A new UNLV stadium is not an urgent need
To the editor:
Wednesday’s editorial arguing that the University of Nevada, Las Vegas athletics department’s future depends on getting a new stadium misses the point and shows a lack of understanding of basic math.
The public fails to understand the primary purposes of its university. The first purpose is to teach students to learn to think and solve problems, and the second is to provide students with the job skills and personal learning habits that will prepare them to be successful.
Research activities, faculty publications and world-class athletic programs are great, but these should never be the primary focus of a university, especially a state-funded one. The Massachusetts Institute of Technology boasts no athletic program that anyone can brag about but is a world-class academic institution, turning out some of the best and brightest graduates, people who have changed and will continue to change the world.
The UNLV athletics department costs roughly $12 million a year to operate, but we’re told if the taxpayers elect to fund a stadium — costing perhaps $1 billion — the revenues that the stadium generates will cover the budget and eliminate losses. But if we used the $1 billion instead to cover the annual operational costs of $12 million, it would take 83 years — far greater than the expected lifespan of the stadium – before those funds were exhausted.
And if UNLV used the $1 billion to improve the quality of its graduates, better equipping them to enter the workforce or pursue advanced degrees, just think about how much better off the state would be and how the value would be multiplied many times over in raising the standard of living and quality of life of all Nevadans.
The dire warning that unless UNLV gets a new stadium, “the entire athletic department is in jeopardy,” makes me sad for the students whose educations at UNLV are minimized because of the perception that the only important product of the university is undereducated athletes. It also makes me sad for the faculty who have done so much to make UNLV something more than just a football team.
HENRY SOLOWAY
LAS VEGAS
The son’s Sun
To the editor:
The Las Vegas Sun was put on death watch immediately after Brian Greenspun made the decision to turn a newspaper into a 52-week-a-year promotional piece for the far, far left. This former newspaper is nothing more than a continuous insert of adulation for all things Harry Reid and the bashing of conservatives.
I also am amused at the charge that the Review-Journal is the “conservative” paper in town. Most of the national news on the political front is picked up from The Associated Press — hardly known as a conservative outlet. In addition, the editorial page certainly leans right, but there is the continuous presence of hyper-partisan Steve Sebelius to quench the thirst of the liberal left.
Mr. Greenspun followed his personal political bias to turn his father’s newspaper into a political tool of the left. Frankly, he had every right to do so as the owner of the publication. What he doesn’t have the right to do is use the legal process to force his unwanted views down our throats. If people want that pap, they’ll buy it. In this case, it is obvious not enough people care for his propaganda to make it a viable concern. Goodbye, Sun.
JOSEPH SCHILLMOELLER
LAS VEGAS
