• printer friendly
• mail this article
• iPod format
• digg

Photo

On-Campus Housing Council members debate housing fees and safety programs Tuesday evening.

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.