The LSU Board of Supervisors Friday approved a resolution officially approving the University’s Campus Master Plan, despite protests.
The resolution called for the Master Plan to “serve as the primary mechanism and guiding document for coordinating and planning capital construction and physical improvement projects” on the University’s campus. The plan drew criticism from students, faculty and residents of the neighboring community at the board’s public input session last Thursday.
The number of speakers present for public input at the meeting was the most in the board’s history.
“We feel that the maps and schematics are not entirely accurate in representing the students, faculty and staff of LSU,” said Lee Abbott, an English senior.
Abbott led a parade of 14 speakers addressing the board, with concerns ranging from mass transportation, drainage and water runoff in the community north of campus to proposals to remove or replace numerous buildings on campus.
Students from the College of Agriculture also put forward their concerns about the proposed move of the Horticulture Hill Farm Teaching Facility from its current location behind the Lod Cook Alumni Center and plans to move the Louisiana Livestock Show from Parker Coliseum to off campus.
Bob Mirabello, a Horticulture Department instructor and Hill Farm facilitator, expressed strong disapproval to the board for what he believes is the Master Plan’s lack of respect for public opinion.
“It is clear that the designers had their own agenda, and the faculty, students and alumni were ignored,” Mirabello said. “People will find their meeting places simply erased with no guarantee of relocation.”
Board members expressed their feelings about the public comments and the overall methods used to create the Master Plan. Board member Victor Bussie urged members to take the criticism very seriously.
“If there is any objection that we have to the plan that can be eliminated now, this would be the time to do it,” Bussie said during the meeting. “I have no objection to approving it today, but there should be the assurance that we will meet with those that have concerns and address them.”
The board ultimately approved the resolution unanimously.
Chairman Roger Ogden said the board voted to approve the Master Plan because it believed the plan already adequately addressed many of the concerns brought up by the public.
“This is a road map and not a final product,” Ogden said. “I think that we have had problems in communicating that fact, but many of the concerns have been looked at in the working and executive committees.”
Ogden added he anticipated very few changes in the plan.
Certain students present at the meeting were vocal in their opposition to Ogden’s opinion. Prior to the board’s meeting, a small group of students who spoke at public input argued with Ogden about the lack of students involved directly in the Master Plan’s decision-making committees.
Other specific complaints the student made lamented the absence of board members for public input and the short amount of time allotted per speaker, two minutes each.
“We really couldn’t speak to all of the board members that were going to vote on the approval,” said Wendy Bourg, a University alumna. “I feel that it was a circumvention.”
Ogden said board’s regulations laid out the process for public input in advance, and he believes everyone wishing to address the board received ample time for comments.
Bourg and other students guaranteed further action in spite of the board’s vote.