Earlier this year, after the 2004 Princeton Review rated our university No. 1 for “dorms like dungeons,” the Emerald wrote in an editorial that such a low rank was no surprise and that creating a new Living Learning Center while ignoring the decrepit conditions of our older residence halls badly in need of renovation was a problem. Our blame was misplaced. Unfortunately, we now know that University Housing is plagued by problems — not of its own making — that are simply of a much wider scope than unattractive prison-esque building styles.
University Housing is required to pay the University more than $250,000 in overhead fees each year, representing one of many auxiliary enterprises that helps relieve the University of overhead costs. University Housing money is also seriously drained by mandatory payments to the consolidated debt pool, a fund put in place to help small schools within the Oregon University System construct and renovate residence halls. Being a part of this pool means it is economically beneficial for the University to build new residence halls rather than renovate old ones because only increased occupancy will cause the debt fund to gain revenue.
Additionally, the University apparently has no qualms about unscrupulously acquiring property using housing money, then using that property for a non-housing purpose, adding further trauma to a department that is unwillingly hemorrhaging funds.
It’s easy to see the convoluted state of current University Housing, but it’s also easy to see that it is hardly housing’s fault. The University requires housing to pay extensive overhead fees when the housing department itself is in desperate need of its rightful revenue. It is especially significant to note that the University is currently designing a $160 million basketball arena. This fiscal decision makes it perfectly clear that the problem is not lack of money, but lack of proper priority. It is unfair that students paying money to live in University dorms are actually paying money to create a sports stadium.
Likewise, it hardly seems fair in the case of east campus neighborhoods that once University Housing has purchased and renovated property, that space could then be used by the University for a completely unrelated purpose. If housing made an investment in any property, they are due all possible return on that investment. University Housing is being treated like a real estate agent, required to purchase property for clients out of its own pocketbook.
Housing is stretched in too many directions. It must pay funds toward the consolidated debt pool and buy real estate that is not even going toward housing projects, not to mention day to day wages and repairs. The least the University can do is end the indirect overhead assessment on housing until it can pay back the money owed to housing from previous property investments.
It’s a question of how student money can best be spent. Students living in University Housing should be paying for exactly that: University housing. Yes, University Housing and the University in general should be a cohesive unit; however, it is unjust to ask housing, and the students paying for that service, to extend their already tight funds toward unnecessary overhead fees and unrelated areas of University growth.

[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]