KIRTLAND COMMUNITY COLLEGE

BOARD OF TRUSTEES OPEN FORUM: Student Housing

Kirtland House, College Drive

March 14, 2006

CALL TO ORDER

The workshop was called to order by Chair Sally Galer at 7 p.m.

Members Present:      Robert Bovee, Sally Galer, Roy Spangler, Richard Silverman, Patricia Webb, Denis Weiss, Roberta Werle

Members Absent:        None

Others Present:          Mark Allen, Susie Allen, Stacey Barnes, Irene Borak, Jerry Boerema, Vickie Borchers, Fay Bovee, Mark Burger, KC Chervenak, Jo Ann Comerford, Carol Finke, Gene Frazier, Leslie Freeze, Keith Gave, JoAnn Gave, Kathy Koch, Ed Koliba, Doty Latuszek, Jackie Liddle, Aaron Linskey, Tony Madaj, Kathy Marsh, Joe Meadows, Kyle Morrison, Tonya Ouillette, Marcell Romancky, Charles Rorie, Kim Ruddy, Dale Shantz, Ron Sharp, Kathleen Wray,

Sally Galer welcomed everyone and Charles Rorie provided a brief background of the position of the college on student housing.  Based on his experience and research, he said that it is realistic to say the college cannot stay exactly where it is now.  There has been significant growth of the college over the last few years, and we know that high school enrollment is on the decline, so it is not possible to stay where we are now. Without an active, appropriate plan for growth, the college is sure to decline. Rorie stated that he is open to any approach that will serve the college, the community and all of us toward growth.  The status quo is not the way to go.  He explained that the plan presented by Student Suites in December 2005, was an example of what might be possible, not an actual proposal under consideration.

Sally Galer asked for review of the water well situation.  If we have to do something with the well system anyway, the rationale is that costs can be combined with a plan for student housing.  The Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) said that the current well system is acceptable if we do not exceed a resident capacity of 17 people (in addition to the Children’s Learning center and the President’s residence). We have until June to respond to DEQ regarding what we plan to do.  We have submitted a proposal to the state capital outlay committee for just over one million dollars for the purpose of improving the well system. The governor has recommended our proposal for funding.  We are hoping that there is enough flexibility that we could use some of the capital outlay for other needed projects on campus, but any modification to the capital outlay proposal needs to be made very soon. 

Leslie Freeze asked how the present configuration regarding security would improve with more students in one building. The response was that a resident manager would be able to monitor one building easier than multiple buildings. Currently we have two resident assistants who are charged with supervising housing activity and problems. Security for weekends, 11 p.m. to 7 a.m., costs about $15,000 per year. 

Kathy Wray spoke of her personal experience in student housing on a full-service campus with many activities available to students.  How would Kirtland help students cope with the isolation of this campus?  Sally Galer responded that with more students on campus, more activities would need to be made available.  Kathy Wray answered, “Then is the cost of such activities calculated into the cost of new student housing?”   Galer responded that it should be included in the housing fee.  Carol Finke reiterated what Kathy Wray said and that we have a tendency to make decisions fast at Kirtland without carefully considering all the aspects involved.  Bobbie Werle addressed those concerns by stating that these are their concerns also, and a balanced presentation to include all aspects is being requested by the board for a complete business plan for new student housing.

Tonya Ouillette spoke of her sister’s experience living in Kirtland’s student housing.  She saw how the students trashed the property and wonders why we would give them something nicer to trash.  An outside company to build and run the housing would be a good consideration that should not cost the college anything.  Sally Galer responded that this is one of the alternatives they want to look at with a student housing proposal. 

Roy Spangler spoke of areas he has been studying: owned and operated or turn-key operation, market research and assumptions for occupancy.  He would like to see parents in the district surveyed regarding their desire for student housing at Kirtland.  Sally Galer agreed that this would be helpful information.  Mark Allen asked whether we already have that information.  We have had housing for three years, so we have a history to draw from.  Athletic recruitment has contributed to the out-of-district occupancy of current housing.  The student housing at Kirtland has never been marketed because we have had good occupancy.  Mark Burger said that he listens to Kirtland’s radio ad that promotes student housing at Kirtland.  Susie Allen says her experience with recruiting students is that housing questions rarely come from in-district students.  She added that we do not even have a current brochure to give out for student housing. 

Richard Silverman commented that it may be that students are not excited about living out here, but the survey should also include some what-ifs such as what services, if they were offered, would attract students to student housing.  Surveys already held lean toward apartment-style living, with not much on-site services requested. 

Ilene Scherer referred to a document from classified staff with questions and concerns and asked for some answers.

One of the biggest concerns is by expanding housing, it did not increase student body on campus very significantly so the costs should be expended to benefit a larger population.  The response was that there is no plan yet; if we cannot put together a plan that will be a reasonable business plan that projects paying for itself, then it won’t be done.  We don’t know yet because we are not that far along.  The question of whether or not we want student housing, or do we want capacity for 40 or 80, was brought up because it is hard to provide the services mentioned tonight for a small number of people.  It would be feasible for a larger number of students such as 80 as opposed to 40.  Charles Rorie spoke that, out-of-district students are a perceived as a mismatch with the college mission, but we did say we want to provide a welcoming climate for our neighbors in northern Michigan.  Tuition is the only significant variable we have, and when a student comes from out-of-district, they bring in double the tuition rate.  It gives the potential for filling empty seats in classes without hiring additional instructors.  They contribute a substantial amount of money to the operating side of the college. 

The board has asked for a conservative business plan assuming no summer-time occupancy.  Those opportunities will be a bonus, not figured into the operating part of the plan. 

A feasibility study done by administration is expected to be reported to the board with answers coming from administration and staff so the board can make an informed decision.  Different options and alternatives should be included in the feasibility study and that information should also come from the staff.  It is the administration’s job to bring the study with input from the staff.  Carol Finke pointed out that decisions by the college leadership team generally do not involve input from staff and faculty.   Mark Burger explained that when they saw a resolution to go ahead with new student housing, it caused alarm to the staff.  He said that the feasibility study is appropriate.  Charles Rorie explained that the resolution was to ask for a proposal. 

Ed Koliba spoke of a lack of participation from various groups, but that a task group has been working on housing issues over several years.  The current approach is to resurrect such a committee to arrive at the plan requested.  A decision is going to have to be made about the well system by June.   It will affect how much housing we can market to students next year.  He said that anyone may join that task group for further input.

The forum was adjourned at 8:35 p.m.

ADJOURNMENT

The open forum was adjourned at 8:35 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Kathy Koch

Recording Secretary