Pandering to funders

Ooof. It came to my attention earlier this week that an architect had resigned from UCSB's Design Review Committee over the university's proposed Munger Hall Project, a giant monstrosity of a student housing project where 94 percent of the 4,500 students would not have windows in their small single-occupancy rooms. Further, these rooms would be grouped into suites of 8 bedrooms per one bathroom. Oh and those 4,500 students? There would only be 2 exits to the building.

How could this be? Well, as the article explains, "The idea was conceived by 97-year-old billionaire-investor turned amateur-architect Charles Munger, who donated $200 million toward the project with the condition that his blueprints be followed exactly."

Did I say ooooof already?

The article goes on to state: "UCSB spokesperson Andrea Estrada said while the university was grateful for McFadden’s service on the review committee, his comments on the Munger proposal and his resignation won’t stop it from being built. “The Munger Hall project and design is continuing to move forward as planned,” she said in a statement. “We are delighted to be moving forward with this transformational project.”"

We are delighted to be moving forward with this transformational project.

Now maybe I'm projecting, and I have no way of really knowing, but that sounds like a statement said through the gritted teeth of someone whose job it is to pander to wealthy and entitled donors. $200 million is a lot of money as UCSB is under fire for lack of student housing.

But when pandering to entitled donors to get funding for those who need it when the process of getting that funding harms the very people it’s supposed to help?

It doesn't help.

A singular vision is by definition not going to be inclusive. It's hard to imagine that even one student was consulted about the design of this project if even the architects on the review board didn't have a say.

Let's say the concept for this project didn't already sound like a terrible idea - how about doing some research or prototyping to test out the concept?

Aside from the fact that Munger isn't even an architect, architects tend to hate "designing by committee" but that's not what participatory design has to be. I always say inclusion isn't American Idol where the person with the most votes wins.

It's about getting input and feedback from those impacted by solutions in order to create better solutions.

Are they really going to go ahead with this project as designed? Stranger things have happened. I guess we'll have to see.

Banner photo by Vladimir Solomianyi on Unsplash

JOIN SELF-COACHING FOR DEI ADVOCATES