Along with the 7 to 7.5 percent increase in housing fees this
past year, student concern about how to lower these fees has also
escalated.
Most of the fee increases are due to the Housing
Administration’s four-year construction plan, through which
it hopes to house all undergraduate students for four years, said
On-Campus Housing Council Chairwoman Michelle Sivert.
“UCLA is constantly under construction. The upside is that
we have new, renovated buildings versus older buildings,”
Sivert said.
“How would we subsidize next year’s fee increase?
The only answer is by cutting. Then the next question is about what
to cut,” Sivert said.
These cuts will likely come from services available to the dorm
residents, such as gym equipment in the dorms. However, there have
been no suggestions as of yet on what trade-offs to make to offset
next year’s fee increases.
Still, most dorm residents are of the opinion that since they
are paying for the construction of buildings that they cannot use
next year, they might as well pay for the services they need and
use now, Sivert said.
There are some who don’t mind their money going toward
construction projects on the hill.
“They have to get the money from somewhere. It’s not
like I like it, but it benefits those of us in the dorms since in
the end we get those new buildings,” said Jennifer Jong, a
first-year business economics student.
First-year undeclared student Heather Searles said using
increased housing fees to pay for construction is justifiable
because more dorms are needed to relieve the amount of students
living in triples.
In light of these issues of overcrowded dorms, the Undergraduate
Student Association Council is assembling a Tidal Wave II report,
which will document its possible effects on the UC system and
specifically UCLA.
Tidal Wave II is a predicted influx of 50,000 students to the UC
by 2010.
OCHC will aid in the housing portion of this report, explaining
how Tidal Wave II will affect those living in the dorms.
Sivert said OCHC’s influence in housing decisions has
increased over the past year. Previously OCHC would be informed of
changes in housing policy after they were made. This year Sivert
said they have a say before final decisions are made so student
feedback can be incorporated into Housing plans.
For example, the Housing budget plans to increase fees were
presented to OCHC before they were put into effect, allowing the
council to review and approve the plans or make suggestions based
on student input.
In order for a student suggestion or complaint to reach the
Housing Administration, the suggestion must be given to the floor
external vice president, then the hall EVP, who will then send it
to the Policy Review Board, comprised of all building EVPs on OCHC.
This board discusses the suggestion and determines whether it has a
strong enough basis to enact changes.
“For the past quarter, we have been focusing on issues
like construction mitigation, automatic teller machines on the
Hill, the congestion of dining halls and an alternative meal
plan,” Sivert said.
Students also impacted the decision of an Residential Technology
Services fee that the Office of Residential Life had suggested.
This would automatically create a telephone service for every room
and have it billed to a student’s BAR account. EVP feedback
showed residents did not support the idea because many students use
their cell phones instead of dorm phones, and do not want to be
billed for a service they don’t use.