by Maher A. Sid-Ahmed
Ph.D. is a Professor in the Faculty of Engineering,
(Head of a department from 2004 to 2014) University of Windsor
Questions that beg answers
Cody Hall (built in 1961) is a five story residence building demolished in 2012 and turned into a parking lot. Why? Although the building was left empty since 2005 and required repair it could have been renovated and turned into much needed lecture rooms and offices which was the other suggestion posed to the administration. Was there a cost benefit analysis done that justifies demolishing versus renovation.
Electa Hall (built in 1959) another student residence building is scheduled to be demolished in October 2015 to turn the place into a green area. Why do we need more green area when Assumption Park is behind the building on the corner of Vista Place and University Avenue?
If the purpose of demolishing buildings is to lower operational costs then why are we putting up new buildings? Why demolish residence buildings that are or could bring revenue to the University?
About $32 million will be spent to gut and rebuild the former Windsor Star building (built in 1927). Why build in downtown when right on the main campus two lots are made available as a result of demolishing Electa Hall and Cody Hall?
Why spend $4 million on a piece of land (occupied by the Tunnel Bar B-Q) in downtown that is worth only a fraction of that amount? Why overpay for this land that is not near the main campus? Note that the planners of the Mega hospital have purchased 60 acres on country Rd 42 for $10 million. University of Windsor on the other hand paid $4 million for a small parcel of land in a congested area of the city. An estimated total of $70 million will be spent on the downtown campus. Why?
Everything that is planned for downtown already exists on the main campus. The trend in most North American universities is to keep the different Faculties on one main campus to allow students to take courses across academic disciplines.
For the downtown campus the city donated $10 million and $15 million came from provincial government investment capital. Where is the rest of the money coming from? In 2011 the President noted to staff about the 2012-2013 budget that a gap between $12 million increase in new costs and the $6 million increase in revenue is a reason for a round of tuition hikes. If that is the case, what return on investment is expected from a downtown campus to cover the gap in cost versus income?
While some argue that the downtown campus would help with the revival of downtown businesses, a major downtown developer, “Italo Ferrari, president and owner of Wilsondale Assets Management, which controls more than half a million square feet downtown, says economic spinoff from students is ‘an optical illusion,’ because they lack disposable income to patronize specialty shops downtown” (the Windsor Star).
So, if there is no real increase in revenue and no real advantage to the downtown businesses then what is the purpose of this expensive venture that could put the University of Windsor deeper in debt, a debt they will not be able to repay except maybe by issuing more bonds and another increase in tuition fees just to pay the interest on the loan. Bonds have to be redeemed by their maturity date. Where will the university get the money to redeem the bonds? From where does the University pay the interest on the bonds that are the source of the loan? What happens to the gap when the operating costs of the university increase because of the new buildings?
The administration bought the Assumption University building plus a riverside home for $3 million. The buildings are worth nowhere near that amount and the reasons given for the purchase seem to be contrived. The university was operating fine without that purchase.
Buildings completed on the main campus since the new leadership took over, with the exception of the Engineering building and the multi-story garage, seem to lack a strong business case.
There are other in-house issues. For example, qualified administrators are replaced with less qualified candidates. Further, some appointees occupy positions they are not qualified to occupy.
As a concerned member of the academic community, I care deeply about the University’s present and future. I feel that the above matters make its future rather uncertain and threatened.
