Letter to the editor: Save Our Campus
For months, Oakland University (OU) has diverted funds away from education and towards the development of a plan to commercialize our campus. The proposed East Campus Development (ECD) project seemingly intends to bulldoze our public lands, lease campus to private entities, and oversee the erection of an upper-upscale “boutique hotel.” Those organizing the plan want the community to think that the details of the project are still developing and subject to amendment, but the truth is, no matter what kind of development might finally be decided, the project will increase campus traffic, reduce campus sustainability, and diminish campus safety.
ECD is not for the OU community, it is for ultra rich visitors, and it must be stopped. We encourage everyone to make their voice heard by signing our petition, linked here. By signing today, you are urging Oakland University to cancel East Campus Development.
Traffic
As a commuter campus notorious for traffic and sparse parking, ECD will only exacerbate the problem. The project is guaranteed to increase traffic on and around campus, increasing the time it takes to commute to and park at OU. Because OU does not provide any public transportation to mitigate traffic problems for its one lane campus, road congestion will get substantially worse. Coincidentally, development is planned to occur next to South Adams Road, another area that OU has been in talks with others about expanding. While that may sound enticing, this could take 5-10 years and would force OU to give up even more land. It is irresponsible to take on such a damaging project without preparing any timely solutions to the burdens the ECD will cause the community.
Sustainability
The architects of this plan are obsessed with the public appearance of sustainability; however, no matter how this project is framed or pitched, there is no development plan for luxury and excess that will be sustainable. In fact, any proposed development on East Campus will hurt sustainability efforts that the university has pledged to uphold. Sustainability is much more complex than OU’s promises to “protect the trees” because they are an important “asset.” The construction process itself will mean excavating, digging, clearing, and paving over the green spaces that Oakland University is known for. Moreover, the completion of this project will create a domino effect that will destroy complex ecosystems. As OU profusely professes their illusions of sustainability, their students, faculty, and staff groups made up of experts in the field are united in reminding the university this project is NOT sustainable. Simply put, if OU cares about sustainability, they will reject this project.
Safety
In a year when campus has felt considerably less safe, we should not be giving up jurisdiction of our land to private developers. ECD will remove OU’s authority over the East Campus and the OUPD will be replaced with the Rochester Hills Police which the university has no control over. The newly developed areas will invite strangers with no OU affiliation to campus. Additionally, campus policies on smoking and weapons that apply to the OU community will likely not apply to people at the corner. OU wants the community to believe everything is under control, but once they lease the land away, they will have little oversight. If a business moves in that does not align with OU’s values, there will be little the university can do to stop it. It is reckless to compromise campus safety for potential profit that is far from guaranteed. Maintaining a safe and welcoming campus environment will be difficult if OU gives up its control of the campus.
Conclusion
We understand that the OU Board of Trustees is looking for a way to mitigate budget shortfalls, but the solutions must be rooted in OU’s mission and values. ECD is out of touch with the needs of students and the entire OU community. The plan has not been endorsed by any majority of the OU community, and if new projects do not primarily serve students, faculty, or staff, they have no place on our campus.
Furthermore, the ECD is wasting staff time and resources on crafting a playground for the rich when they could be focusing on transforming OU into a university of choice. Over the course of the last year, students have asked for affordable course materials, a living wage, and sustainable policies and projects, and in response, OU has offered luxury buildings and sustainable platitudes, not actions. OU must invest in community initiatives that will improve campus, NOT further corporatize and commercialize a non-profit university.
Sign this petition to say NO to the East Campus Development plan.
Signed,
Oakland University Student Congress (OUSC)
Cooper • Nov 3, 2022 at 11:33 AM
Boutique Hotel is probably “The Graduate” style hotels at UMich and MSU. Scott Kunselman was involved in a recall at FCA. Asked to resign. Guy was on the board of trustees- was a notable OU contributor, then the COO position is created for HIM… to do stuff that profs used to do. Prof salaries? Stagnant. Tuition? Increases every year. Merit scholarships? Still exist, but most people transfer out of OU anyway. Sure, Scott retired in 2020, but that energy, of glad-handing, handshaking, opaque levels of communication… that’s heinous.
Stuff like this sickens me. Haves vs have nots. How is treerunner doing? How has that helped students? Sure, it’s cool to drive by. We need MONEY. We need tuition to GO DOWN OR STAY FLAT.
I am proud of OU’s response to Covid, led by Ora. I exchanged emails with her as a freshmen over my fears of increasing tuition.
A plan like this, with no clear line of sight on how it will benefit students? It sickens me. My underdog alma-mater, my uni that has given me so much, is just like the rest of the universities? How heinous and disappointing.
I’m an BS in Business Economics from OU SBA, ’21. We are taught to “answer the question, question the answer.” Ask “why?”
I do not like the conclusions I am coming to. I do not like the answers to these questions. Do better. Be more transparent. Stop salary increases. Stop promoting projects with no clear benefit to students other than it’ll make our campus look more boutique and luxurious, despite our median SAT is 980-1210
please email me or text at 2484084688 if you want more info
yousef • Nov 1, 2022 at 8:54 AM
Finally! Maybe my tuition wont go up!
Faculty Facepalm • Oct 31, 2022 at 7:41 PM
Wayne State has some pretty cool sustainability programs that have seen recent enrollment increases while OU’s enrollment continues to tank. Ditto with Eastern. These schools are passing us like we are driving backwards and this development is a grand and embarassing display of how many light years we are behind.
Shannon • Oct 31, 2022 at 6:16 PM
This letter is great and covers spot-on points. This is such a bad idea for so many reasons and the people at OU voting on this need to care about this or they’ll hurt real bad when they vote on this and upset everyone.
This isn’t what I’m going to OU for or what I’m spending my money on. None of us signed up for this and most of us don’t look forward to this. It’s embarrassing and shows adverse values to what OU claims.
The time is now • Oct 31, 2022 at 4:31 PM
Petitions and protests are not very common at ou. When the OU community protests and petitions they do it for good reason. They do it because there is a lot at stake. If you’re someone that wants to help people, someone that wants to make a difference in the world, this is the time. This is the moment. Don’t let it pass you by.
Frustrated Faculty • Oct 31, 2022 at 4:28 PM
We talk talk talk about sustainability, and then teach our students — through example — that when the financial going gets tough, just subdivide and develop. The ONLY people I’ve heard from (and there aren’t many of them) who support this project, are real estate developers.
So Done • Oct 31, 2022 at 3:21 PM
I honestly don’t know what to say about this except that it makes no sense. Why would OU choose to spend school funds on something that is not meant for students and would actively make our on campus experience worse in multiple ways? I can only assume it’s a very transparent cash grab.
At the very least, Oakland should work on finishing its other construction projects before it takes on another, and I mean /at the very least/.
Frustrated. • Oct 31, 2022 at 2:23 PM
As a freshman at OU, I have loved how beautiful our fall scenery has been so far. To think that they would even consider tearing down anything contributing to that for more concrete and industrialization is so disappointing. Not to mention the lack of sustainability, safety, and care for our campus. So disappointing and disgusting. Do better.
Disappointed • Oct 31, 2022 at 2:05 PM
Its disappointing to see OU choose the path of commercialization rather than investing in education. The purpose of a university is for the students! We don’t need a hotel on campus. Making investments in the university’s ability to educate students will make this a university of choice, resulting in greater attendance. Let’s provide more resources for students!!
Disillusioned Student • Oct 31, 2022 at 1:59 PM
The one thing OU still has going for it is it’s natural beauty, and they want to take that away and build a hotel instead? It’s cartoonishly out of touch. Leasing public campus land to a private developer to build something not designed for explicitly students? It’s Hollywood levels of evil. It’s almost unbelievable, then I remember I attend OU.
Student • Oct 31, 2022 at 1:58 PM
I don’t even know where to start with this. Such a ridiculous idea for so many reasons. Not sustainable, not safe, not for students. Shut this thing down.
AngeredStudent • Oct 31, 2022 at 1:48 PM
Yes! About time someone call them out for this project. Very few people want this, extremely unpopular.