EDITORIAL | University must not charge students more money on false pretenses
When the Board of Trustees approved a room and board increase for residence halls in April, most people on campus were not exactly under the impression this semester could bring the biggest freshman class in history.
The best solution? CMU officials should consider moving the trustees’ annual room and board vote to July.
Miscalculations in planning like this are bound to happen when working from estimates so many months before the fact. And the low enrollment projection was understandable considering a decrease in freshmen is what the university saw between the 2008-09 and 2009-10 academic years.
When these miscalculations result in such a major misstep, however, the process must be put under scrutiny.
Plus, discussions regarding room and board during the July meeting make more sense, given it’s the time trustees also decide on tuition.
In the fall of 2008, 3,864 freshmen came to campus, which then made history. The following year, the number of incoming freshmen fell by 173.
In July, Director of Admissions Betty Wagner said the university received about 18,000 freshman applications, and the freshman class is expected to be between 3,900 and 4,100.
Shaun Holtgrieve, associate director of Student Life, said some rooms in residence halls will have five students assigned to them to accommodate the huge number of students.
This information stands in direct contrast with the reason room and board was raised and why it is now 18.6 percent higher than it was four years ago.
It could be argued this is an unforeseen eventuality, since most enrollment is determined long before April. However, now that it has happened, CMU must react and learn to take precautions to keep this from happening again.
More options needed
A major issue is the continued raising of tuition, only to have more crowded housing arrangements. Any students ending up in a room housing five students will be seeing a refund, but the fact stands that students are paying more for less housing.
Coupled with the continued removal of centralized on-campus apartments, students are seeing their housing options being minimalized.
If this year’s increase in enrollment is sustained in coming years, other options will have to be discussed.
While building even more residence halls would be a costly undertaking, the university may need to reconsider its policy of requiring freshmen to live on-campus.
A system such as allowing freshmen to request permission for off-campus housing and allowing a select few to do so, may help control the situation.
Whatever the solution may be, more planning and forethought must be taken to maintain a positive and affordable on-campus housing experience.
