New campus addition does more harm than good
By Justin Woodward
Last Updated:4:02 PM EST 1/27/10 Section: Viewpoint
A $3 million donation is a good thing. A new track field is not bad, but why do we need it?
Fisher has implemented a hiring freeze and refused to give raises to current employees, which is appropriate in this economy. With the current hiring freeze, where we will we get staff for this building?
While the construction is paid for by the Polisseni grant, next year when taxes are due, and the maintenance fees have to be paid, we will have to pay for maintenance . New sports will be added, but where are we supposed to put the new athletes? With the new complex, we are expected to add 150 students.
However, we are already putting three people in two person rooms, and are routinely out of parking. We don't get to say what the gifts are for, but our Board of Directors pursues gifts for certain purposes. It is doubtful the Polisseni Foundation gave the money without prodding from the school, especially considering Wanda Polisseni is on the board of the college.
Why didn't we push for grants to help implement ways to increase effectiveness on campus? That money would decrease costs instead of running operating costs. If we have plans to increase enrollment, doesn't it makes sense to plan for the necessary increases in housing and parking?
We keep saying Fisher is going 'green', we have a 'Fisher goes Green' website and there is a sign in the Ward/Haffey dining hall. So why don't we push for money to go towards putting in green tech?
It seems that the same problems that affected the housing market affects colleges. We built buildings without planning for the future. The Skalny Welcome Center, which administrators said would not benefit current students, was built to get more students to come. But we didn't plan housing for residents or parking for commuters? Tuition is going up faster than inflation. And why? To pay for the improvements to the campus. Why are we building improvements? To justify the increased cost of tuition of course. Is there a flaw in that logic?
If people are unable to pay increasing amounts of money for things they didn't really want or need to begin with, then there could be a problem with the economy of higher education. Good thing the economy never loses steam and shrinks.
jmw02824@sjfc.edu
Fisher has implemented a hiring freeze and refused to give raises to current employees, which is appropriate in this economy. With the current hiring freeze, where we will we get staff for this building?
While the construction is paid for by the Polisseni grant, next year when taxes are due, and the maintenance fees have to be paid, we will have to pay for maintenance . New sports will be added, but where are we supposed to put the new athletes? With the new complex, we are expected to add 150 students.
However, we are already putting three people in two person rooms, and are routinely out of parking. We don't get to say what the gifts are for, but our Board of Directors pursues gifts for certain purposes. It is doubtful the Polisseni Foundation gave the money without prodding from the school, especially considering Wanda Polisseni is on the board of the college.
Why didn't we push for grants to help implement ways to increase effectiveness on campus? That money would decrease costs instead of running operating costs. If we have plans to increase enrollment, doesn't it makes sense to plan for the necessary increases in housing and parking?
We keep saying Fisher is going 'green', we have a 'Fisher goes Green' website and there is a sign in the Ward/Haffey dining hall. So why don't we push for money to go towards putting in green tech?
It seems that the same problems that affected the housing market affects colleges. We built buildings without planning for the future. The Skalny Welcome Center, which administrators said would not benefit current students, was built to get more students to come. But we didn't plan housing for residents or parking for commuters? Tuition is going up faster than inflation. And why? To pay for the improvements to the campus. Why are we building improvements? To justify the increased cost of tuition of course. Is there a flaw in that logic?
If people are unable to pay increasing amounts of money for things they didn't really want or need to begin with, then there could be a problem with the economy of higher education. Good thing the economy never loses steam and shrinks.
jmw02824@sjfc.edu
Be the first to comment on this story