Finances & Facilities Working Group
Executive Summary
Since the initial meeting in April 1999, the Finances & Facilities working group has been gathering information that we believe is of significance in regard to the physical facilities on campus and the financial means necessary to maintain the current structures, and construct and maintain those facilities that are needed for the future. As a result of these several months of work, we have compiled a list of strengths, weaknesses, and observations that we believe will be helpful in determining a comprehensive long-range plan to carry the College of Charleston into the future.
Strengths:
The College of Charleston has, with the current fee structure, significant unused bonding authority for E&G operations. The current estimate, without any change in the fee structure or bond market is $ 30,000,000.
The College currently has on hand, excess debt service funds sufficient to completely retire the outstanding E&G debt, and is positioned to do so when the bonds are callable in 2002.
Likewise, the financial wherewithal to raise capital funds is currently in place. The College has been able to position itself, through it's current fee structure, to maximize its ability to acquire capital funds. Beginning in fiscal year 1997, the College restructured its fee schedule and reclassified a portion of the Plant Improvement Fee to Tuition Fees. This was possible due to the fact that the College had debt service fees in excess of the amount needed to fund the current debt service. By moving the fees from Plant Improvement to Tuition Fees, the College was able to establish an experience rating which provides us the opportunity to issue state institutional bonds based on this history of Tuition Fees generated.
The College's recurring budget is based on a revenue stream, the foundation of which is current enrollment, meaning that no growth is assumed during the budget process. This enables the College to make choices on future enrollment without the issue of loss of revenue needed to maintain the current level of operations.
While perhaps a weakness in a financial sense, the current out-of-state enrollment, from an academic standpoint, is believed to be a strength, and therefore has been included here as well as in the weaknesses section.
There is currently interest from the private sector in partnering with the College of Charleston to provide additional residence hall space. This would enable the College to obtain additional housing space without the capital outlay normally required.
The College is fortunate to have available areas of physical space that are not yet utilized. These include such spaces as the additional footage in the BellSouth building, the AT&T building, space at the North Area, the "K" Lot, and the possibility of property on Daniel Island.
Weaknesses:
While the College of Charleston does not budget based on growth, the current revenue is based on an out-of-state enrollment percentage that is perceived, by some, to be too high. If it is determined that this percentage should be decreased, it would necessitate adjustments to the budget, or an increase in the current fee structure in order to maintain the current revenue stream.
The residence halls at the College are marginally functional in terms of physical condition and technology, and are grossly overpopulated resulting in the placement of three people to a two person room, and the reallocation of study and group space into beds. These conditions are noticed by both prospective students and their parents, and very often, comments regarding these less that adequate conditions are made.
The current facilities are overcrowded, overused and undermaintained. This is evidenced by the utility infrastructure in the Science Center, the HVAC in Maybank Hall and the Education Center, and the water intrusion in the Stern Center and the Simons Center for the Arts.
There is insufficient planning and funding when going into the process of designing and constructing new buildings. There is the tendency to "cheap out" once the construction has begun due to cost overruns. This often results in substandard systems and fixtures which render the facility inadequate even before it is initially occupied.
Campus maintenance is not adequate, both in terms of daily and "emergency" maintenance. This results in the further deterioration of the facilities.
One of the causes of poor maintenance is the utilization of the physical plant staff as a construction crew rather than as a maintenance force. This results in the extraordinarily large deferred maintenance list that is currently in place at the College.
The management of the physical plant staff is perceived to be inadequately responsive to the needs of the campus community.
While the College has experienced considerable growth during the past several years and efforts have been made to increase faculty to accommodate this growth, staff positions have not been increased at the same pace.
There is currently insufficient teaching space, i.e., the actual number of classrooms during the hours of highest demand. In fact, the classroom average weekly utilization rate as reported in the Higher Education Statistical Abstract (21st version) is the highest of all the research universities, teaching universities and USC two-year campuses.
Additionally, the availability of appropriate kinds of space is either insufficient or simply non-existent
The inadequacy of faculty office space is another weakness. This lack of space impacts the ability of departments to request new faculty lines due to a lack of space in which to physically place the faculty member.
The availability of adequate parking is scarce at best. Additionally, the flow of traffic, both automobile and pedestrian, is problematic.
Observations:
Residence halls are below the standards and expectations of students and parents.
The College has less flexibility in terms of debt service in the Auxiliary Services as compared to E&G. This impacts the ability of the College to construct residence halls and parking facilities without the "partnering" of the private sector. This lack of flexibility is the result of the current level of outstanding debt for Housing, Food Services, and Parking.
The urban location of the College provides excellent opportunities as well as unique challenges.
Expanded class offerings, in terms of earlier and later classes, may provide some short-term relief to the overcrowding of the physical campus.
The College needs to assure that new construction projects avoid the same problems as those experienced in previously constructed buildings. We should learn from the mistakes of Maybank Hall, the Stern Center, and the Simons Center for the Arts.
The College of Charleston has, in the past, accepted "barely adequate" in terms of facilities. We don't accept this in terms of programs and curriculum, so why should we do so with facilities.
The College should explore the possibility of a "campus planner" position.
One key to addressing the current and future financial and facility opportunities is the proper functioning of an informed and coordinated executive management team.
Any long-term plan for the College of Charleston must address the issues of parking and transportation, especially in terms of new construction and the impact that it will have.
The process of requesting new facilities and the associated funding, especially at the state level, needs to be more open, transparent, and inclusive.
Whatever the eventual outcome of this process is, there will need to be a "transition plan" developed to enable the actual migration from the current physical campus to the "envisioned" campus.