The idea for a new student union by 2020 has raised concerns from Portland State students about the importance and timeliness of such an undertaking with tuition already on the rise. The two concepts—a renovation projected to cost $90 million, and a complete rebuild projected to cost $116 million—were unveiled the first week of April in two open-house meetings.
Over the course of the Student Union Feasibility Project, students have voiced concerns regarding the expense of a new student union. Feedback from an anonymous survey conducted by the feasibility study included comments like: “to replace the existing building is a waste of resources,” and “it does not seem to be driven by the interest of the students,” as well as “students cannot afford a huge increase in fees.”
Additionally, feedback from the open-house meetings was mixed. According to Karina Ruiz, associate principal at Dull Olson Weekes Architects, approximately 50 people signed in at the meetings, but she estimates about twice that number actually attended. Of the feedback received, most of it was verbal—only 14 people gave written feedback.
Education graduate student Erol Chandler is opposed to the idea of building a new student union. He stressed that while considering renovations for buildings is always good, the timing with this one is particularly poor considering the rise in tuition.
“It is absolutely ridiculous to think of anyone being excited about paying more while the building is closed for two years just for new paint and even floors,” Chandler said. “This is not at all important.” Chandler added that Smith Memorial Student Union is already one of the nicer buildings on campus and that he would rather see money put towards training professors instead.
According to Ruiz, a variety of opinions were expressed at the open-house meetings, but the common theme was that SMSU had problems that need to be addressed and that the design concepts were well received. “There is more work to be done to delve deeper into what is needed to meet the needs of multitudes of students and not just a select group that has a loud voice,” Ruiz said.
“The hardest thing about projects like this,” said Indrani Boyle, associate campus planner, “is that we end up with a really pretty picture that seems like it is what we are going to do; but really, the intent is to show what could be possible. Again, maybe nothing will be done at all. This was an informational study and not a plan.”
The study itself cost the university approximately $150,000, with $144,000 of that going to the consultant team. The rest was spent on the costs of events and printing.
The funding came from the Student Fee Committee, the Student Building Fee and from an excess in savings from the Smith Memorial Student Union budget. Each source contributed about $50,000. No fees were raised to pay for the study—the funds came from previously accumulated fees. Additionally, the Associated Students of Portland State University also contributed a few thousand dollars from its own savings.
A primary concern with the project is the prospect of raising tuition even further to pay for a new or renovated building. Boyle said that at this point in the informational study, it is unknown how much the project would potentially cost students, and that possible alternatives have not yet been thought of. “Any significant increase of tuition would go to referendum with students voting on it,” she said.
Before a funding model can be decided, Boyle said that the university must decide what is reasonable and then present it to students first. Boyle proposed that one possible funding model would be to build the new student union with other funding sources and only raise fees for students who would be attending PSU while the building is in service.
Accounting sophomore Matthias Moseley was more ambivalent about the prospect of a new student union. He said he was unsure of the project’s importance and that he would want to wait for more information before making a decision. “The university is more likely to get student approval to raise tuition for a completely new building and not just remodeling it for $20 million less,” Moseley said.
The feasibility study identified that a sizable portion of SMSU is dedicated to non-student functions. The concepts were designed explicitly to expand space for students and to remove other functions that take student space.
“We have offices in SMSU that are not typical of a student union and maybe do not need to be there,” Boyle said. “However, there is the potential to make changes to how SMSU is organized without making any physical changes. No decisions have been made about this either, but it is certainly one option moving forward.”
One major problem with building or remodeling the student union is that all of the student groups and organizations, like ASPSU, student media and the Multicultural Center, as well as student support services like Student Legal Services and Student Parent Services would have to be relocated during the two-year construction period.
While the concepts were being formed, the Student Union Feasibility Project team visited the University of Washington, a campus that is currently working on renovating its student union. Boyle said that the topic of relocating services provided by a student union during its renovation was addressed.
“If building a new student union is a 100-yard dash, we are probably at yard one,” Ruiz said. “Before the design can even begin there is a lot of work the university has to do to validate assumptions and figure out the organizational details. One thing that was stressed early on was the importance of this project in the context of other PSU plans.”
The team frequently consulted students and designed the concepts around the input gathered from three different workshops, focus groups, open houses and surveys. One of the sessions included talking to a university studies class to get a diverse student voice that may not normally be heard.
“From inception, this project was driven and motivated by students,” Ruiz said.
Ruiz estimates that in all, between 250–300 different people were directly addressed in the process; she estimates that 85–90 percent of them were students. There were also 500 different responses to the surveysent out via the PSU email system. The survey asked students what they felt was important in a student union, but did not include questions about the importance or immediacy of a new or renovated union.
“I was very happy with the response rate from campus,” Boyle said. “It is difficult asking students about a building they would neither pay for nor use. It gauged people’s perceptions and feelings.”
According to Boyle, the next step is to figure out funding models or if this is even worth pursuing further. She added that this study was far from final and that even if it was decided to build a new student union, further architectural studies would have to be conducted and more input gathered.
The idea for a new student union by 2020 is only a concept, not a hard deadline. Boyle added that it could happen at another time, or not at all. “There is plenty of time for students to submit concerns and suggestions,” she said.