urbanMSP

Oh for Pete's sake.

Civil rights complaint claims $190M Athletes Village violates federal gender equity laws

http://www.twincities.com/sports/ci_276 ... -athletics

They're tearing out a track that provides for male and female athletes, and replacing it with a football practice facility for male athletes. Almost half of the University's women athletes are on the track or cross-country teams. They're going to have to address that, Title IX is a real thing and an important thing at that.

What he said.

They're building a new track facility in Saint Paul. An equal number of male and female athletes will be displaced.

That's not true on two levels.

1. There is no actual plan to replace the track yet. The idea is to put it in St. Paul, but there is nothing formalized.

2. Although not mentioned in the recent article, women's track is effectively a loophole in Title IX. This is from a Star Tribune article a few weeks ago:

Women’s track and cross country accounted for 227 of the university’s 501 female participants (one cross country, indoor track and outdoor track athlete can count as three participants) in 2013-14 , according to the latest equity in athletics data figures. There were 388 total men’s athletes, 337 women; but in total participation there were 471 men, 501 women.

http://www.startribune.com/sports/gophe ... 36661.html

Also, according to this Minnesota Daily article, the women's track team is almost twice as big as the men's, with 87 athletes compared to 49.
http://www.mndaily.com/sports/2015/01/2 ... violations

So the U of M is effectively pushing half of its female athletes to St. Paul while it builds a top-end facility on campus that will mostly benefit its male athletes.

There's obviously a balance. Because football brings in the most revenue of any sport, a certain investment is needed to keep that humming. At the same time, Title IX is one of our most important institutions. It's the reason why the elite U.S. women are world-class in just about every sport represented in the NCAA, but it's also one of the foundations of gender equality in our society. If college football teams wanted to go private and keep all of their revenue, they could. But as of right now, they're just corrupt, quasi-private organizations that fall under the umbrella of public institutions.

For the record, Star Tribune comments are never helpful, but the comments for that Title IX article are some of the worst I've seen.

The primary purpose the University of Minnesota's athletic program is to provide a platform collectivists exploit to give feminists jobs to sue taxpayers with tax payer dollars. Men are evil oppressors, women are perpetual victims who are unable to compete fairly without the totalitarianisms impulse to transfer stolen public funds (taxes) to distribute to others (privilege).

If men get free haircuts in the athletic program, women are entitled to pedicures and more because of real, imagined and past discrimination. The hegalian theme to pit blacks against whites, men against women is a perpetual grievance law industry.

Minnesota is one of the leading University systems pitting women against men, men against women at every turn. I can't wait for it all to go bankrupt. The sooner the better.

Great, militant feminists costing tax payers millions. I'm sorry for all men, but nobody pays to see women's sports. Most would prefer to watch the radar and weather reports. This isn't hateful. Do you know where the Lynx even played their last game?

Some things of note here. The current track complex cannot even be used for meets, because it is not up to standards due to its poor condition. it was built on top of the foundations of old homes many many years ago, and they have to keep upgrading it every 5 years to keep it up. The current track is a money pit for the athletics department. There have been plans since I was in college 15 years ago to build a new one in St Paul due to the ground conditions and lack of space on the East Bank.

Also, why does it matter where the track is? If it is on the St Paul campus, it is still on campus. Should students who have class on the West Bank or in St Paul file a lawsuit because they feel all their classes should be on the East Bank campus? They can only build it where there is room.

The inequality of spending on facitilities is way overblown at the U. The U built a women's hockey arena when they had the best arena in college hockey to play in. All because they wanted their own arena. The women's rowing team got an unbelievable facility. The new basketball facility is for the mens AND womens team. It is privately funded, and a great majority of the donors are giving because the men. So the women make out just fine in this case. And the football facility is being privately funded as well. The U does not have the right to tell a donor that 50% of their donation must go to a women's sport. And the entire complex will provide a huge benefit to men's and women's teams. Further more, the athletics department is not state funded. Any women's team should be thankful that men's bball, hockey and football are able to provide them with the great facitlites they already enjoy. Because without them, they would not have any sports teams to belong too. They would all have been shut down years ago due to costs.

1. According to the Pioneer Press story the plaintiff in the Title IX basically admits the goal of the complaint isn't related to gender but instead to save the track. The direct quote was "The goal was to either prevent the destruction of the current outdoor track or force the construction of a new track before the 2016 outdoor season." While I think you can make a decent argument that there are Title IX issues in play I think we can all agree the Title IX isn't meant to help angry track people save their track.

2. The U officially picked Mortenson to build the new facilities village, I'm guessing no one is too surprised. http://www.gophersports.com/genrel/022715aaa.html

There are some new renderings up http://nothingshortofgreatness.com/facilities.php

Looks like there is a parking lot fronting 15th Ave...what happened to the University District Alliance development principles (https://www.myu.umn.edu/public/UDA%20Pr ... 110930.pdf)? I suppose they are only applicable to private developers and not to the university itself.

Looks like they're moving the Basketball Practice Facilities to... Atlanta?.. Sure is a lot further than St. Paul, eh?

Looks like there is a parking lot fronting 15th Ave...what happened to the University District Alliance development principles (https://www.myu.umn.edu/public/UDA%20Pr ... 110930.pdf)? I suppose they are only applicable to private developers and not to the university itself.

I believe that is the existing parking lot for Bierman. Not adding any parking. Just not removing that particular parking lot.

I believe that is the existing parking lot for Bierman. Not adding any parking. Just not removing that particular parking lot.

Oh, after looking at it again I see you're definitely right. Too bad they couldn't move the lot behind the building or something.

I love the way there's somebody running in all the outdoor renderings - maybe they figure the students don't really need a track.

Could the U buy out one of the warehouses between Elm and 17th and then put a ped bridge over the rr tracks that would act as sort of a "connection" to the new facility?

The pedestrian bridge that's by Wilkins Hall now used to cross the railroad tracks somewhere in that vicinity, IRC.

Looks like they're moving the Basketball Practice Facilities to... Atlanta?.. Sure is a lot further than St. Paul, eh?

They fixed it with a Minneapolis skyline. As seen from the 24th St. ped bridge, of course.

They fixed it with a Minneapolis skyline. As seen from the 24th St. ped bridge, of course.

That's hilarious.

They posted this rendering on Instagram

https://instagram.com/p/8oE6YWk6BG/

Can we figure out what angle that's taken from?

Not too hard to figure out from the renderings at http://nothingshortofgreatness.com/facilities.php