Rethink College Park

Sigma Phi Epsilon Fraternity and Rethink College Park are hosting the first information session on East Campus since the selection of Foulger-Pratt as the University’s development partner. In attendance at tomorrow’s information session will be V.P. of Administrative Affairs Doug Duncan, and both Richard Perlmutter and Bryant Foulger of Foulger-Pratt.

This event will be the first in the series of public input forums the University will hold to discuss East Campus.
Though this event is aimed at the Greek community, all are welcome to attend.

Wednesday, April 18 at 7:00 pm
Sigma Phi Epsilon
8 Fraternity Row

We hope to see you there.

The campus and indeed the entire world was shocked to hear early yesterday of the senseless and random killings of over 30 students and faculty members at Virginia Tech by a lone gunman. A candlelight vigil will be held today at 8PM on McKeldin Mall. The Chapel will be open today until 5PM for reflection and quiet space and the university is providing a number of services for the grieving. Our hearts go out to all those touched by this terrible tragedy.

Shuttle-UM announced Friday that its shuttle tracking system is now fully operational. Called Shuttle Trac, the system allows for real-time bus arrival information accessible via telephone, the web, a plasma screen in the Union, and bus-shaped monitors located at many bus stops.

Though the system’s inaugural run back in November suffered from serious glitches, the system’s manufacturer has since refined and fixed the technology.

Our own non-scientific observation by the Leonardtown Community Center has shown the system to be fairly accurate with its predictions.

The following is a message from the event organizers:

JOIN THE FACEBOOK EVENT

Come out and show the entire state (via all major news networks) that it is time for a real solution to UMD’s housing crisis. Join us to protest Resident Life’s gross failure to UMD seniors and to show the Board of Regents, UMD, and Prince Georges County that we will fight for DECENT, AFFORDABLE housing both on and off campus. These parties must fund, prioritize, and incentivize more student housing whenever possible.

News coverage so far:
-Fox (click video)
-NBC

Statement Regarding Student Housing Construction

This message outlines the Board of Regent’s longstanding policy that encourages University System of Maryland (USM) institutions to pursue fully public student housing projects only after “all options for non-USM debt [have] been exhausted.” Essentially they want private or public-private projects as is well known by university administrators. More simply: they put together the wrong package when they proposed a 500-bed north campus dorm last May.

An impressive congregation of students and student leaders congregated on McKeldin Mall last night to bask in the press spotlight (every major new network was there) and exchange horror stories about their desperate search for more housing. As the “McKeldin Hall” protest enters its first full day, the fury over Friday’s Dept. of Resident Life decision has only intensified and New revelations today will only stoke the flames. Diamondback interviews suggest that university administrators ignored the Board of Regent’s suggestions to submit plans for a indirect-debt, public-private partnership and instead blindly pursed a 500-bed dormitory financed by direct-debt. That dormitory project was of course dead on arrival. Basically, they should have known full well it would fail.

What’s also apparent from Diamondback coverage and quotes is that the university is trying to shield FP-Argo (their chosen developer for East Campus) from potential competition that would come from new on campus housing not built by FP-Argo - at least until they finish negotiations with the developer. That’s all good and well until one realizes that the residential portion of East Campus won’t be online for nearly 10 years (if not more). In addition, we believe that the considerable uncertainty surrounding that project is largely responsible for the dearth of privately proposed student housing projects in College Park.

“Vice President for Student Affairs Linda Clement said that until the university wraps up its negotiations on the East Campus development project begun last month, the school is rejecting all other housing projects, putting off a decision on any sure solutions to the university housing woes for at least six months.”

What follows is a RTCP column published in the Diamondback today:

All around the campus this weekend, we heard personal stories from our friends who were scrambling to find off-campus housing after the surprise, last-minute announcement that the university could not house more than 600 seniors. Clearly the Department of Resident Life dropped the ball, and it needs to be held accountable for its late notice and failure to make arrangements for those who are financially strapped. But let’s not let our short-term frustration with the department cloud out the real underlying issue at hand here: the persistent and long-term lack of decent, affordable housing in College Park. As students mount their “Hooverville” protests on McKeldin Mall this week and The Diamondback continues its relentless coverage of the housing crunch, I urge them to realize that:

- The housing crunch is not new nor is this campus’ housing situation unique among universities nationally.

- The housing crunch is not the result of increased university enrollment, which was capped after the school became the state’s “flagship university” in the late 1980s.

- The housing crunch is a reflection of a changing student population and the university’s rapid transition from a commuter to a residential school.

- The university has neither wholly financed a new traditional dorm since La Plata Hall in 1968 nor a suite-style dorm since New Leonardtown in 1982.

- In the mid-1990s, 50 percent of freshmen sought on-campus housing. Now it’s approaching 100 percent.

On this foundation, let’s think of a solution for the long-term structural housing shortage in College Park. Yes, the university is partially responsible for solving the problem, but no reasonable person can expect it to house every single student who wants to live on the campus. Indeed, many other colleges deny juniors and seniors outright from on-campus housing. Priority must be given to underclassmen and those who are financially strapped. We should examine solutions that recognize both the university’s responsibility to its students and the real necessity of the private market to pick up most, if not all, of the slack.

The solution has to involve a compromise between the university, the city and the county. University administrators must work with the Board of Regents to change long-held debt policies to take into account the real need for traditional dorms on the campus. The city must break free from its anti-rental mentality made evident by rent control, owner occupancy requirements on new construction and the present effort to limit fee incentives. These policies could have a significant effect on the housing situation in the future.

Prince George’s County must work to amend local zoning codes to give more financial incentives to private developers for undergraduate and graduate housing. This includes, among many things, allowances for greater housing density, lower parking requirements and special consideration for student complexes next to the campus. County and city officials have already indicated, to student government leaders and RethinkCollegePark.net, their willingness to revisit local zoning codes this summer for the benefit of students. They must act according to these promises.

The careful work of the parties during the past six years has brought thousands of new student beds to the area. Yet the events of the past week remind us that the housing crunch is far from over and that past policies have failed to keep pace with the rapidly changing on-campus population. Inaction would be a form of mutually assured destruction, whereby the university’s academic competitiveness is weakened and the city’s neighborhoods will continue to be degraded by transient student renters.

Housing will surely plague students for years to come, but I’d ask those who are furious with the situation today to focus their current frustrations to bring about real long-term change instead of just more venting. In the past, students have been victims of the broken state of the political process in the area. If students don’t use this opportunity to begin on the road to a solution, we’ll have no one to blame but ourselves.

David Daddio, Co-editor RTCP

Dozens of students, led by the SGA, plan to stage a five-day protest against Resident Life for their housing debacle as well as the Board of Regents for their continual refusal to fund new dormitory projects. The protest will kick off at 9pm and be complete with a tent city on Mckeldin Mall and all the local news media imaginable.

The student housing crunch in College Park is not new by any means. It’s been going on far longer than the 9 months or so we’ve been covering it. Yet, yesterday’s revelation that 639 seniors will be dropped from on-campus housing next year hit a lot of folks close to home and has triggered a level of student organization that has not been seen since the great Facebook rebellion of 06′. Some groups plan to stage a protest in front of Annapolis Hall every hour, on the hour, starting at noon today to criticize the Dept. of Resident Life’s 11th hour decision. Res life also plans a forum Monday at 1:30 in the Hoff Theater in the Student Union.

Indeed, the 639 number is just the beginning of next year’s waitlist which will be quite a bit higher once it incorporates lesser priority groups. The new Freshman deadline for housing applications doesn’t even occur till May 1st. More enlightened students will realize that if they aren’t affected by this round of eviction notices, their time may come if they seek on campus housing their senior year and don’t secure a South Campus Commons or Courtyards room.

So what exactly caused the crisis?

Clearly, the answer is a change in housing preferences as more and more underclassmen (and undergrads) vie for limited on-campus spots. The crisis IS NOT (we repeat: IS NOT) a result of increased enrollment at UMD, which was capped after the school became the state’s “flagship university” 15 years ago. IT IS the result of the university’s lack of available debt to build new dormitories. As we noted yesterday, UMD has not built a traditional dormitory since La Plata Hall in 1968 nor a suite-style dorm since New Leonardtown in 1982. They tried to build a new north campus dorm last year, but were handily rejected by the Board of Regents.

Who’s to blame?

It’s clear that Res Life erred in waiting so long in notifying students of their ineligibility for housing. That being said, they are not responsible for the failure to build more housing. Annapolis is responsible because tight purse strings led them to demand that UMD’s housing be self supporting. This caused the need, in recent years, for public-private partnerships like Commons and Courtyards, university land contributions like University View, and county incentives/giveaways for buildings like the Towers at University Town Center.

What’s not cut and dry is who’s responsible to house students - the city (+ county) or the university? Yesterday’s post drew maybe the most fierce comment string we’ve ever seen on this site. Opinions ran the gamut, but most will see that really both the private and public sector should play a role. It’s worth pointing out that both have made progress in recent years on the student housing front but somewhere along the way their efforts fell flat. Virtually no designated undergraduate student housing is on the way (in the city or on campus) and even standard (and existing) rental housing is having trouble navigating through the local planning and political process. Indeed the city has recently:

-instituted a rent control ordinance on single-family homes

-mandated owner occupancy requirements in nearly every project coming through the pipeline

-is pursuing the limitation of incentives for student housing via Annapolis

What’s the solution?

Clearly we need a multifaceted approach to student housing that includes the university bearing some of the burden. That does not mean they should pick up all or even most of the slack. The city needs to move forward with incentives for housing in Lakeland, the Knox area, and along Route 1 or surely the their neighborhoods will be so overcome with transient renters that they will be virtually unrecognizable in 15 years.

Jack Perry, a District 2 City Councilmen is quoted in today’s Diamondback as saying, “The University of Maryland needs the housing; we don’t. This is the city of College Park, not the campus of the University of Maryland.”

We say NO to Mr. Perry because his standpoint (the least enlightened on the city council) is a form of mutually assured destruction. Think like a mountain, Mr. Perry, think 5,000 to 7,000 beds.