Skip to main content

Dormcon General Body Meeting

Date: October 26, 2023
Location: Next House TFL
Food: pepper sky’s

note

If you find any issues with the meeting minutes, please email dormcon-secretary@mit.edu

TL;DR (will be created after the meeting)​

  • guests: helen wang + david friedrich
  • housing rates structure discussion with david from hrs
    • explanation of what the change might be and some of the thoughts/constraints influencing the potential change
    • open discussion with thoughts and clarifying questions from students
  • very quick exec + dorm prez updates

Agenda​

  • Introduction of Helen Wang, Senior Associate Dean of Residential and Community Life, and David Friedrich, Dean of HRS
  • Housing Rates Structure Presentation by David Friedrich
  • Discussion and Q&A
  • Exec updates
  • Constitution Discussion
  • President Updates

Full minutes​

we ready to start

Housing Rates Structure Discussion​

  • introductions​

    • mitali: if you have not noticed yet we have some guests today. introduce yourself?
    • helen: hello I am helen wang new senior associate dean for res life. I was at wellesley and then mit part time so slowly starting to get to know the place. excited to be here!
    • david: hi senior associate dean for res services. excited to have conversations and see familiar faces. the work that I do. we’re two sides of the same coin. my side does space and operations and we together support the work we do in the houses.
    • helen: when mitali and rebecca invited us to dormcon. great spot to get feedback on dialogue and belonging. would really appreciate feedback broadly about things that make you feel like you belong at mit and questions about dialogue and conversation. if you have more thoughts feel free to send me an email. I am getting to know mit so I welcome any conversation!

    FEEDBACK LINK: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLScdDgLXHreBDtPKuzB9lkCaY1JrZ33gJJuRrePA3vcMhEnohw/viewform?usp=sf_link

  • first item on agenda: discussion of potential change to rates and housing structure

  • opening remarks from david​

    • david: glad to be here. I think it’s been a productive conversation over a year and a half now. we’ve noticed rates for housing are going up as we go through renewal projects. we wonder if there is a different way to do this. we’ve undertaken a process to talk to many stakeholders and engage in dialogue. a couple opening remarks. we genuinely want to get feedback. a decision has not been made at this point and we want to think through this carefully
    • we’re at a remarkable time in development happening in residential system. new grad housing. undergrad renewal projects. new house, burton conner, ec currently closed. looking down the road to see what we can do after that. we believe the residential part of the mit education matters a lot and what happens in these buildings is important.
    • we really need your input. we’ve been on the path of these renewal projects and each time we complete the rates have changed. we have three tiers and within the tiers we have rates for singles, doubles, triples, quads. dorms reopen at tier 1.
    • this pricing structure has been in place for a long time. I’ve been here 6 years and it predates me. I don’t think it makes sense. what are other options here? I think this is the perfect time to figure out whether we continue on the path we’re on where we move all the houses into a category of rates. the concerns we have heard is that what happens to the singles and who has access to the singles given financial needs. and how does that relate to an experience everyone can have access to.
    • mit is one of only half a dozen schools that is fully need blind admissions process. committed to making sure mit is affordable for every family. that commitment to finaid is remarkable. part of that commitment is ensuring that there is a level playing field for all students to engage in all that mit has to offer.
    • are there different ways to approach the housing structure that make it more equitable? there are a couple constraints.
  1. housing side. how do we have the resources to manage and operate quality housing system that is sustainable over time. based on the pricing structure we’ve had I don’t know if we do that. I don’t know if it sets us up to be sustainable in the long term. the buildings we had to close and renovate had major systems failing. we have to keep in mind that housing is not auxiliary. we have to operate on the rates that students bring in from housing. what we bring in is not enough to cover everything that happens in the housing system.
  2. financial aid side. we have to be mindful of how changes impact finaid. millions of dollars go into finaid to continue to make mit accessible for everyone. committee on undergrad admissions and finaid. that committee looks at proposals to make sure we are meeting that goal and how we compare to closest peers. our closest peers that have same commitment to finaid have housing system that is one price. everyone on campus pays that same rate. it’s a process of seniority point system etc. for how you can move into a single from a triple. at the end of your four years things even out. it’s not about financial need for where you can be but more of whether you’ve been a leader to move across rooms.

  • this idea of going to one rate is a fundamental shift in the philosophy of how you do pricing. we think now as amenities. now we’re trying to level the playing field where there isn’t too much variation. there will be a bit. but we want to make sure student has the same access to every housing option and can make authentic choices of where you want to live and who you want to live with. and the community you join. now open to discussion.

  • open discussion/questions​

    • rebecca: pls raise your hand if you’d like to speak
    • random prez: when you talk about one price system. what is that price going to be? is it going to be tier 1 single right now, tier 3 double. thoughts on that?
      • david: because finaid calculation is for tier 1 double rate any adjustment has to keep that in mind. if we stay on the path we’re on we did projection of revenue stream to housing system over time. and trying to make sure we can maintain. between tier 1 double and tier 1 single. and talking about how do we get to there from now to then. could hold tier 1 rate steady and have other ones eventually collapse up into that. we need to work through calculation more but overall.
    • resident: I thought this decision was in part because mit wanted to make price of dorms less of a factor in choosing where to live. that doesn’t necessarily work if the average living price for people on campus increases dramatically. because not all housing is equal.
      • david: not any campus has equal housing. we are moving to narrower band. the first point is good one. this is about saying that since price is met with finaid dollars it becomes affordable for everyone. then making decision based on who you want to live with.
    • resident: is mit/hrs saying that all students will receive finaid for housing. for some students they only receive finaid for tuition. the price of where they live is important. it could make it harder for some students especially first years who are required to live on campus.
      • david: mit is not saying any of this has to happen. trying to respond to questions students have had. has some of the challenges you have described. this isn’t about driving up the price of housing. it’s about keeping us on a trajectory we need to be on for housing and making sure finaid aligns with housing. everyone gets a different amount of aid based on needs. students have appreciated the flexibility to choose how they use that.
    • resident 2: a lot of low income students are coming from working another job to put food on the table. by choosing lower housing option students can get back money and use that to send back home. some students are willing to make that housing sacrifice for getting money back home. this is a different way to think about this.
      • david: one interesting data point we found on how students are making choices of housing. the same percentage of students living in single is regardless of finaid. that is an encouraging sign for us. there is a range. I hear you, that is another point of feedback. what are the other aspects of the finaid package we want to look at. personal allowance is something we could look at. that’s outside of my area but that’s something to think about.
    • resident 3: what’s the idea behind making room types the same price?
      • david: what it comes down to. you’re paying to receive a bed on campus in a building that provides much more than that. instead of spending a lower rate in a triple for your first year then single for third year. we are averaging it out so that you essentially pay the same amount.
      • resident 3: idk if this is true of all dorms. but if someone because of lottery process doesn’t end up in exact outcome that you describe?
      • david: it’s about the lottery and not about I can live in a single because someone else can’t. other campuses: we want friends to live together without considering what they can and can’t afford.
    • resident 4: you’ve described the situation at other colleges. but have students here brought up these concerns that people can’t make dorm choices because of prices.
      • david: what the data shows is that students do a good job of living where they want to. what we’re trying to do is say, we can do nothing. but students have come back to us saying they’re not happy. this is a solution we offer given constraints. there are some students that will say that they like how things are and others that appreciate the equity and the level playing field. students have strong feelings one way or another.
    • random resident: principle behind change is that price doesn’t become a factor. right now there is a tradeoff between amenities and price. whereas if you remove the price that balances the amenities. high amenity dorms might be prioritize more by students since they are the same prices.
      • david: interesting point.
    • random resident: lived in ec, random, new vassar. from my experience. dorms are not the same quality (amenities). the point I keep hearing is that this is to make housing more equitable for low income students. for me as a low income student and a person who has chosen to live in ec and random because of cheaper housing I don’t see why raising the prices is helping because it’s removing the option for me to choose a cheaper house so that I can work less. that is an option that is important to me and saves money and a lot of work.
      • david: I hear you.
    • random resident: I hear that this is going to be net price increase for dorms that are lower tiers and for rooms that have more people. this could incentivize a lot of students who are low income to consider off campus housing options such as ilgs that are cheaper. you’ve punted low income students into ilgs, off campus apartments. that are going to more removed from campus given transportation.
    • resident 6: at schools where this has been implemented. is there a way spaces could change based on student preferences?
      • david: we’re faced with a lot of constraints. how to handle all the students in the housing system. at other schools, it’s not a factor. you know what you have today and in five years this will just be the way it was. the question of why doesn’t really come up.
    • resident 7: I have some concerns. the way that I saw the price difference justified by the different dorms is that there are more expenses in a tier 2 or 3 dorm because there are less things you can do because you are sharing the space. you have to go somewhere else to take a zoom call or you have to buy ac. that price goes towards paying for those things. sharing room with multiple people is not only pricing difference but also how you live your life.
      • david: good input
    • resident 8: last semester I lived in double in ec. currently single in tier 1 (simmons). housing price basically doubled. makes sense for equity if the dorms are equal. some dorms are not even ada compliant. I lived in macgregor over the summer and it was a hot box. I live in simmons and I have laundry and working elevators which is a luxury that’s only available for tier 1. tier 2 and 3 don’t have that most of the time. there’s an understandable level of reducing equity differences. rn there is such a disparity in dorm quality. makes sense to postpone until dorms have met low bar of quality.
      • david: this is a time to think about this. when ec reopens there will be elevators. not all tier 1s have ac. macgregor is all singles. there are elevators that only stop at every 3 floors. but the point is, everyone who chooses to live in macgregor is paying tier 2 single that is above finaid calculation. this change removes that. this is another side of this. I take your point that we won’t have completely equal quality. but we’re at a moment of making big investment where the band is becoming narrower. ec is going to bump up and be on the same level as tier 1s.
      • resident 8: but we also have random which is on the same tier. there are students who need singles or elevators for accessibility reasons but finaid doesn’t need that. for medical accommodations for single there is whole convoluted system for making that work. there are a lot of different perspectives to consider.
    • new vassar resident: one observation and two suggestions.
      • once a dorm is renovated it becomes tier 1. as older dorms continue to be renovated, we are heading toward a limit where all dorms become tier 1 pricing. the decision that hrs is giving students right now is that we all pay more for housing now or later when eventually all dorms get renovated.
      • first suggestion. if all dorms are going to become same cost, something that needs to happen is that dining needs to become optional. if a student living at tier 1 dorm price actually quadruples because dining meal plan is more than the cost of making food yourself. if you are making all dorms tier 1 pricing for the sake of low income students you need to give them the choice of letting them feed themselves. that could even be bigger difference than paying for tier 1 housing.
      • second suggestion to address disparities in amenities. perhaps pricing of rooms on campus could be treated like real estate market decides on price of apartments. cost of room accounts for dollar per square foot per person. that will make figuring out where to live more complicated. that will allow housing to better demonstrate what the value of what some dorms are. and give students more choice of where they get to live. that would be better of way of getting hrs to be able to handle revenue stream.
      • resident 9: considering that the current problem is to make housing equitable idk if market solution..
      • new vassar resident: there isn’t a reason why dorms are assigned what tier. especially what happened with bc the year it reopened. it seems that the price does not meet the quality of housing. if we created a proper system of rating amenities instead of extreme abstraction, I feel like that would create more equity and transparency.
    • mccormick resident: would like clarification. would housing and sfs be trying to make this change before renovations are completed or after?
      • david: there is no timetable on this necessarily. what has pushed the question is what is happening with ec right now. if we decide to do this how do we get from today to that new reality. we need to invest in certain areas that we have been and continue to do. bigger projects will be made in decade but I don’t see why wait when we can make it equitable sooner. only next and macgregor will be tier 2 and random will be tier 3.
    • resident 10: my biggest problem is that we have basically been discussing amenities in different dorms. pushing focus toward amenities with fixed pricing. whether finaid covers housing in all, part, or none. whatever price is chosen matters in a lot of different ways to different people. hard to change things to that. each dollar that comes in or out of that housing price matters to students. no push for administration to push for housing that is not only high amenities but affordable.
      • david: everyone has different situations. I admire colleagues in finaid. the key aspect of affordability is tying price of housing to affordability.
      • resident 10: this seems like broad oversimplication of issue with affordability of housing. especially for low income every dollar that you get back matters a lot. students want to be able to make choices that benefit your life. having $500 extra is better than having say a nicer bathroom.
    • maseeh resident: it sounds like the reason for this being suggested is financial situation. do you know how much money it would take annually so that we don’t have to go through this situation.
      • david: we are trying to find a way forward that balances everything out. that doesn’t disrupt resources we need to support housing. so that finaid meets goals. we are trying to minimize that number. let’s not watch the tier 1 and 2 single price keep going up so that students don’t have to pay beyond finaid. so now we are trying to get everyone to pay same amount. another question is that are there things we can do with finaid to account for living expenses. in that sense there is no dollar amount.
      • maseeh resident: so it will increase the amount that you will need to operate. or if everyone pays more.
      • david: almost every room will eventually be at tier 1 double rate or above. we are trying to collapse all that. what is driving up price of projects we are completing is moving dorms up into tier 1. we are no longer driving up the price of a single that goes above finaid calculation. the price wouldn’t stay fixed. price goes up every year. the point is that it would always go up at the same rate as finaid calculation.
    • resident: two questions. what would be the expected increase in revenue from this change?
      • david: none.
      • resident: is there any change that the whole dining thing that has anything to do with this?
        • david: no dining is its own separate conversation and I’m not responsible for dining myself. what we’re trying to say here. what housing collects in rates goes into operations. none of it fully pays for
      • resident: so does it reduce that deficit?
        • david: yes a little bit but not much.
    • resident: mit finaid is that up to 65000 full need is met. when you look at this data are you looking at parent income. if you are lower income you can feel more pressure.
      • david: finaid looks at every situation and continues to raise that ceiling.
    • resident: could we have finaid reps at next dormcon gbm?
      • rebecca: yes we can look into this.
    • mitali: want to try to wrap up conversation soon. last three points.
    • resident: if these changes are being made before renovations complete. does housing think it’s alright for students living in tier 2 or 3 to be paying premium for what they are getting.
      • david: we find ourselves in an odd scenario. for example everyone in macgregor is paying more as tier 2 single. and you are paying more than finaid. so now with change you are paying same as finaid calculation.
    • another resident: I briefly had a single for parents weekend so my mother was able to stay in my room. but this year mother had to stay in hotel so there are other costs. I don’t like making decisions based on peer institutions. what is good about mit is that it is special. I don’t like making decisions based on what other institutions but instead we should do what’s best for us. is quads
      • david: based on document guiding renovations. we want to build based on singles and doubles. ideally we will get to end of renewal cycle and we could. we need to have a standard. if you have a triple you should have all the furniture for that. no promises today we have 150 undergrads in grad housing so we have no room.
    • next gra: was undergrad at mit in 2016, lived in macgregor. as a gra you select a dorm and there’s no difference in how much you are paid. it is similar to what you suggested. and it kind of sucked to pick next over other dorms. it makes sense to me to wait until dorms are renovated so that some dorms don’t have ceilings leaking. I know renovating dorms are expensive but it seems to me that I hope mit could construct dorms that could be maybe less nice housing but more affordable to maintain the option. so that it’s not something that’s hit immediately but is phased in. so that you know that this is happening in two years and can make more informed decision. I think current students opinions matter more than mine but I appreciate everything in this conversation.

  • concluding remarks​

    • david: we need to be thoughtful and it’s a complicated conversation. I’m always happy to come back when you want to have me.
    • rebecca: we need to end conversation here. we have qr code where you can put further feedback and questions. david could you share your email so students can share comments and thoughts. thank you everyone for coming. we are going to proceed with how dormcon usually goes.
    • jordan: you can reach out to dormcon-housing-chair@mit.edu, we meet with hrs every two weeks

EXEC UPDATES​

  • housing (jordan/cameron)​

    • we have been looking for housing capacity projections.

  • dining (tyra/ananda)​

    • dining form is now up, qr codes at dining halls. getting great feedback that goes straight to mark and heather
    • get notifications when responses come in
    • recommend bookmarking bit.ly/mitdining23
    • working on live feedback form on new platform
    • trying to get more activity in second floor stud vendors. putting up banners on first floor right by entrance.
    • invited to committee on student life as guests
      • mostly not surprising statistics
      • interesting to hear perspectives there
      • every two weeks so will be good discussion
    • meeting with someone from bon appetit to discuss dietary restrictions
      • so if anyone has dietary restrictions and has feedback please reach out to us (email dormcon-dining-chairs@mit.edu)
      • you can also use the normal dining form if you want it to be anonymous

  • underclassmen rep (hanu/geoffrey)​

    • top optionality - sent cameron names of some gras so we can hopefully get started meeting with bc head of house and area director to talk about issues and address some concerns
    • working on CPW hosting survey
    • mural policy update
      • new policy coming soon
      • [thumbs up from david]
      • specifically for next house but will apply to other dorms soon
      • next house is beginning its own mural pilot. real fake walls throughout the dorm
      • if you are from other dorm and interested in having murals email us at dormcon-uc-rep@mit.edu

  • treasurer (melissa)​

    • start doing transactions between dorms and dormcon. transferring rex funding and special event funding requests. from dorm budgets we are transferring apple picking fees
    • if you have any more special event funding proposals we would love to hear them.

  • judcomm (sara/mateo)​

    • we finished the first version of the constitution
      • link here
    • there will be vote next gbm to approve it
    • making it easier to read, some corrections. will be presented
    • will draft amendment to fix wording things. and also addressing issues such as population and renovations. should be able to vote in any order

  • cpw/rex (temkin/daniel)​

    • reached out to tasha to get feedback
    • survey to early returns on food security to inform stuff next year
      • big changes this year
      • all organizations sponsoring early return had to provide meals
      • received some feedback from dsl
      • will be sending out soon

  • tech (nate)​

    • I run the website and could help you with your website as well. email me at dormcon-tech-chair@mit.edu
    • website has google calendar link
    • announcement section on main page
      • right now has building switch lottery deadline
    • old notes are now certificate protected

  • advisor (lusi/amanda)​

    • building switch form is due at noon (the one during the day time)

  • secretary (sunmee)​

  • p/vp (mitali/rebecca)​

    • postering policy
      • submitting student names to join working group on dorm specific policies
    • discussion of toptionality. parallel convos in bc. will continue working
    • thank you everyone for sharing thoughts on relationships with house teams last week. planning on meeting with house teams and giving broader feedback

DORM PREZ UPDATES​

  • simmons​

    • proxy: temkin
    • jk rowling/terfs eom.
      • [context pls??]
      • around a decade ago the old hoh put stickers all over simmons for harry potter. people want to take them down because jk rowling not the best person. people don’t want to take them down because bureaucracy bureaucracy eom.

  • random​

    • website contentions
    • dorm website thoughts? pls email me

  • maseeh​

    • maseeh formal next weekend at mit museum
      • if you want to go lmk can prob give you a ticket
    • we gave helen a tour of maseeh on monday

  • new vassar​

    • got guest list set up finally
    • first year house tax got collected. same problem as bc

  • macgregor​

    • not much has happened
    • forced house team to eat desserts on sunday
    • rolling out changes and updates to constitution

  • mccormick​

    • taking 30 residents to watch the eras tour movie
      • [round of applause]
    • we currently do not have express guest list
      • we decide not to give tap access
      • you will need to just go to desk worker and tell them your name

  • baker​

    • scooter/bike accident outside of baker + scooter accident inside baker this week
    • if anyone has any thoughts on how to get people to not injure each other
      • speed bumps in the hallways??

  • next​

    • haunt is underway
    • if you heard about the leaking ceiling that was us
    • now have social committee

  • ec​

    • tap access to stud lounge as of noon today (!!)
    • elected bad ideas chairs
      • coming soon to an iap near you

  • bc​

    • we took toptionality proposal draft to house team
      • they had concerns around implementation (suite-by-suite)
      • gras concerned about interacting with students at gra
      • hoh concerned about existence of policy at this dorm while other dorms don’t, or students objecting to existence of policy at all
      • house gov confident we can make it work, house team a bit shaky.
      • continue working with what support we can get
    • had abc last weekend
      • went fine
      • it was a good time, thanks for coming
    • fundraising for panels
      • alum engagement/newsletter
      • might provisionally install some panels, then fundraising fills in remainder

  • new​

    • missing :’(

we are at time. any last concerns you can bring them up. you can also find the relevant party and bring them up here.

if you have additional thoughts remember to fill out form on qr code. can always email dormcon!!