BoT meeting 2/25/11

susie starfish · **Joined:** Fri May 08, 2009 7:05 am **Posts:** 22

honey bear, you are right, "seeing the bad in everything" or trying to making good things look bad gets people attention but it is wrong. we like the sidewalks and thank the board for wanting uca to be safe and look nice. we hear parents and visiting students say all the time, how nice those sidewalks are. thanks to the boards vision, uca is the most beautiful campus in arkansas. the adg should be praising our board for their concern for our students,staff and faculty. the sidewalks that have been and will be replaced need to be badly, they are old and many unsafe.

BearCountry · **Joined:** Mon Jun 13, 2005 12:13 pm **Posts:** 5426

From what I know about people from Arkansas, and other states at that, is that people tend to move away from the guy or gal who always has bad news. You know, the person everyone goes, "oh lord, here she comes" as they make a hasty retreat.. :lol:

UpandIn913 · **Posted:** Sun Feb 27, 2011 10:12 pm

Honey Bear wrote:

Quote:

the negative slant that their local reporter always puts on every story

Hammer, meet nail. Just like Ms. Shelton's article yesterday with the headline about the 510 grand for the sidewalks. Very controversial (about the sidewalks) to say the least but she made it a point to lead with a big number headline as opposed to a "feel good" headline just to draw attention to her article. She pretty much thrives on these kind of articles and headlines as we have become accustomed to. Always looking for something controversial to headline a story with must be rewarding for some people no doubt. I guess in some people, seeing the bad in everything is easier to recognize than accepting the good that is presented to everyone.

She is a second rate reporter who thinks people actually care about what she is writing about everyday. Ever since the Lu story broke, she has been trying to find something to write about that would be negative towards UCA. Let her keep writing this trash because she won't have a job much longer, newspapers are a dying breed and she is a dead writer.

On a brighter note...I'm proud to have the board that we have in place right now. It really seems like everyone is coming together as one rather than what's best for their own personal agenda.

Oh and I'm not a big fan of having purple or grey turf. Just seems like we are trying to be to much like Boise and Eastern Washington. That's just my 2 cents, if it were up to me I'd say keep the grass because nobody else in the conference has grass anymore and I would think that would give us an advantage.

Here's to the bright future for UCA!! :thumbup:

joshuca · **Posted:** Tue Mar 01, 2011 9:25 am

McCollum's Column: A few tidbits about UCA athletic developments

Quote:

THE TURF

UCA’s board of trustees did three major things related to athletics this weekend. The board approved the private funding for the skyboxes at Estes Stadium (which was a formality because the project has already been approved), artificial turf on First Security Field at the softball field and the construction of a weight room.

Construction on the weight room, which will be on part of the practice field on the east side of the PepsiAmericas Center, should begin in June and be completed by January, 2012.

Installation of the turf on the softball field will begin in June and take three weeks.
The football field has a larger than average surface because it once had a track surrounding the field. It’s a 140,000-square foot area. Cost of both is estimated to be about $1 million.

The installation of the turf on the football field will take about 45 days and will begin immediately after the Bears’ spring game on April 16.

According to UCA Athletic Director Brad Teague, UCA, based on figures given to athletic department officials by physical plant officials, are estimating that UCA will save $100,000 annually in routine maintenance costs that are required for a grass field. Teague said those savings will occur from five workers who take care of the grass field will be reduced to two for the artificial field. Those three workers will not be laid off but will returned to the Physical Plant. He said UCA should also have savings from other contracted labor that is necessary for the grass fields. Teague said the Physical Plant gave UCA estimates ranging from $45,000 to $250,000 per year in equipment and supplies (such as fertilizer, water etc.) to care for a grass field with weather being the major variable.

“We took the $45,000 estimate in trying to figure out the savings,” Teague said. “It’s a conservative estimate.”

The color of the turf? It had already become a item of passionate debate among UCA fans before the official announcement. Traditional green or non-traditional purple and gray.

“We really don’t know right now,” Teague said.

UCAFANS.COM | GO UCA BEARS!

BoT meeting 2/25/11

Who is online