GSA Housing Proposals

The GSA has written a proposal/response to a recent report written by the Graduate and Professional Student Experience Survey committee (website: Their goal is to increase access to housing for incoming students, build more housing, and build a sense of community.

Below are the most recent drafts of the GSA housing proposal. GSA representatives have until Friday, June 15th, 2007 at 5pm to submit amendments in writing. If you have suggestions for amendments send them to your GSA representative using the amendment form found on the bottom of this page. To download the form you must log-in and click on the "files" button that will appear in the toolbar at the bottom of this page. If you are not a registered user you can still access the language of the form and copy and paste into a word document for submission to your GSA representative. If you do not have a GSA representative for your department contact Doug Jorgesen, incoming GSA president.

To discuss the proposal and for more background visit the forum:

GSA Draft Proposal/Response to GPSES Committee Report-June 9, 2007

1 Affiliated Housing
3 The GSA has identified the lack of an inclusive residential community affiliated
4 with UCSD as the most pressing issue for graduate students. Housing is a vital and
5 integral part of an active academic community. While comparable universities are
6 fortunate to have affordable housing in close proximity to campus, UCSD is surrounded
7 by high cost commercial development. This commercial development drives up real
8 estate prices, making the surrounding area inhospitable and unaffordable for students.
9 Affordable and desirable on-campus housing must be a high priority of the administration
10 particularly because UCSD does not have any kind of surrounding “campus town”.
12 In addition to causing significant problems for current graduate students,
13 demonstrated in the GPSES report by the lack of connection to the campus community
14 and frequent stress from finances, the lack of affordable housing also threatens the
15 continued viability and future of UCSD as a great research institution. While the goal of
16 the university is to double its current graduate enrollment, it was unable in the most
17 recent year to enroll more students than in the previous. While San Diego has
18 traditionally had an advantage over other schools due to the ideal setting, it appears that
19 this advantage is evaporating with the rising cost of living. Without far reaching
20 planning now, graduate students will increasingly choose other institutions for their
21 studies.
23 The lack of affordable housing is particularly onerous for incoming graduate
24 students. Incoming students are forced to find housing in San Diego, frequently without
25 knowledge of the area or friends that can become roommates. Due to high housing costs
26 and limited availability of housing near UCSD, these first year students often live far
27 from campus with roommates that may not even be part of the UCSD community. The
28 long commute prohibits engagement in campus activities that frequently occur at night.
29 As a result GPS engage the UCSD community primarily within their department. This
30 inhibits development of community within housing, as well as students in the later stages
31 of their career that have more established social circles. In the housing communities
32 standard at most campuses, as well as for UCSD undergraduates, community develops
33 organically within first year housing, particularly within the first few months of arriving
34 at UCSD.
35 To address these issues the GSA has identified the following action 35 plan for the
36 Department of Housing, OGS, and GSA to cooperatively address.
38 Key Housing Areas for Improvement
40 Action 1: Create additional affordable housing for graduate students
41 through both traditional and nontraditional means.
42 → Improve future housing development to better address student
43 cost/benefit concerns
44 → Explore co-ops and off campus housing colonies to increase housing
45 availability and affordability
48 Action 2: Develop a more cohesive, fair, accessible, and sound housing policy
49 that allows for designed growth for the future.
50 → Reduce operating costs
51 Reduce landscaping and utility costs
52 Reduce administrative costs
53 → Revise housing priority policy
54 Provide housing for incoming students
55 · Aim for 1 year less than normative time to degree
56 · Restrict housing time limits until this goal is met
57 Maintain housing priority for families
58 → Revise the current rent structure to make housing accessible and
59 affordable
60 Equalize the current rent structure
61 · Balance rents between AH properties
62 · Plan for future development so that rent increases are
63 predictable and gradual
64 Provide rent abatements for needy students
65 → Revise current social constriction policies
66 Create separate areas with different quiet hours and alcohol
67 policies for students to choose between
69 Action 3: Actively establish a strong community within existing affiliated
70 housing.
71 → Create a tenants association to address community concerns within
72 housing
73 Action 1: Create additional affordable housing 73 for graduate
74 students through both traditional and nontraditional means.
76 UCSD faces a serious shortage of housing for GPS. As of the writing of this
77 report there are 4878 GPS [1] at UCSD, and 1681 GPS and 354 spouses/partners of GPS
78 housed in Affiliated Housing [2]. Additionally there are 1263 GPS on the waitlist for
79 housing, with at least 42 additional spouses/partners [3]. As well as GPS, Affiliated
80 Housing has 420 undergrad, faculty, and staff residents [2].
81 By these numbers UCSD currently houses 34% of GPS, with 26% currently
82 seeking housing. We believe that the number seeking housing is artificially low due to
83 the extremely long waitlists for the more desirable housing. With the opening of One
84 Miramar 800 new graduate beds will be available to unmarried graduate students. This
85 should increase the proportion of housed students from 34% to 51%, not accounting for
86 increased growth in the student population that is projected to be small for the 07-08
87 school year. This will still leave 463 current students on the waitlist.
88 In addition to these 463 students, we believe that many more students who would
89 like campus housing are not on the waitlist. One major group is masters students, who
90 are not currently offered housing [4]. Current housing policy also artificially restricts the
91 waitlist through strict requirements for students on the waitlist such as having 48 hours to
92 reply to a housing offer, needing to move on 30 days notice, and not being allowed to
93 keep a waitlist spot after moving in. The primary/secondary roommate system also
94 deliberately restricts the waitlist.
96 While the housing situation for GPS at UCSD is currently terrible, it only appears
97 to be getting worse over the next five to ten years. In the past ten years GPS enrollment
98 has grown from 2473 to 3910, and increase of 1437 students [1]. By 2011 enrollment is
99 projected to grow [4] to 6130, an increase of 2220 students in less than half the time. To
100 accommodate these extra 2220 students an increase of only 350-400 additional beds is
101 planned. Is it possible that the surrounding community can absorb these additional
102 students? Currently vacancy rates in the area around UCSD are 3.8% at rates of $892 per
103 month per bedroom. With the construction of additional commercial space near UCSD it
104 appears that this situation is only degrading for students. It is clear that future students
105 will be forced to live farther, endure longer commutes, and pay higher rents than current
106 students.
107 There is a serious possibility that future enrollment will be restricted precisely
108 because the shortage of affordable housing is so acute. While UCSD has traditionally
109 benefited from the high quality of life of San Diego while recruiting, it appears that this
110 benefit has been seriously eroded by the increasing cost of living. It seems likely that the
111 current difficulties encountered in enrolling students has come from the lack of
112 competitiveness of support packages from the university in light of the high cost of
113 housing relative to other universities.
114 Conversely, UCSD faces a stage of great opportunity. Currently the University
115 has an abundance of land available, in contrast to other campuses like Los Angeles and
116 Berkeley. If UCSD manages its land properly and creates more affordable housing
117 without rushing into expensive and undesirable projects it has an opportunity to further
118 continue its meteoric rise among research universities. Through careful, 118 long range
119 planning and willingness to take risks and innovative solutions UCSD can create a
120 graduate community and experience superior to all other schools in California,
121 establishing its dominance throughout the world for years to come.
123 Traditional Means
125 The GSA applauds the administrations recent plan approved by the Regents to
126 increase GPS housing by 350-400 beds. We hope that occupancy can be made as high as
127 possible in this structure. While we appreciate very much the recent addition of the One
128 Miramar complex and feel that there are many reasons to be excited, there are also many
129 reasons to be disappointed. Among them are the high cost of construction and
130 undesirable floor plans.
131 Attached to the One Miramar complex is a parking garage with one spot for each
132 resident. While the GSA feels that transportation is important for GPS and that it is
133 generally unreasonable to expect GPS to live without a personal vehicle, we also believe
134 that the costs of such a structure should have been more closely examined. While most
135 GPS would like to have a car, we would like to have the cost option for ourselves. This
136 suggests that in current complexes residents should be given incentives for relinquishing
137 their vehicles. The level of incentives necessary would indicate whether the cost for such
138 a large parking structure is justified for future complexes. In general we believe that the
139 goal of UCSD should be to create a strong enough community in the surrounding area
140 that students do not feel obligated to have a personal vehicle. This would allow
141 significant cost savings for GPS, a reduction in environmental impact, and a self fueling
142 improvement in local community and campus connection.
143 Current plans call for additional beds to “be provided in apartment units
144 comprising two, three, or four bedrooms in both high-rise and mid-rise buildings” [4].
145 While many GPS enjoy the low density environment of existing Affiliated Housing
146 structures, we understand the need for future housing to be higher density to
147 accommodate as many students as possible. Currently Affiliated Housing has many two
148 bedroom units (I plan to provide specific numbers, which I have at home), but not many
149 one bedroom or three/four bedroom apartments. The GSA believes that future
150 development should focus on one bedroom apartments to house GPS couples without
151 children and three/four bedroom apartments that are more desirable for single graduate
152 students. Further, we believe that in general plans should aim to increase the diversity of
153 housing options as much as possible. In contrast to One Miramar, we also hope that
154 future housing complexes will emphasize increasing communal living space, particularly
155 at the expense of large hallways and bathrooms. In general hallways, which waste space,
156 should be limited as much as possible.
158 Nontraditional Means
160 The greatest opportunity for UCSD comes from continuing its tradition of being
161 an innovative, risk taking institution. Every risk that UCSD has taken has paid off, but
162 since we established our name we have become more conservative, particularly with
163 respect to students services and campus activities. We have a great opportunity to
164 continue leapfrogging other universities by exploring alternative housing 164 options and
165 taking risks when we see the strong potential for reward. We can aim to be the best
166 campus community in California, setting trends that other campuses would follow, or we
167 can settle for being a commuter research center. While the GSA advocates exploring the
168 full range of alternative housing options, and encourages the administration to solicit as
169 many sources as possible for other options, only two will be addressed here.
170 The first is housing co-ops, currently housing hundreds of students at UC
171 Berkeley and other campuses [5]. While the university has not traditionally promoted co
172 ops and other small businesses, we feel that co-ops offer the greatest potential benefit to
173 students. Providing below market rates for management, maintenance, and food service
174 through cooperative work, co-ops provide the best opportunity for GPS to have
175 affordable, community oriented housing. Many of the aims of the university could be
176 met through housing co-ops. Unfortunately the area surrounding UCSD is too expensive
177 and land is too limited to allow for the development of housing. The GSA urges the
178 administration to make every effort to allow the development of co-ops on university
179 land at cost. We are eager to work with the administration and interested students to
180 develop responsible co-ops as a long term housing solution.
181 Another solution the GSA believes should be explored is the possibility of remote
182 housing colonies. Due to the free and frequent shuttle service between campus and the
183 Hillcrest medical center, a large number of graduate students have chosen to live in the
184 Hillcrest area, where there are lower rents and a higher quality of life within reliable and
185 swift transportation to the university. Some departments, particularly in the humanities,
186 report that the large majority of their social events occur in Hillcrest/ North Park because
187 of the large community there. The GSA urges the university to explore how to encourage
188 the development of these communities, through enhancing transportation options and
189 possibly purchasing property for the express purpose of developing an alternative
190 graduate community. Extreme vigilance should be shown in maintaining awareness of
191 the housing situation in San Diego to seek out low cost opportunities to expand housing
192 off site.
193 Action 2: Develop a more cohesive, fair, accessible, 193 and sound
194 housing policy that allows for designed growth for the future
196 Many issues faced by dealing with housing are brought about by the well
197 intentioned but haphazard housing policies currently in place. Housing is not provided
198 during the most difficult transition time for students, when they first arrive, but is offered
199 to students that have established themselves in San Diego. This creates a host of
200 problems. In an ideal situation students would begin in housing with a mix of established
201 early career GPS and other incoming GPS that have yet to establish themselves.
202 Community would develop organically within the housing community, which would then
203 transition together to the greater San Diego community. Ties established in the first year
204 would continue throughout the GPS career, with most students most strongly connected
205 to other students on the same timeline as them in terms of advancement and graduation.
206 Current administration policy does allow first year housing for some students
207 through the SHORE recruitment program. The GSA believes that incoming GPS housing
208 should be seen as a recruitment tool for all incoming GPS, and not just those picked
209 through the sometimes random methods of the SHORE program. Further, the current
210 SHORE program offers a dramatically lower cost of living over the complete graduate
211 career for some students, while the GSA believes that the cost of living should be low for
212 all GPS.
213 To this end the GSA feels that the current gross disparity should be addressed.
214 There are many important considerations when deciding on rent levels. Virtually all of
215 these have been ignored to this point, as rent levels have been set in an ad hoc fashion on
216 a per project basis. Current rent policies are virtually nonexistent. Rates are set on a year
217 to year basis, without adequate planning. Because of this students have in recent years
218 experienced dramatic and unexpected rent increases. This has been extremely difficult
219 on many GPS that established their lifestyle and made commitments on the basis of
220 previous rent levels. It is important to remember that doctoral students make a
221 commitment to their education for six years, and that the university should make every
222 attempt to make changes gradual and predictable to prevent students from being in a
223 situation where they have obligations they cannot meet. The worst case scenario is a
224 student with one year left until graduation finding that they are unable to continue at
225 UCSD for financial reasons and sacrificing much of their life without a degree.
227 In order to address these issues, the GSA has identified the following long term
228 goals for Affiliated Housing to address:
230 Key Goals for Affiliated Housing Policy
232 · Goal 1: Reduce operating costs
233 · Goal 2: Revise housing priority policy
234 · Goal 3: Revise the current rent structure to make housing accessible and
235 affordable
236 · Goal 4: Revise current social constriction policies
238 In achieving each of these goals emphasis should be placed 238 on making these
239 changes gradually and fairly, such that no GPS is burdened in an unacceptable or grossly
240 disproportionate manner.
242 Goal 1: Reduce operating costs
243 Current housing costs are relatively low at some AH complexes, due to
244 minimization of expensive remodeling and renovation work. The GSA applauds the
245 efforts of AH to keep housing as affordable as possible. However with expensive new
246 housing being added and the cost affiliated with increased turnover due to the shift to
247 incoming GPS housing, it will be imperative that AH strive with increased vigilance to
248 reduce costs as much as possible. To this end the GSA has identified two
249 recommendations to explore to minimize rising housing costs.
251 1) Reduce landscaping and utility costs
253 Projected utility costs for residential apartments (all AH properties but La Jolla
254 Del Sol) for 2007-08 are $1.3 million, which is $828 per adult resident per year, or $69
255 per adult resident per month. In these units the AH provides water, gas, and trash
256 removal. 18 units also have included electricity. The GSA believes that there is
257 opportunity for significant cost reduction in this area. Trash removal is already very
258 efficient at $93k, or $60 per adult resident per year. Gas usage may be reduced and
259 comfort improved through improved insulation in older units, although certainly a
260 cost/benefit analysis should be considered before this is implemented.
261 Grounds costs for residential apartments are projected to be $421,755 for 2007-
262 08, or $268 per adult resident per year ($22/month). The GSA believes that significant
263 cost reductions can be realized through more environmentally friendly landscaping at the
264 Mesa and other housing properties. Currently water hungry and maintenance intensive
265 grass covers many unnecessary areas in the Mesa complex. Because of this watering is
266 continuous, with many areas of grass being frequently unpleasantly damp. A zero
267 scaping effort was initiated that would reduce cost and environmental impact, and
268 significant progress was made with specific, detailed plans being created that would
269 minimize costs while still providing large lawn areas for community enjoyment. It
270 appears that these efforts have not been followed through, however. The GSA advocates
271 that these efforts are renewed, and that all future developments seek to use water
272 resources and labor in a cost efficient manner.
274 2) Reduce administrative costs
276 Following are projected costs for AH (except for La Jolla Del Sol) for the 2007-
277 08 fiscal year (in terms of total cost and cost per resident):
279 Household Services Administration: One Miramar $577 k / $352
280 Household Services Administration: Mesa, Coast, SGA: $332 k / $415
281 Maintenance & Paint Services: Mesa, Coast, SGA: $187 k / $114
282 Maintenance & Paint Services: One Miramar: $27 k / $33
283 Internal Housing Administration: $1.1 M / $4518
285 Human Resources: $30 k / $12
286 Purchasing: $33 k / $13
287 Financial Services: $79 k / $32
288 Administrative Services: $80 k / $33
289 Information Technology: $270 k / $110
290 Total Central Administration: $1.2 M / $492
292 While the GSA understands the complexities involved in managing an enterprise
293 as large as AH, we call for the administration to control administration costs as much as
294 possible. A significant concern is due the difficulty in comprehending the budget. The
295 GSA is unclear on the differences between “Household services administration” and
296 “Maintenance and Paint Services administration” and alarmed by the $110/year cost each
297 resident is paying for information technology. In order to identify further cost cutting
298 measures the budget should be made public, reviewed by the soon to be created tenant
299 association, and should have descriptions of each expense.
301 Goal 2: Revise Housing Priority Policy
303 Current housing policy allocates housing to three groups: GPS with children (and
304 also undergraduate students with children), incoming students through the SHORE
305 program, and senior GPS as identified by time on the waitlist. The GSA believes that
306 housing should be reallocated over time to early stage GPS with the eventual goal of
307 providing housing to incoming GPS and those at the beginning of their career. We
308 believe that the preference given to students with children should be continued in
309 recognition of the extra difficulties presented to these students in the interest of
310 maintaining accessibility.
311 Providing housing for incoming students introduces difficult challenges for the
312 housing structure. Currently AH turns over approximately 1/3 of their units, or ~400
313 units throughout the entire year. It would be extremely difficult and expensive for AH to
314 turn over the required 500 units necessary for incoming students on the same day.
315 Further there would be additional cost associated with the vacancies required to secure
316 apartments for incoming students under the current waitlist policy. In order to minimize
317 these costs the GSA suggests instituting one year leases (to minimize vacancy) that
318 would begin at staggered point during the summer (to spread the turnover). GPS would
319 be required to fill the duration of their lease, unless they found a qualified sublessor. The
320 GSA would support any system that would solve this problem with the minimal burden
321 on GPS.
322 In order to create space for incoming students someone has to leave housing. At
323 steady state the GSA would like to see GPS guaranteed housing for one year less than
324 their time to degree, which is the standard at UC Irvine. This has the benefit of
325 encouraging students to graduate in the nominal time, unlike the current system which
326 rewards delayed graduation with low cost housing. Unfortunately there is currently an
327 insufficient amount of housing to meet this goal.
328 In transition from the current system to the steady state system the GSA proposes
329 the following method for creating space for incoming students:
330 - Housing time limits should be implemented. These time limits 330 should be slightly
331 shorter than the current average amount of time that a student spends in housing
332 such that the waitlist is gradually reduced. Under this system any student should
333 be able to defer their tenure in housing if they desire to have housing in the later
334 stages of their academic career.
335 - Once the waitlist has been eliminated and housing has shifted to incoming
336 students, the students that have been in housing for the longest time will not be
337 offered continuing leases. If two students have been in housing for the same
338 amount of time then preference should be given to the student with the longer
339 normative time to degree. Under this system any student should be able to defer
340 their tenure in housing if they desire to have housing in the later stages of their
341 academic career.
343 The GSA appreciates the efforts of AH to accommodate students by allowing
344 partners as qualified roommates in two bedroom apartments. However, we feel that the
345 benefit to the GPS community would be greater if only other GPS were allowed as
346 qualified roommates in multiple bedroom apartments not occupied by GPS with children
347 until such as time as there is sufficient housing available for spouses/partners to resume
348 being allowed roommates. Until that time married/partnered GPS should be given
349 preference in both studio and one bedroom apartments. AH should investigate the cost of
350 converting more units to one/three bedrooms in the style of central Mesa, and perform
351 those conversions if it is a cost effective way to create an extra accessible bedroom.
353 Goal 3: Revise the current rent structure to make housing accessible and affordable
355 Currently there is no clear rent policy in the AH properties. As new properties
356 become available the rent structure for that property is set without consideration for the
357 units as a whole. While some extremely low cost units are available to assist those GPS
358 with significant financial burdens, there are no safeguards to ensure that the most
359 qualified students will receive this benefit, thus many financially well off students receive
360 this large housing benefit while needy students face significant hardship in the San Diego
361 housing market. There is also no long term rent policy accommodating new
362 development, so rent increases are sudden and unpredictable. In order to solve these
363 problems the GSA proposes that two policy changes be implemented: rent equalization
364 across properties and time and a rent abatement policy.
366 Rent Equalization
368 Under current policy rates between AH properties vary by as much as 191% for a
369 two bedroom apartment. While there are differences between amenities, it is clear that
370 some properties are dramatically more desirable than others when both cost and quality
371 are factored. One Miramar, while comparable to Mesa when all concerns are considered,
372 is at least $189/month more expensive for a two bedroom apartment. The only
373 explanation for this that is given is that former OGSR Dean Richard Attiyeh said that
374 rates should be between those of Mesa and La Jolla Del Sol. The GSA believes that rents
375 should be set according to desirability on a market system. According to this system
376 properties that had more applications than open rooms from incoming 376 students would
377 increase in rent, while properties that had less applications than openings would decrease
378 in price.
379 It is important in the implementation of this system that the expectations that
380 students have based their financial decisions on are maintained. This contrasts with
381 current policy. The GSA proposes that housing make ten year plans with all new housing
382 and projected expenses, and provide guidance to incoming students on the expected
383 housing situation for the next seven years (the amount of time that some GPS will be
384 dependent on these predictions). Every effort should be made to maintain these
385 projections for current students, shifting additional costs to incoming students over long
386 periods of time. When a new property is opening AH should run surpluses in the years
387 leading up to the opening and deficits in the years afterwards such that rent increases can
388 be maintained at a steady and predictable rate. The GSA expects rent increases to be
389 maintained in the following range:
391 Steady state: Inflationary or less
392 After cross property market equalization but while more housing is still being built: 6%
393 or less
394 During cross property market equalization: 8%
396 If at any point the average rent appears as though it will rise above 40% of the
397 average graduate student pay rate UCSD should slow GPS enrollment growth so as to not
398 make a situation where current students are unable to continue for financial reasons.
400 Rent Abatement
402 Many students are unable to pay increased rents due to legal or other limitations
403 on income. These include, but are not limited to, international students with spouses who
404 are legally unable to work, single parents, and students with disabled partners/spouses. In
405 order to accommodate these students and increase competitiveness for a diverse student
406 body, the GSA proposes an alternative maximum rent for students in these circumstances.
407 This rent would be set at 40% of income, with a long term goal of reducing it to 33% of
408 income. This would dramatically reduce rents and increase quality of life for the neediest
409 GPS, while providing reasonable rents for all GPS.
410 Further, there are many GPS for whom rent is already greater than 40% of
411 income. The GSA demands that the university raise the minimum pay rate for GPS
412 employed at 49% above the full time minimum wage.
415 Goal 4: Revise current social constriction policies
417 Current social policies in the housing properties are unnecessarily restrictive, in
418 particular quiet hours and alcohol possession. While administrators have traditionally
419 appealed to the presence of families for these policies, many families themselves find
420 themselves overly constrained by their single neighbors due to the policies. To
421 accommodate these concerns the GSA proposes that quiet hours and alcohol possession
422 policies be restricted on the basis of location. Specifically we request 422 that in the
423 Mesa/One Miramar area the more restrictive policies be applied to the eastern part of the
424 Mesa structure and the northern buildings in One Miramar, expanding the size according
425 to demand.

GSA Draft Proposal/Response to GPSES Committee Report-May 30, 2007

Graduate Student Association Supplementary Report on
Graduate and Professional Student Experience Survey
May 30, 2007

In light of the Graduate and Professional Student Experience Survey (GPSES) and subsequent committee report, the Graduate Student Association (GSA) submits the following recommendations for improving Graduate and Professional Student (GPS) satisfaction at UCSD. According to the GPSES Executive Summary, “over two-thirds of graduate and professional students are satisfied with their academic experience at UCSD, and nearly two-thirds would again choose to attend UCSD”, while “less than two-fifths find the social experience satisfactory and less than one-third find the cultural experience so”. Further, “only about one-third feel a sense of belonging at UCSD, and fewer than one-third find sufficient opportunities for involvement on campus”. Most disturbingly, “only 10% of graduate and professional students feel a connection to the campus community, and nearly two-thirds (64%) do not feel a connection”.

As active members in the GPS community, we are acutely aware of the availability of social and cultural activities for GPS, as well as the difficulty of recruiting participants and attendees for those activities. We feel that the issue is not a lack of programming or activities for GPS, but rather structural problems with UCSD policies that lead to a lifestyle disconnected from the campus community. Some of these problems are similar to those experienced by undergraduates at UCSD. However, many present unique challenges that require independent solutions for the GPS community.

In their report the GPSES committee identifies several areas of critical importance (among them community, housing, and communications) and both short and long term actions that can be taken to improve GPS satisfaction at UCSD. Most of the recommendations in their report are for high level structural changes within the culture and policies of the UCSD administration. Further, they identify in the appendices many concrete actions that can be taken in a variety of areas. The GSA feels that the issues identified in this report are very important, and many of the structural and cultural changes should be implemented.

In order to provide further guidance from the GPSES and committee report, GSA has identified concrete actions that we believe would, if implemented, significantly improve the GPS community in the next five years. To facilitate accountability and clarity, we have separated our recommendations according to the campus unit responsible and have provided the most desirable five year implementation of our goals. The administration should implement these recommendations using whatever administrative
mechanism they see fit.

Affiliated Housing

The GSA identified the lack of an inclusive residential community affiliated with UCSD as the most pressing issue restricting the development of a GPS community. Current housing policy emphasizes minimizing vacancies, providing housing preference
for senior GPS students and those with families, and funding each housing project on an individual basis with little cross subsidization. While these priorities are well intentioned, they have led to an inequitable situation that is particularly difficult for
incoming GPS.

The GSA recognizes the residential housing community, particularly for incoming graduate students, as vital for a GPS connection to campus. Current housing policies give preference to senior GPS and families, those with the least need to build external
connections to other GPS. Conversely incoming students are forced to find housing in the San Diego area, frequently without knowledge of the area or friends that can become roommates. Due to high housing costs and limited availability of housing near UCSD, these first year students often live far from campus with roommates that may not even be part of the UCSD community. The long commute prohibits engagement in campus activities that frequently occur at night. As a result GPS engage the UCSD community
only within their department. In the housing communities standard at most campuses, as well as for UCSD undergraduates, community develops organically within first year housing, particularly within the first few months of arriving at UCSD.

In order to improve community for UCSD GPS we suggest that Affiliated Housing implement the following policy by the end of the next five years:
• Immediately Affiliated Housing will be required to make it’s budget comprehensible and available to any graduate student that requests it
• All reasonable measures shall be taken to cut costs at Affiliated Housing such that housing opportunities can be expanded while maintaining below market rents
• All newly admitted graduate and professional students shall be guaranteed housing in their first year of study.
• In order to minimize vacancy, students are assigned leases that last one year starting in stages during the summer, and are required to complete the full length of their lease or provide a qualified sublessor.
— Students completing their degree do not need to find a qualified sublessor.
— Affiliated Housing will identify an eligible candidate who will then sign a
prorated lease that terminates the following summer.
• Every year those students that have been in Affiliated Housing the longest are not
allowed to renew their lease to make space for incoming students.
— Students that have been in Affiliated Housing for the same amount of time
are selected by merit
— Masters degree candidates are guaranteed one year of housing.
— A doctoral candidate student can choose to take a leave of absence from
housing, returning at any following year such that their number of years in
housing does not exceed the standard amount of time
• Housing is priced according to desirability, such that the demand for each housing
complex available is equal (market pricing).
— Housing should be provided for as many GPS as possible so long as oncampus
housing remains the most affordable housing in UTC
— New housing is built with floor plans with the highest demand
• The North Mesa complex is assigned as priority to family housing.
— Preferential placement in family housing is provided to single graduate
parents, followed by international couples with children, domestic couples
with children, international couples without children, domestic couples
without children
— Any remaining spaces are allotted to single graduate students on one year
— Family students are exempt from the time requirements for other students
— All one bedrooms and studios are reserved for graduate couples
• North Mesa will retain current policies regarding quiet hours and alcohol
• All other units will have later quiet hours and will allow alcohol in common
spaces within reason
• GPS will be allowed to change roommates among students with remaining
eligibility without penalty
• Improve community spaces in Affiliated Housing, including but not limited to;
— Installing UCSD wireless access throughout existing complexes.
— Improving comfort in community rooms and adding more general
recreation options, such as installation of ping-pong tables or foosball
tables in several community rooms.
— Increase outside seating/gathering areas.
• First non-exec GSA rep to reply with comments to Doug gets a free dinner!
In order to implement these policies with a minimum of difficulty and the least
inequity for both current residents and incoming GPS we recommend the following
transition plan during the next five years:
• Commitments that UCSD has made to families and students granted housing on
preference programs shall be honored regardless of other policy changes
— These students must be grandfathered into any new proposal
• Rates should change at 10% a year (increasing for more desirable housing,
decreasing or remaining constant for less desirable housing) until demand for
each type of housing is equalized
• Beginning in stages in the summer leases will be of a one year length
• Current residents and those on the waitlist shall be limited to four additional years
of housing from the implementation of this policy
— Families and SHIP/SHORE students that were promised housing for their
entire stay will be exempt such that those promises are honored
• Incoming students shall be limited to three years in campus housing

• Families that apply for housing after this date are placed on the waitlist for North
Mesa, which is restricted to family housing
• New housing units should be planned in proximity to current housing at Mesa to
increase capacity by several hundred more beds
• Until the waitlist is eliminated the dates on the waitlist shall be locked such that a
student does not lose their place on the waitlist once they are accepted into
• New entrants to the recruitment programs (SHORE) shall be limited to the same
term (two years) as other residents

These recommendations, implemented over a period of five years, would significantly
increase community, equitability, and availability of housing for all GPS at UCSD.

Housing Proposal Amendment Form (language)

Here is the language of the housing proposal amendment form. I figure, if push comes to shove, you can just copy and paste this text in to a word document (the original format of the form) and submit it to your GSA rep.


Housing Proposal Amendment Form

Submitting Council Member:
Author Email Address:

Text of Proposal to be Deleted: (Please specify line numbers)

Text to be Inserted: (Please specify line numbers)

Summary of Arguments in Favor of Amendment: (text past this page shall be transferred to the further arguments section)
*Note this is the exact text of the form, "past this page" equals 1623 characters including spaces.

(page break)
Further Arguments for Amendment X:

Submit Amendments (for those without GSA representation)

Add a New Comment
or Sign in as Wikidot user
(will not be published)
- +
Unless otherwise stated, the content of this page is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 2.5 License.