Administrators fail to see Graham pool's worth
By David Ray
Over the summer, Santa Clara's risk management and financial departments were faced with a decision: to stay within insurance guidelines to provide a lifeguard for the Leavey, Alameda North and Graham pools, or to have them shut down.
On returning to campus, it becomes painfully obvious what the decision turned out to be.
Instead of dishing out the cash for lifeguards to oversee all three pools, the school decided to closed the Graham pool.
So, what gives? The plan in late August was that the pool area would be converted into a grassy area with picnic tables and barbecue grills.
That's a great idea, right? Well, only if you ignore the fact that Graham already has several grills and our campus has grassy areas as far as the eye can see.
For the better part of the academic year, the Graham pool acted as a major recreational and social center for many students: an oasis surrounded by a desert of tile roofs and stucco walls.
It was a place where students could take a quick dip after an intramural game or relax with friends while laying out on the surrounding glass.
The Graham pool had the feel of a childhood backyard -- a familiar place where you could sit back and just be yourself. It was an atmosphere that couldn't be found anywhere else on campus.
Without the Graham pool, where will the ultimate Frisbee team compete in slippery watermelon? Where will Graham residents listen to Jimmy Buffett while sipping their inconspicuous margarita-filled Benson cups?
I doubt there will be that same environment at Leavey.
I guess the administration never considered Leavey's inaccessibility to the residential halls. It's doubtful that many students will be willing to make the trek all the way up to Alameda North.
I see no reason why the university would opt to shut down the pool instead of hiring a lifeguard staff to satisfy the insurance company's request.
At $10 an hour it would cost $560 a week to keep the pool supervised for eight hours a day. Figuring that the pool is really only used during the 24 weeks of fall and spring quarter, that brings our grand total to $13,440 annually.
That's only about two bucks per student per year. Considering I'm already dishing out $28,000 for tuition and another $10,000 for room and board, I would have no problem throwing in another two bucks to keep open one of the most entertaining and lively locations on campus.
If a dramatic $2 tuition hike isn't not an option, then maybe Santa Clara could hold off on buying another five-digit palm tree for the next few years.
In fact, adding a lifeguard station at Graham would be beneficial to Santa Clara in that it would create on campus jobs. The campus is undoubtedly loaded with qualified lifeguards who would jump at the opportunity to get paid $10 an hour to sit in the sun and work on their tans.
It seems to me that money is not the problem and neither is workforce. So why would the university shut down this warm weathered hot spot?
Perhaps it's another administration ploy to turn our attention from enjoyment to education -- an attempt to get us to focus more on school and less on the fact that Santa Clara made the "Playboy Top 25 Party Schools" list less than 20 years ago.
Whatever the reason, the Graham pool will be remembered by those of us who were around to experience it, and students will have to find other ways to relax and enjoy the surroundings.
Personally, I'll see you guys on the concrete steps of the Leavey pool, with that inconspicuous Benson cup in one hand and a Discman spinning Jimmy Buffett in the other. Call me a sellout, but a man has got to tan.
*Ã Ã David Ray is a junior.