heard this on the radio this morning. They said that the BOR would be contacting the party at 9am this morning.

other than being the final legal settlement to the colapse in '99, what could this mean for Bonfire's future?

I believe I read somewhere on here that they still have to settle all the personal suits before we could even look at bringing ti back to campus. Plus, Dr. Murano has not made nay mention of Bonfire as far as I am aware. But, this is defineitely a step in the right direction.

well i would believe this to be the last personal suit due to the fact that it's the board of regents making the phonecall this morning...

i would think its a positive to have all the suits final before the 10 year mark...

So this isn't the litigation regarding the liability cap? I hope that it is all personal suits, that would be great progress. Dr. Murano is from the Ag side of the A&M house. That might be another positive. We shall see. By the way, supposing they bring it back to campus. Just dreaming here, but where are they going to put it? Last I checked they are filling up the polo fields with trees and other things.

West campus maybe?

There's a great place out past the George bush library, with a row of trees blocking the view of Harvey Mitchell. Parking lot nearby, big open field, panoramic of bell tower and kyle field, all it needs is a taco bell.

i think that if it does come back to campus it should be built in the shadows of the bonfire memorial.

quote:

---

i think that if it does come back to campus it should be built in the shadows of the bonfire memorial.

---

on the same low soft drainage area? There is a reason those fields and that golf course are what they are and nothing else...

I agree with the sentiment, but maybe not the practice. I think all future Bonfire's should pay respect to '99, possibly with more than just a moment of silence beforehand, but right next to the polo fields could stir up some issues, it's sorta meant to be a quiet reflective memorial.

oh, and found this
http://www.kwtx.com/home/headlines/33332489.html

The polo fields are HUGE. It could easily go in another area out there.

That wouldn't be the problem. It's just about the worst place on campus to put it. Move it back to a location with impacted soil.

Speaking of, does anyone know why it left Duncan in the first place?

So we are still waiting on the business suits to be completed after today settlement. This sucks.

There were a few reasons, NoAC, but one of them was to appease the residents living in the southgate area.

Scott Coker '92

quote:

---

Speaking of, does anyone know why it left Duncan in the first place?

---

One of the main reasons was due to the proximity of the houses on Bush and the amount of sparks and ash that were landing over there.

Just read the letter she sent out over e-mail and apparently we just settled the last suit and she seems pretty open to allowing Bonfire back over time

You don't want what the University is going to call "bonfire" to come to campus. Students will have little if anything to do with the building of it. It will be nothing like Bonfire that we remember. It will be built by a company, and students will get to watch it be built. I'm sure there will be a student advisory committe with "leaders" elected by the student body. But it will never have the meaning, pride, and spirit of the past.

No thank you.

well...we'll see.

please oh please if this is true let us continue as we have the past couple years... but on campus

http://dmc-news.tamu.edu/templates/?a=6871&z=15

Here is the press release..

The way I interpret it, they are open to allowing it back on campus but I don't know in what shape.

quote:

---

if this is true let us continue as we have the past couple years... but on campus

---

THIS WIL NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER HAPPEN!!!!
Trust me, no one wants this more than me, but it is never going to happen.

I'm surprised by the tone of the email. Sounds promising.

YellowPot_97 is correct. Plus Zachary is still being sued.

It will never come back to campus in any form other than a professionally build, pre-fab fire...which defeats the whole purpose...and even that is a stretch.

Sucks, but that's the way it is.


[This message has been edited by Ol Jock 99 (edited 10/28/2008 12:52p).]

anybody want to calculate the labor costs per year of a contractor built Bonfire?

try it, you'll see that yellopot is wrong.

Man-hours * $7 would be a bare minimum
Man-hours * $15 would be a little more realistic

then there is equipment, and so on...

unless you can find another source of purely volunteer & capable labor...it will be built by students.

quote:

---

it will be built by students

---

And until you can figure out a way to do it safely*, it won't be build on campus by students.




*: IMHO, you won't be able to design it at a sufficient risk level for the University and State to sign off for student involvement over the token level. The inherent risk is too high. And spare me any "life is dangerous"...I don't disagree, but this was a completely "unnecessary" (from an outside perspective) university sponsored activity that killed 12 people. Do I miss it too? You bet. But that doesn't change the facts.

I've been reading and rereading the statement for the last half hour, and it seems like the points at the bottom were included to prevent a wave of emails asking about the future of bonfire from assaulting the presidents office. I agree they seem open to the possibility of return, but this soon after a decade of court proceedings ends, there's no realistic way to judge what will happen next. It looks like they're also covering their bases, listing a P.E., which was one of the points listed in the Bonfire Commission Report. So...absolute best case scenario, a couple of years and Bonfire is back on campus, but head stack answers to an engineering team. I honestly think I'd rather see it stay how it is now than morph into something where students are on an elected advisory board so that "we have input" and the rest is contracted out.

do you really think current students will care as passionately as you do about another construction project on campus that is merely an inconvience to them...

...especially on west campus where it's barely visible daily. With no blood, sweat, or time in Stack, it will be worthless to them.

Hey, I've wanted to see it burn (on campus) since I was 7 years old and visiting A&M for the first time, and saw it going up on the polo fields (1995). I jumped at the chance to do it in any capacity (i.e. Student Bonfire). I've wanted to see it come back to campus since I got here. I've had endless hours of pointless debating how and when and if ever it would come back. And these last two days have been witness to the biggest events in regard to that cause since I've been here. I want it back. I'll be praying for it. I don't care how rational it may be or not, I'll keep holding out for it until it happens, and I'll be here that day.

I know it may or may not be rational to hope for it back in the near future, but seeing as it has been done safely off campus for several years now, I can't help but think there might be hope. And as for the thought that it likely being on West Campus would be detrimental to the sense of spirit, I don't really think so. If it did become just another construction project that might be true, but if it did come back as a student project it would be appreciated no matter where it is. After all, I've seen the spirit surrounding Student Bonfire, which is nowhere near campus, so having it a little ways away from the main campus really seems like a non-issue.

Keep it off campus and continue the building process as it is now. Obviously it is working. No reason to have it on campus if some outside contractor is going to build it.

It was a horrible accident. Thank God the lawyers are not going to get much. With their 40 % take if certainly will not leave much for the families. Was it worth it?

I think everyone agrees with that. It would ONLY be worth bringing it back to campus if it would truly be a student activity like the current Student Bonfire.

Now that I've thought about it, I think bringing it back to campus is one of the worst things that could happen to Bonfire. If it were to ever return to campus, it would not be student build. The University is not going to take that risk again. I just don't see students being able to have much if any involvement with a fire on campus. If a contractor built bonfire were to be built on campus, Student Bonfire would recieve ENORMOUS pressure to stop working off campus. The insults and insinuations of "dividing" campus would end it. With a fire on campus, there would be no "need" for one off campus. I think it would destroy alot of the support that Student Bonfire now gets. And without Student Bonfire, Bonfire would truly be gone.

If a contractor built fire is brought to campus, that is the end of Bonfire.

bingo 97.

I dont want Bonfire if it is contractor built. Think about a bunch of construction workers with no ties to the university building something they have no idea of what it is for. They wouldn't care. These students are men and women. They could easily be sent to die for their country. Why can't they be used in a workers capacity? I think people tend to baby the students and that thought process is part of the problem.

awesome 97...we are on the same page.

I agree. I hope it doesn't come to that. What do y'all think can be done, if anything, toward that end?

The only thing that we can do is keep building it the way that we have been. I dont know the exact numbers, but a lot of us know what it feels like to put your blood sweat and tears into building this thing. The more who understand it like that, the better, and the only way that we can show it to people is by continuing to work the same way we always have. Wait for an appropriate venue to voice your opinions to the decision makers who will ultimately decide on it, but until then, just keep building the hell out of what we know is the true bonfire.