Misunderstanding

The Current | February 15, 1999

There's no misunderstanding about the Arts Center

Mr. Wombacher's latest letter to the editor in The Current (Feb. 1) claims to expose "a few fallacies" in my understanding of the Performing Arts Center. Upon reading the letter, I immediately took issue with it. Since he has obviously misunderstood me, I will make my points clearer.

In his assertion that the Arts Center is not being paid for by students, I would remind Mr. Wombacher that aside from a small percentage of private funds, the primary source of capital for the project is tax money that virtually everyone going to UM-St. Louis pays. I grant the fact that the money, had it not been dedicated to the Arts Center, might not have gone to UM-St. Louis. Then again, if the State of Missouri wanted to spend its revenue on the arts or education, there are many programs much more in need of funding than UM-St. Louis' performing arts department.

What is more at stake, however, are the expenses of operating the Arts Center, which, as of yet, Touhill has not guaranteed to backstop. This means that the costs for everything from the building's maintenance to the staff to run it may well be added to the students' tuition or taken from the already drained resources of UM-St. Louis' central departments and services. How many more cuts can the mailroom take before it collapses? How long will our central departments be able to stand out without the funds they have seen in the past?

Furthermore, Mr. Wombacher narrowly avoids his own fallacy of saying that the Performing Arts Center will draw UM-St. Louis students by just stating that "people" will come to the building's events. It is good that he made this distinction because as numerous sources, including The Current's own editors, have said, the Arts Center will not come close to filling half of its 1,600 seats with students. Who the "people" that Mr. Wombacher refers to are is a mystery except for that they certainly aren't UM-St. Louis students. To the faculty's appeals to build a smaller fine arts venue that would cost less and fit the campus and students' needs better, our beloved Touhill has emphatically refused.

This issue isn't about being for or against the arts or any other field of interest. This issue is about the fiscal irresponsibility of this administration and the resulting, detrimental effects on the core of this University. Mr. Wombacher suggests we "have some faith" that the Performing Arts Center will turn out as well as he dreams it might. As a Catholic, though, I can say that faith alone doesn't save souls and that it won't save the Performing Arts Center either.

-Jake Parker