Mary Coleman wrote:

> Maybe it is to do with the fact that the UTC athletic director, Steve
> Sloan, wants to go ahead with the special fee for sports despite the fact
> that 80% of the students voted against the $75 per-semester fee.
>
> See the Metro section of today's paper.

I think Chuck Cantrell provided the "actual" explanation, but if that is
what is being considered by Athletics, I think that is a *much* bigger
shame than what the protesters are upset about!

The students voted 410 to 1500 NOT to endorse the athletics fee.  That
is 78.5% against it.  Does that not sound like enough of a mandate?
Then consider that there are nearly 400 student-athletes at UTC, almost
every one of whom probably voted YES on the question.  That means that
fewer than 100 (probably fewer than 50) non-athlete students supported
the athletics fee.  Among non-athletes, it probably lost by 5% to 95% or
worse.  Talk about a landslide.  I don't see how Mr. Sloan could ignore
such a one-sided vote and still press for the fee, but maybe he can.  If
so, that would indeed be a shame.