Im more outraged at St. Lawrence Universitys new residence hall than I was portrayed in the article May 2. Why did construction begin with less than half the funds raised? Maybe SLU is confident theyll have the money, since they raised everyones tuition $3,000 for the next school year with no explanation. I doubt thatll go toward renovating my current dorm building, which has water from the upstairs bathroom leaking down the walls into my room, or toward expanding our two dining facilities with the growing acceptance rate.
However luxurious this new building will be with its geothermal heating and cooling, its glass bridge walkway and a bathroom for every bedroom, no other residence hall on campus is becoming something to be proud of. Improvement needs to be an across-the-board effort, and SLU is leaving a lot behind in haste to show off their amazing new building. Im not opposed to expanding the residences; Im opposed to the luxury and neglect of practicality that comes with this project.
Tuition should not be $58,000 per year now, but SLU cant lower that figure after the new residence hall is complete, because that would prove that tuition was raised for this project, which is claimed to be funded only by donations.
There are thousands more people affected than the 17 trustees on the board that approved this project. There should have been more reaching out for opinions of the parents and students currently paying tuition, but SLU knows that an honest approach would have put a dent in the projects development.
I want to reiterate that St. Lawrence University is a small school in a small town and has expanded as far as it can.