University officials last week surprisingly announced that they want to sell Westemoreland Apartments, the University’s largest apartment complex. The 404-unit compound provides relatively affordable housing for students with families, graduate students and international students – students who may have to move if the sale is finalized. The 26-acre property also includes a childcare center.
Officials said they want to sell the 45-year-old property because it is costly to maintain and because of potential costs to repair major structural problems. The site was also built to accommodate families with children, and only about 13 percent of residents have children.
Money from the sale, conservatively estimated at between $15 million and $18 million, may be used to improve housing close to campus, although some funds could first go to other purposes, officials said.
While the sale process can’t move forward without the Oregon State Board of Higher Education’s blessing, we find this move by the University administration dubious at best.
Administrators have a history of misusing Housing Department funds. As an auxiliary entity, the department’s funding is generated by room and board fees and is independent of general University funds. Housing funds are “primarily intended to serve the student bodies’ housing needs,” according to the University’s Business Affairs Office Web site.
Yet in past years, administrators have greedily reached into the housing pot to acquire land for non-housing purposes. Case in point: During 1964-66, the Housing Department paid about $200,000 for three parcels of land now occupied by the Riverfront Research Park. The land was purchased with bond money under the auspices of building student housing, but housing footed the bill even after the designation for the land changed. Four decades after the purchase, the administration last year decided to compensate housing just $34,746 – a move administrators considered generous.
We believe housing should have been fully reimbursed. Melinda Grier, University legal counsel, decided that repayment wasn’t legally required because the use of the property changed after the Housing Department paid off bonds used to purchase the land. This technicality, however, doesn’t change the fact that students paid money to housing that has not been reinvested in housing projects.
With the sorry state of residence halls today, using money from the Westmoreland sale for renovations or to construct new residence halls sounds somewhat appealing. But new residence halls probably won’t accommodate families or provide more childcare options.
Moreover, administrators might decide to use the money for projects entirely unrelated to housing. Such a move would be egregious and deplorable given the need for housing improvements.
There are advantages to the sale: Westmoreland is located more than 2 miles from campus, it is falling into disrepair and other family housing options, such as Spencer View, are more popular. But newer and closer facilities are already full, and officials admit that not all residents living in University housing who want to return next year will have accommodations.
As the State Board considers approving the sale in early November, we urge its members to carefully ponder administrator’s true intentions for the sale money. Will they try to rob the piggy bank and leave another I.O.U.? Based on their track record, we can’t rule out this possibility.