us as a society. Whether or not they chose to vote is up to them. I gave them the info.

I'm honestly so delighted that there was such a high turnout. I wish it could have passed only because I know first hand how any addition to current facilities would have benefitted us.

It wasn't unrealistic in the slightest. It was the high bar that we, as students, should be striving for. We pay enough to get to college, may as well make it worth every damn cent I put in. I've used the current SU more than just about any student that voted in favour of it being built. Of that I am almost certain. We can settle for the bare minimum we have but when the chance comes in the future to expand, I hope my future counterparts vote in favour of it.

Kelefants

MajesticDonkey wrote: »

Well here's my suggestion: spend Chuck's €20m on extending the library and improving the ulwireless network around the college - things that really need to be done at this time.

Chuck Feeney's money was conditional on passing this referendum. The money was to be used on this project only. As such because a minority of students voted no, that money has been squandered. It would have been easier to stomach if the result had been a resounding no, but to have such a majority and still not pass is heartbreaking. I'm disappointed, more so for the future students who will never get to use these facilities. I spoke to a lot of students today who said they voted no, but when i questioned their reasons and explained it to them they regretted their no vote.

That being said, it was fantastic to see such an unbelievable turn out and such a great buzz about campus. I loved every minute of the campaign and was delighted to see such a vibrant campus today.

thomond2006

How much money did the SU/University spend on the planning, architectual work etc? That's dead money now...

Ginge Young

thomond2006 wrote: »

How much money did the SU/University spend on the planning, architectual work etc? That's dead money now...

Not a whole pile, the Arena was done years ago, and the SU were just very basic designs to show what a building like that may have looked like.

But as little money as it was, I'm going to do anything I can to ensure it's not dead money.

supackofidiots

Ginge Young wrote: »

Not a whole pile, the Arena was done years ago, and the SU were just very basic designs to show what a building like that may have looked like.

But as little money as it was, I'm going to do anything I can to ensure it's not dead money.

what does that mean ginger? the project is dead in the water now, finito, the students have spoken, game over.

Ginge Young

The students spoke and they said yes, just not enough. 61% was a very large majority, so I'm going to explore other routes and see if there are any other options available. Had 61% said no, I probably wouldn't, but as it is I see a clear mandate from students to see what else can be done. (granted I dont know if anything can but that's what I'll be dedicating my time to).

creepellai

supackofidiots wrote: »

what does that mean ginger? the project is dead in the water now, finito, the students have spoken, game over.

Never....!!

creepellai

Ginge Young wrote: »

The students spoke and they said yes, just not enough. 61% was a very large majority, so I'm going to explore other routes and see if there are any other options available. Had 61% said no, I probably wouldn't, but as it is I see a clear mandate from students to see what else can be done. (granted I dont know if anything can but that's what I'll be dedicating my time to).

That's the most annoying part... 61% want it but yet still it dies (well.. hopefully not!)