With each passing year, UCLA residence halls are becoming more
like army barracks than places to study. Students must cope with
thin walls, communal bathrooms and rodents. Next year, more
incoming freshman than ever before can expect to live in triple
dorm rooms ““Â where it is difficult to accommodate even
the most spartan necessities.
The Housing Office plans to cope with increases in admissions by
building three new residence halls by 2006 or 2007; but if their
construction is anything like De Neve’s slow and frequently
pushed back completion, undergraduates will not have adequate
housing to meet their needs for quite a while. This is unsettling
for prospective students, considering UC enrollment is expected to
increase by about 60,000 students by 2010.
Ideally, the On Campus Housing Council’s student
representatives would address dorm residents’ housing
concerns, but the council has proven rudderless on important
housing decisions. This is because housing officials show OCHC
little respect. Last year, for example, student input was
completely ignored when housing officials engaged in mid-year dorm
consolidation, forcing 157 students to unexpectedly alter their
living situation during finals week. The OCHC serves a valuable
programming purpose, but on-campus housing must be a better
represented campus issue.
Last night’s Undergraduate Student Association Council
meeting held in conjunction with OCHC is a good way to start
increasing the visibility of student representation on the hill,
but USAC can do more.
USAC should seriously consider adding an on-campus housing
commission to council. While it’s understandable for USAC to
be concerned about stepping on OCHC’s toes, USAC must
shoulder the responsibility that comes with being a more effective
advocacy group than OCHC.
Having an on-campus housing commissioner would more thoroughly
institutionalize on-campus housing as an issue. It would give it
more political resources, since the council member would work with
the president, vice presidents and other commissioners, using
already-established state and national advocacy organizations.
Financial Supports Commissioner Andrew LaFlamme has already taken
the lead in helping students find affordable off-campus housing;
now USAC needs to address on-campus housing concerns in more
drastic ways as well. Even with new dorms, different housing issues
will keep arising in the future.
The easiest, but most difficult, solution to the housing problem
is attaining state funding for it. Students have been quiet about
on-campus housing problems, though. They have not protested or
demanded change from university and state officials with the same
zeal as they had when calling for a repeal of university
anti-affirmative action policies. Having a USAC commissioner
dedicated to organizing these types of demonstrations will be
beneficial in the long run.
The burden of seeking state funding falls on the UC president,
whoever Richard Atkinson’s successor may be. But it is
Housing Director Michael Foraker’s duty to pressure the
higher-ups. Although it will be difficult to obtain funding given
California’s budget crisis, Foraker must give it the old
college try and encourage the other university officials to do the
same. Foraker has acknowledged that dorms should be
“environments conducive to academic success.” But
unless rats can help students with their homework, his vision is
not being fulfilled.