kansasdemocrat

Anyone else annoyed/****ed off/whatever with the contract changes to The Bluff apartments?

mom2collegekids

What are the changes?

And, are the changes for this fall semester? or for some future semester.

feenotype

Could you elaborate on what the changes are?

uaprophet

Beginning next fall, (2010-2011 school year), students living there will be required to contract and pay for an entire year. August 2010-July 2011. If students choose not to live there during the summer they will still be required to pay I believe half the cost for the summer.

Yes I'm disappointed. Many students will probably be moving back into the actual on campus dorms.

feenotype

I think people are forgetting that UA leasing the Bluff and using it as "on-campus" housing was always meant to be a temporary solution.

feenotype

I just read the CW article about. I can't believe this, but I'm going to pull a mom2collegekids and say some people are just whining for the sake of whining.

mom2collegekids

^^^

Oh brother... Take action, don't whine....ask for advice how to proceed, don't give up.

Anyway....the best way to handle the Bluffs it to threaten to "vote with your feet and pocketbooks." That means that all the UA students at the Bluff should inform UA Housing that unless UA pressures The Bluff to change this policy, they will move out and want on-campus housing for fall 2010.

That will put the fear of God into UA housing that all these upperclassmen will have "first dibs" for on-campus housing during the sign up period, creating a possible shortage for incoming freshmen. Then UA will do a mass negotiation with The Bluff (a super-nice private apartment complex that UA uses when more housing is needed.).


And...if UA feels that with the new Ridgecrest South opening this fall that it no longer needs to "borrow" housing from the Bluffs, then...well, we knew the Bluffs was temporary, even if it was very nice, nice, nice housing.

feenotype

Take action against what, exactly? This is all going to plan for UA. They want to get students out of Bluff and back in their housing where all the revenue is theirs to keep. Anyway, why should taxpayers and donor be subsidizing luxury living for students?

mom2collegekids

^^^

As I said in my post...

If UA has enough on campus housing (due to Ridgecrest South), then the Bluff is no longer needed.

However, if UA expects a robust group of incoming freshmen next year (many holding schollies for free housing), then UA might still need the Bluffs for housing.

So..the call to action is this. Call housing and find out what their forecast is for 2010. Will they still need to depend on the Bluff to provide housing for any UA student? In other words, can UA accomodate all the Bluff's students in next year they return to campus housing.

But, no one should complain that UA contracted with The Bluff to begin with. If UA had done what many other colleges have done (make "doubles into triples" by adding bunk beds), you students would be screaming....and rightfully so. UA made a smart and caring decision to contract with The Bluffs.

so, again, if The Bluffs are no longer needed, then fine. But, the Bluffs may find themselves in a situation where they will have to "bend," if they find that many/all of their UA students return to on-campus housing.

feenotype

If I remember correctly, the reason UA leased the Bluff in the first place is because the enrollment expansion occurred more quickly than planned (they didn't have enough housing open in time). I believe the opening of Ridgecrest South has taken off that pressure. So, yes, the Bluff is no longer necessary.

It is kind of humorous that residents of the Bluff are now complaining about possibly having to move back on campus. When UA first had to lease it, students were complaining about having to live in "on-campus" housing off-campus.