It’s the worst kept secret in Madison: the Natatorium is a dump. And not the kind of dump you affectionately refer to as your living room. There, you and your roommates are never forced to wait for couch space to open up so you can get your daily TV routine in — “Lost” never takes an extra hour because of overcrowding. Unfortunately, this is not the case at the Nat, nor the SERF nor the Shell for that matter.

Citing rising usage as well as decaying infrastructure, one group, NatUp 2010, is looking for students to contribute up to $54.19 per semester for up to 30 years to finance a new, expanded Nat. And while we wholeheartedly blame our collective homeliness on long waits for exercise equipment at all three facilities, we do have a number of concerns about the NatUp proposal.

Of course, the biggest question on everyone’s mind is “Why not the SERF?” And though NatUp gives some reasons as to why the SERF can’t be expanded right now, they offer no clear vision on how it will be expanded in the future. Even with 400 more beds coming into Lakeshore over the next several years, the SERF will remain the preeminent facility on campus. If we expect to pay over $100 a year to renovate the Nat, an expanded or rebuilt SERF can be expected to double that figure (especially since, as NatUp’s website reminds us, construction costs will only increase). So when it comes time to fix the building we really want, will those efforts be hamstrung by previous commitments to the Nat?

One way to avoid that problem is private funding. Although this might not draw donors like Camp Randall would, it’s imperative that Rec Sports make a concerted effort to reach out to donors. Securing at least some outside funding for the Nat would be a show of good faith and preserve student pocketbooks for the more important SERF. If responsibility for both projects falls entirely on the students, Wisconsin could see numbers north of $400 dollars per year. Although NatUp will tell you that’s fine for Buckeyes and Illini, we’re pretty sure that won’t fly with Badgers — especially when they can get a year-long gym membership for less.

Also important is the wording of the referendum itself. After the campus saw a Union South referendum passed despite strong opposition and dubious polling practices and phrasing, plans to defer the seg fee increases until most of the voters have left is cause for concern. Rather than having the seg fee increase go into effect immediately after approval, the referendum is structured such that less than one quarter of the current student body will be around to see the hundred-dollar-a-year hike when it comes in fall 2013. It is quite easy to get a college campus to approve something they will not have to pay for (especially when less than one in five students actually vote). Without any tangible consequences, students won’t truly scrutinize this proposal to see if it is indeed viable. Approval of a project of this magnitude must be accompanied by a responsible investment from the student body that approves it, or risk setting a dangerous precedent.

Arguments about ensuring fairness by only forcing those who would use the facility to pay for it do hold some water. It is no secret that fee structure drew much of the backlash against Union South (well, that and the whole let’s just revote until we get a yes approach). Unfortunately, those arguments begin to leak when you realize that even after the seg fee increase is assessed, the building would not open for another year.

Finally, a notice to DoIT: this is a big issue. Already, more than 4,000 students have signed petitions; certainly more than that will vote. This spring will see a substantial — by our standards anyway — turnout, and the system must be prepared to handle it. The last thing anyone wants is a repeat of the Union South fiasco. That would be like being stuck on a treadmill in a crowded room with lousy air conditioning and no view. Wait a minute…