307-Acres Near NRG Stadium (Formerly UT Research Campus Proposal)

[ADCS]

2 hours ago, kbates2 said:

Doing it all with PUF money that could be much better utilized if spread amongst the other state universities.

 

And there it is. UH will keep obstructing until they get ahold of that sweet oil cash, good of the city and region be damned. Especially since they couldn't make it into the Big 12.

 

Disgusting, really.

[kbates2]

1 hour ago, ADCS said:

 

And there it is. UH will keep obstructing until they get ahold of that sweet oil cash, good of the city and region be damned. Especially since they couldn't make it into the Big 12.

 

Disgusting, really.

 

And there it is.  UT will keep spending money grossly overpaying on polluted brownfield locations to misappropriate assets into their booster's pockets without state approval.  They will continue to use funds that could be better spent raising the value of all of our state schools, and Texas residents as a result, on sketchy deals that go nowhere, good of the state be damned.  Especially while they ruin a conference from within that was once respected.

 

Disgusting, really.

[urbanize713]

The hate is strong in this thread

 

 

[ADCS]

15 minutes ago, kbates2 said:

 

And there it is.  UT will keep spending money grossly overpaying on polluted brownfield locations to misappropriate assets into their booster's pockets without state approval.  They will continue to use funds that could be better spent raising the value of all of our state schools, and Texas residents as a result, on sketchy deals that go nowhere, good of the state be damned.  Especially while they ruin a conference from within that was once respected.

 

Disgusting, really.

 

Yup, football and avarice. Face it - UH didn't care about the acquisition process one bit. Fertitta thinks the university that's an extension of his ego doesn't get the state funds that it deserves, simply because he's associated with it. So he's going to engineer a block until he either gets the football he wants, or the money he wants.

 

The truth is we do not need more state systems. California demonstrates that a two-system public model, with different missions, that all state schools are a part of, is the best functioning model. We will never have this in Texas, though, because there are too many entrenched bureaucrats in the smaller systems, and too many alumni for whom a reorganization would be a shot to their pride. Again, primarily because of football.

[kbates2]

How anybody can read a story about UT wasting taxpayer money and claim that it is avarice on the part of UH is beyond me.  

[jmitch94]

This thread sucks. 

[KinkaidAlum]

3 hours ago, kbates2 said:

How anybody can read a story about UT wasting taxpayer money and claim that it is avarice on the part of UH is beyond me.  

 

Because, Forty Acres! 

 

[shasta]

23 hours ago, ADCS said:

 

Yup, football and avarice. Face it - UH didn't care about the acquisition process one bit. Fertitta thinks the university that's an extension of his ego doesn't get the state funds that it deserves, simply because he's associated with it. So he's going to engineer a block until he either gets the football he wants, or the money he wants.

 

The truth is we do not need more state systems. California demonstrates that a two-system public model, with different missions, that all state schools are a part of, is the best functioning model. We will never have this in Texas, though, because there are too many entrenched bureaucrats in the smaller systems, and too many alumni for whom a reorganization would be a shot to their pride. Again, primarily because of football.

 

You sure about that? UH has already blocked a potential partnership with South Texas College of Law and Texas A&M. Texas A&M responded with blocking a northwest expansion plan by UH stating that it was too close to THEIR turf.

 

This kind of thing happens all the time. The University of Houston sits in a county that has a larger population than 25 states and it does view itself as a potential UCLA caliber school of the Houston region. So, you bet they are going to fight to protect their vision because that's what ALL Texas schools already do.

 

Texas A&M is NOT proposing to build a new campus 2 miles from UT-Austin just because the population growth of the the city of Austin warrants it.

 

Some of your logic in this thread is  troublesome.

 

 

[iah77]

You do realize UCLA has to share it's turf with over 10 large public campuses right?:

Cal State Fullerton, UC Irvine, UC Riverside, Cal State San Bernardino, Cal Poly Pomona, Cal State Dominguez hills, Call State Long Beach, Cal State La, ect not including 10 + private universities. 

 

UH needs to stop being a crooked institution. Renu Khantor is the HIGHEST paid public university president at 1.3 million USD and literally chairs over UHD which is labeled by the department of education as a DROPOUT factory... like seriously?  https://www.texastribune.org/2016/07/17/three-top-four-highest-paid-university-executives-/ 

 

UH is not preparing the graduates we need neither in quality or quantity. 

Is this what Houston deserves? Absolutely not

 

 

[arbpro]

Renu Khator is worth every cent she is paid. Need evidence? Well, she played smash mouth with UT and won! Just like I said she would.

[samagon]

Oooh, can we talk about the $5.2 million UT paid it's previous football coach to do even less for UT?

 

Or maybe the $19 million that UT paid to have him replaced with Tom Herman?

http://www.hookem.com/story/much-costing-texas-get-tom-herman-19-million/

 

as one commenter stated: with that kind of investment anything less than a national championship is subpar.

 

I'll grant you that they make a lot of money on football, so academics are a different story, but still, these are some pretty stunning numbers, and then to get bent out of shape that someone in charge of academics gets paid a lot?

 

regarding calling UHD a dropout factory, here's a good story to read:

http://www.chron.com/opinion/outlook/article/Olivas-Drop-out-factory-report-doesn-t-reveal-9198606.php

Edited March 3, 2017 by samagon

[KinkaidAlum]

2 hours ago, iah77 said:

You do realize UCLA has to share it's turf with over 10 large public campuses right?:

Cal State Fullerton, UC Irvine, UC Riverside, Cal State San Bernardino, Cal Poly Pomona, Cal State Dominguez hills, Call State Long Beach, Cal State La, ect not including 10 + private universities. 

 

UH needs to stop being a crooked institution. Renu Khantor is the HIGHEST paid public university president at 1.3 million USD and literally chairs over UHD which is labeled by the department of education as a DROPOUT factory... like seriously?  https://www.texastribune.org/2016/07/17/three-top-four-highest-paid-university-executives-/ 

 

UH is not preparing the graduates we need neither in quality or quantity. 

Is this what Houston deserves? Absolutely not

 

 

Kellyanne, is that you? That's some good spin. Texas violates state law, spends hundreds of millions without approval, and then gets shut down when lawmakers look into the deal and UH is crooked? I bet you blame Hillary for the Russian specter. 

 

[nyc_tex]

19 hours ago, KinkaidAlum said:

Kellyanne, is that you? That's some good spin. Texas violates state law, spends hundreds of millions without approval, and then gets shut down when lawmakers look into the deal and UH is crooked? I bet you blame Hillary for the Russian specter. 

 

 

Not that there's much to add, but the entire metro LA area is well over 2X the amount of people than Houston and the state of California didn't even begin the entire Cal State system (along with Irvine, Riverside and others) until the early 1960s. Also, the California public educational system wasn't created as a cabal to over fund 2 universities at the expense of all the other public state colleges and schools like what happened in TX. 

 

I have no doubt the UH contingent and Khator would have been fully supportive of a new UT-Houston branch if UT and A&M and the lawmakers of the state revised the constitution and opened up the PUF to fund all the top R1 schools in the state equally rather than allow UT to open a campus in Houston only to give it disproportionate funds to create redundant programs, departments and schools to siphon off top faculty and student talent, social and economic capital from UH to stifle it's academic growth and tremendous potential. The myopia and prejudice of this state's leaders over 20th century is astounding - to blame UH for any of this is blaming the victim (which is most middle and working class residents of Texas).  Besides, public, non-profit services are not created to compete with each other.

 

Edited March 4, 2017 by nyc_tex

[ADCS]

Again, the fact that the PUF is continually brought up just serves to demonstrate that this is about bureaucratic politics, rather than what's actually good for the state. Bring up UCLA all you want, but notice the "UC" there: they're part of the same system as UC - Berkeley and all their sister institutions, and subject to systemwide oversight (with considerable independence). If UH wants that PUF money, and to exist within a known successful framework, then they should be looking at a merger with UT or A&M, rather than engaging in spiteful turf wars.

Edited March 6, 2017 by ADCS

[iah77]

2 hours ago, ADCS said:

Again, the fact that the PUF is continually brought up just serves to demonstrate that this is about bureaucratic politics, rather than what's actually good for the state. Bring up UCLA all you want, but notice the "UC" there: they're part of the same system as UC - Berkeley and all their sister institutions, and subject to systemwide oversight (with considerable independence). If UH wants that PUF money, and to exist within a known successful framework, then they should be looking at a merger with UT or A&M, rather than engaging in spiteful turf wars.

 

Exactly; the amount of "privilege" on this forum is crazy. Fascinating these comments come from people who obviously consider themselves better educated and more cosmopolitan with references to NYC, Boston, Kinkaid etc as if no one else here has lived in NYC or gone to a preparatory school. The fact is that education is a right and not a privilege and that by granting UH a monopoly on a decent public education in Houston you are denying education to people in the Houston community who would benefit from another option. 

 

UH exist for the benefit of the Houston population, not the other way around...

Edited March 6, 2017 by iah77

[KinkaidAlum]

Funny how people supporting UH are seen as the ones with privilege. Why must you feel the need to attend a University of Texas branch? Why do you assume the University of Houston is the only option for decent public education in this region? Are you unaware of how many other public options there are in southeast Texas or are you just too good for those schools?

 

The fact of the matter is there are just four public schools and five overall in the state of Texas that are in the World University top 400 AND designated by the Carnegie Foundation at the highest level (doctoral granting with highest research activity). Those five in order of ranking;

 

University of Texas, Austin

Rice University, Houston

Texas A&M University, College Station

University of Texas-Dallas, Richardson

University of Houston, Main Campus

 

Quite frankly, instead of wasting hundreds of millions offering duplicate services in the one region of this state that has the most options (Rice, UH, and A&M serve this region well), the UT system needs to elevate UTSA, UTEP, UTRGV, UT Arlington, and UT Tyler. That would be in the best interest of this state. It would also be in the best interest of this state to help elevate Texas Tech as well.

 

As a Texan, would it be in all of our best interests if the Valley, San Antonio, El Paso, the Panhandle, and a second DFW area school were elevated before another one was added to Southeast Texas?

 

 

[samagon]

4 hours ago, ADCS said:

Again, the fact that the PUF is continually brought up just serves to demonstrate that this is about bureaucratic politics, rather than what's actually good for the state. Bring up UCLA all you want, but notice the "UC" there: they're part of the same system as UC - Berkeley and all their sister institutions, and subject to systemwide oversight (with considerable independence). If UH wants that PUF money, and to exist within a known successful framework, then they should be looking at a merger with UT or A&M, rather than engaging in spiteful turf wars.

 

I think the point is that the PUF money is better spent in regions of the state that are not so saturated already, and if the state (UT) wants to put state money (PUF) into the Houston market, why not put that money into UH rather than duplicating efforts? 

 

Why would UT being denied by the state to waste PUF money to continue saturating an already saturated market be the fault of UH? 

 

[ADCS]

2 hours ago, samagon said:

 

I think the point is that the PUF money is better spent in regions of the state that are not so saturated already, and if the state (UT) wants to put state money (PUF) into the Houston market, why not put that money into UH rather than duplicating efforts? 

 

Why would UT being denied by the state to waste PUF money to continue saturating an already saturated market be the fault of UH? 

 

 

If that's the case, then why doesn't UH roll into the UT system? Same outcome with less bureaucratic overhead.

[cspwal]

They'd have to spend a lot of money on paint

[kbates2]

24 minutes ago, ADCS said:

 

If that's the case, then why doesn't UH roll into the UT system? Same outcome with less bureaucratic overhead.

 

Has that worked out for  UTSA, UTEP, UTRGV, UT Arlington, or UT Tyler?  The UT system does not spread the wealth like the University of Cal system that you keep mentioning.

[ADCS]

Just now, kbates2 said:

 

Has that worked out for  UTSA, UTEP, UTRGV, UT Arlington, or UT Tyler?  The UT system does not spread the wealth like the University of Cal system that you keep mentioning.

 

That is its own separate issue, and something I believe needs reforming within the UT system. 

[iah77]

6 hours ago, KinkaidAlum said:

Funny how people supporting UH are seen as the ones with privilege. Why must you feel the need to attend a University of Texas branch? Why do you assume the University of Houston is the only option for decent public education in this region? Are you unaware of how many other public options there are in southeast Texas or are you just too good for those schools?

 

The fact of the matter is there are just four public schools and five overall in the state of Texas that are in the World University top 400 AND designated by the Carnegie Foundation at the highest level (doctoral granting with highest research activity). Those five in order of ranking;

 

University of Texas, Austin

Rice University, Houston

Texas A&M University, College Station

University of Texas-Dallas, Richardson

University of Houston, Main Campus

 

Quite frankly, instead of wasting hundreds of millions offering duplicate services in the one region of this state that has the most options (Rice, UH, and A&M serve this region well), the UT system needs to elevate UTSA, UTEP, UTRGV, UT Arlington, and UT Tyler. That would be in the best interest of this state. It would also be in the best interest of this state to help elevate Texas Tech as well.

 

As a Texan, would it be in all of our best interests if the Valley, San Antonio, El Paso, the Panhandle, and a second DFW area school were elevated before another one was added to Southeast Texas?

 

 

In case you did not notice, the average person can't afford to relocate to a new city and have their own housing at 17-18. Even dorms are out of reach for the average family without financing. Extremely privileged view point, do you know the average person dies within less then 40 miles of where they were born? The average person can't afford to leave their city, much less without family support. 

 

So say I'm the child of poor migrant workers as over 25-30% of Houston is and I have 2 siblings. Can my parents with no credit history afford to send me to Dallas with added cost of a dorm? Would they even if they could, risking losing a child that may not come back? Would they trust their child in a far away city alone?

 

So you are saying A&M which is literally 100 MILES from downtown Houston is a Houston school? If I'm poor and have to take bus, it's 50 dollars round trip. If parents are dishwashers, that's over a day of work of disposable income. Does that seem like a real option? And of you think Rice serves the Houston community you are dreaming. 57% is from out of state and with really small classes that means literally less than 1,500 TEXANS [Not Houston alone] have a chance of getting in. 

[kbates2]

49 minutes ago, ADCS said:

 

That is its own separate issue, and something I believe needs reforming within the UT system. 

 

I fail to see how that is a separate issue.  We are advocating for the state to spread the funding across more public universities.  You are saying that if UH wants that funding, they should join the UT system. I am saying that even within the UT system the money is not spread out equitably.  I see the issues as one and the same.

[samagon]

1 hour ago, iah77 said:

In case you did not notice, the average person can't afford to relocate to a new city and have their own housing at 17-18. Even dorms are out of reach for the average family without financing. Extremely privileged view point, do you know the average person dies within less then 40 miles of where they were born? The average person can't afford to leave their city, much less without family support. 

 

So say I'm the child of poor migrant workers as over 25-30% of Houston is and I have 2 siblings. Can my parents with no credit history afford to send me to Dallas with added cost of a dorm? Would they even if they could, risking losing a child that may not come back? Would they trust their child in a far away city alone?

 

So you are saying A&M which is literally 100 MILES from downtown Houston is a Houston school? If I'm poor and have to take bus, it's 50 dollars round trip. If parents are dishwashers, that's over a day of work of disposable income. Does that seem like a real option? And of you think Rice serves the Houston community you are dreaming. 57% is from out of state and with really small classes that means literally less than 1,500 TEXANS [Not Houston alone] have a chance of getting in. 

This has nothing to do with the actual topic of the research institute that UT was said to have been planning.

 

But, since you're talking about a 4 year undergrad type institution... Unless I'm off, a person who goes to UH has a far greater potential for success after graduating than a UTEP, UTSA, UTxx graduate. It seems to me that rather than suggesting that UH be dragged down to that level of school, you first work to raise the level of those institutions to at least UH level, then maybe it's a good idea to fold UH into that program. 

 

So let's first talk about what the UT system can do to fix their own satellite schools, then maybe they can talk about them joining the Houston area, either through folding in UH, or through another form of expansion.

 

As far as building a research school, maybe they should get approval from the state, like they're supposed to, rather than just buying land?

 

If you want to have a discussion about poor migrant workers going to college in a UT system school, maybe you make a thread in the off topic forum.

Edited March 7, 2017 by samagon

[jmitch94]

[KinkaidAlum]

Wow, you went off the rails with that one but I am not sure how spending half a billion dollars to open a UT branch in Houston is going to help the children of poor migrant workers in the age of Trump.

 

Also, again, I have to ask you if you are aware that there are other options for education in this region? Texas Southern, TWU, Sam Houston, St. Thomas (which ranks as one of the top 50 schools for Hispanics in the US), Lone State, UH-Downtown, HCC, Prairie View, San Jac, etc... 

 

And, just in case you are truly worried about a first generational student and helping keep costs down, you might want to check out UHin4. 

 

 

 

[BigFootsSocks]

I'm just glad everyone's having a good time online

[OkieEric]

Turner, Fertitta now back "collaborative" approach with UT, UH, Rice, TSU, and A&M

 

http://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/houston/article/Turner-Build-the-data-institute-on-UT-s-land-11121076.php

 

http://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/politics/houston/article/Turner-Fertitta-endorse-data-center-plan-call-11122792.php

[Avossos]

11 hours ago, OkieEric said:

Turner, Fertitta now back "collaborative" approach with UT, UH, Rice, TSU, and A&M

 

http://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/houston/article/Turner-Build-the-data-institute-on-UT-s-land-11121076.php

 

http://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/politics/houston/article/Turner-Fertitta-endorse-data-center-plan-call-11122792.php

 

Power move by Mayor Turner.

 

I think we should all (the greater metro) be supportive of this. The more institutional research we have the better. UH has the highest of goals now - which I am proud of them for. UT and TAMU are set. Rice is Rice. Whoever is involved, something educational here would be very valuable.

[brian0123]

Houston needs this. At work (I'm an IT Architect at a big hospital in the TMC) we're starting machine learning to analyze data of our patients and get into predictive models to better treat them. Data science in healthcare alone has the potential to change the world and Houston should be at the forefront. It wouldn't surprise me if we get to a point where (based on your vitals and data alone) we can predict when you're in danger of a medical emergency occurring so that we can preemptively treat you (or improve staff response times). Turner + any other Houston should rally around this for the UT land location given its proximity to the TMC and potential benefits to our economy.

[samagon]

The way this was all started still smells, and it would be good to see that investigated, but this is the right step to take now. Stay transparent, invite everyone and make it a co-branded affair.

[Twitter1]

The argument UT vs. UH continues I guess. This time several universities are brought up.

 

I like the old plans better!

[brian0123]

Not sure if this needs another post but thought it applied here... https://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21721656-data-economy-demands-new-approach-antitrust-rules-worlds-most-valuable-resource

[MexAmerican_Moose]

nobody has a problem with building an IT/data center, which by the way, was just recently proposed....everybody HAS a problem with the way UT handled the land purchase...arrogance, must be nice having PUF moneyz

Edited May 8, 2017 by MexAmerican_Moose

[Urbannizer]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.chron.com/local/education/campus-chronicles/amp/UT-System-to-ask-for-Houston-land-proposals-by-12712931.php

 

The University of Texas System is inching toward selling the controversial Houston property it purchased for a now-defunct idea of a new campus.

 

Regent Jeff Hildebrand, who is leading a task force on unloading the property, said Tuesday morning at a board meeting that the system will submit a request for quotations to developers by the end of the first quarter of the year. A request for proposals will be issued by the end of spring 2018, he said.

 

He called the 300 acres in southwest Houston "valuable."

 

Hildebrand said he will "aggressively pursue" his objective is to maximize sale proceeds on the property for the system, which received sharp criticism from lawmakers in 2017 because of the land's high price and the system's lack of clear vision for the property.

[Urbannizer]

https://www.bizjournals.com/houston/news/2018/04/22/ut-system-releases-rfq-to-find-buyer-developer-for.html

 

https://www.utsystem.edu/sites/default/files/documents/general-counsel-documents/RFQ No. 04-20-2018 UT System - approximately 300 acres in Houston%2C Texas/BuffaloSpeedwayRFQ04_20_2018REO.pdf

 

UT is looking for “an owner or user wishing to purchase a significant portion or all of the land … or a real property developer who would plan, extend infrastructure and then purchase all or a significant portion of the land over time for development,” per the RFQ. It’s also looking for nationally or regionally recognized buyers or developers that are financially sound and have, “if applicable, a history of developing successful projects similar to the use or market-driven, long-term, multiphase commercial projects.” However, UT doesn’t require any specific uses of the land, and it doesn’t plan to have any presence on the site.

[Highrise Tower]

https://www.utsystem.edu/offices/real-estate/requests-proposals-rfps

 

https://www.utsystem.edu/sites/default/files/offices/real-estate/property/RFP No. 720-1910/BuffaloSpeedwayRFPFinalPosting20181112.pdf

Quote

For the sale of approximately 305 Acres of Land bisected by Buffalo Speedway and Willowbend Boulevard, Houston, Texas

 

Deadline for Submittal of Proposals: Friday, November 30, 2018, at 2:30pm Central Time

 

Sole Contact for Questions, Inquiries, Interpretation, and Concerns Regarding This RFP:

Darya Vienne

Via email: dvienne@utsystem.edu

 

 

Edited December 1, 2018 by ekdrm2d1

[Naviguessor]

Let sleeping dogs lie

[KinkaidAlum]

4 hours ago, ekdrm2d1 said:

I'd rather have this than the UH Medical 

 

And I'd rather not have to scroll through 8 year old threads being bumped for stupid reasons but we don't always get what we want.

[H-Town Man]

The state's largest and wealthiest university will think twice before they try to start a project in Houston again, amirite?!

 

[KinkaidAlum]

UT is currently adding 40,000 square feet and two additional floors to their building on Fannin right now. Also, the largest (unless you are talking system) is A&M.

[H-Town Man]

58 minutes ago, KinkaidAlum said:

UT is currently adding 40,000 square feet and two additional floors to their building on Fannin right now. Also, the largest (unless you are talking system) is A&M.

 

That would be adding to an existing project, not starting a project. Clearly the system, since any project in Houston would not be part of their Austin school.

 

[Trae]

On 12/3/2018 at 8:05 AM, H-Town Man said:

The state's largest and wealthiest university will think twice before they try to start a project in Houston again, amirite?!

 

 

Yeah this will go down as an all time stupid decision by Houston leaders. And I'm a UH grad and would have liked having this school there. The difference between a UT-Houston vs a UTEP, UT-Tyler, etc., is that this would be in Houston, an international city with a top 8 population and economy in America. Houston is nothing like those other small cities with a UT campus. Look at where UT-Dallas is now versus 10-15 years ago. It's attracting high numbers of National Merit Scholars and the school's rankings have really improved. That's what a UT-Houston could have become. Houston is way too big to have just one large public university and A&M is too far to count as a legit second. DFW having three large public universities within it's metro is starting to really benefit it now and will help in the future. UT-Arlington and UNT may not be that high of ranked schools but they're higher than before. They've helped improve the cities they are located in (Arlington and Denton) because of services (often free) to the local community and have spurred development around them (UT-Dallas has too).

 

Houston has one of the highest birth rates of top ten metros in America and we're not going to be able to squeeze all of those kids into UH if they want to stay home. I hope somehow this can still happen even if it's somewhere else in the city. If not then hopefully A&M or Texas Tech opens up a public 4-year campus within Harris County.

Edited December 10, 2018 by Trae

[shasta]

7 hours ago, Trae said:

 

Yeah this will go down as an all time stupid decision by Houston leaders. And I'm a UH grad and would have liked having this school there. The difference between a UT-Houston vs a UTEP, UT-Tyler, etc., is that this would be in Houston, an international city with a top 8 population and economy in America. Houston is nothing like those other small cities with a UT campus. Look at where UT-Dallas is now versus 10-15 years ago. It's attracting high numbers of National Merit Scholars and the school's rankings have really improved. That's what a UT-Houston could have become. Houston is way too big to have just one large public university and A&M is too far to count as a legit second. DFW having three large public universities within it's metro is starting to really benefit it now and will help in the future. UT-Arlington and UNT may not be that high of ranked schools but they're higher than before. They've helped improve the cities they are located in (Arlington and Denton) because of services (often free) to the local community and have spurred development around them (UT-Dallas has too).

 

Houston has one of the highest birth rates of top ten metros in America and we're not going to be able to squeeze all of those kids into UH if they want to stay home. I hope somehow this can still happen even if it's somewhere else in the city. If not then hopefully A&M or Texas Tech opens up a public 4-year campus within Harris County.

 

Trrae, this is bigger issue that just not allowing a UT-Houston,  it revolves around HOW the State of Texas funds ITS public schools. Read up on the PUF (Permanent University Fund) and how the ONLY Public schools that have access to the HUGE pot of money is the UT system and TAMU system. Even among those two UT gets more of the share. Its written into the Texas State Constitution.

 

All other STATE schools were not allowed to get a penny from this fund...that includes UH, Texas Tech, Sam Houston, Texas State, North Texas, etc. so each year these schools would essentially beg for THEIR state to fund THEIR state schools. Eventually the state did create a secondary pot but that is a much smaller pot is divided among all the non- UT/TAMU system public schools in the state.

 

So, you can imagine UH's position....when a nearly hundred year old state school in the state of Texas that has to BEG for state funding each year found out that Texas was going to build a new campus for UH with the excess funds from a pot that the other state schools do not have access to ..they just had to put their foot down.

 

As for the State of Texas, there is ZERO reasons why the university of Houston should not be as prestigious as say a UCLA......this is a State government issue

 

This whole issue revolves around how the state of Texas manages their public institutions of higher learning. They CHOSE not to have a collaborative system as say the UC system in California....that was their decision. It was also their decision to leave certain institutions to fend for themselves instead of helping to build them up into the premiere State system in the United States... This a state issue..not a city Houston issue....

[Timoric]

-

Edited July 12, 2019 by Timoric

[kbates2]

55 minutes ago, Timoric said:

Better to get the dollars, buildings, or whatever it is that makes things better than to complain that life is not fair. The ultimate good is for the City of Houston and I think most Coogs like me want Houston to do good and not just feel good stopping UT from doing good because we don't like that they are so well off (for example they have not one but three Gutenberg Bibles)

 

But the problem is if something makes things better at the cost of making something else worse.  UH cannot compete with UT due to an inequity in funding.  By putting a second university that close to UH, there would be a natural competition for students, professors, research grants, etc.  As UT is given so much more money due to the state's unequal funding, the UT branch would inevitably win the majority of those battles.  As UH vies to improve itself for the benefit of Houstonians, allowing another state funded public university directly into its backyard would effectively dilute the quality of those same students and professors.  

 

I love Houston and I also love UH.  I don't care to stop UT from doing good, I care to boost UH as a university for the benefit of Houston and welcome competition if that competition is on a level playing field.

[H-Town Man]

20 minutes ago, kbates2 said:

 

But the problem is if something makes things better at the cost of making something else worse.  UH cannot compete with UT due to an inequity in funding.  By putting a second university that close to UH, there would be a natural competition for students, professors, research grants, etc.  As UT is given so much more money due to the state's unequal funding, the UT branch would inevitably win the majority of those battles.  As UH vies to improve itself for the benefit of Houstonians, allowing another state funded public university directly into its backyard would effectively dilute the quality of those same students and professors.  

 

I love Houston and I also love UH.  I don't care to stop UT from doing good, I care to boost UH as a university for the benefit of Houston and welcome competition if that competition is on a level playing field.

 

I would agree if it came to the possibility of this being a full campus. But that was never likely what it was going to be (the land area was too small, among other reasons), and it shouldn't have been too difficult to get them to pledge that it wasn't going to be for that. It turned out the plan was for a data center. This was more about chasing away the UT brand and its footprint in Houston, which basically means chasing away UT money and its impact on Houston.

 

It also means we lose a rare chance to diversify our workforce and become a little more attractive to non-oil companies. Dallas owns the region on corporate relocations; they just pulled in McKesson last week, #6 on the Fortune 500. Not very big news up there though since it's only their third company in the Fortune top 10. 

 

[Trae]

6 hours ago, shasta said:

 

Trrae, this is bigger issue that just not allowing a UT-Houston,  it revolves around HOW the State of Texas funds ITS public schools. Read up on the PUF (Permanent University Fund) and how the ONLY Public schools that have access to the HUGE pot of money is the UT system and TAMU system. Even among those two UT gets more of the share. Its written into the Texas State Constitution.

 

All other STATE schools were not allowed to get a penny from this fund...that includes UH, Texas Tech, Sam Houston, Texas State, North Texas, etc. so each year these schools would essentially beg for THEIR state to fund THEIR state schools. Eventually the state did create a secondary pot but that is a much smaller pot is divided among all the non- UT/TAMU system public schools in the state.

 

So, you can imagine UH's position....when a nearly hundred year old state school in the state of Texas that has to BEG for state funding each year found out that Texas was going to build a new campus for UH with the excess funds from a pot that the other state schools do not have access to ..they just had to put their foot down.

 

As for the State of Texas, there is ZERO reasons why the university of Houston should not be as prestigious as say a UCLA......this is a State government issue

 

This whole issue revolves around how the state of Texas manages their public institutions of higher learning. They CHOSE not to have a collaborative system as say the UC system in California....that was their decision. It was also their decision to leave certain institutions to fend for themselves instead of helping to build them up into the premiere State system in the United States... This a state issue..not a city Houston issue....

 

I hear you but this is still a short-sighted position in my opinion. Yeah it's unfair that UT/A&M get most of the funds, but you let the school come first. The finances and how money is distributed across all state public universities can be decided on and worked out later. That will happen with or without UT putting a school in the middle of Houston. Let that money flow into the city. Instead that money will continue flowing to DFW, Austin, SA, etc., while Houston will be left behind. Other metros of similar size have multiple public universities that are gearing those cities towards the future economy. UH at worst would have remained the same with a UT-Houston coming on. With all the history UH has in this region, do you think it would have become a Paul Quinn College? I think having just one large university in such a fast growing metro area is not going to work. Trying to make UH into the one super college campus in Houston is going to be similar to Houston gobbling up so much unincorporated area. You're going to stretch things thin instead of sectioning off and letting different areas compete to bring out the best. That's what you see in DFW where the suburban cities have competed so much to where now they're seen as pristine and very attractive for relocating companies. Those companies move in and give funding to the multiple colleges in the area, hire people who move from out of state and then send kids to those colleges, and now those colleges are shooting up the ranking with giant tech departments. Not putting another 4-year school in town is just not preparing Houston for the future at all.

[Trae]

5 hours ago, H-Town Man said:

 

I would agree if it came to the possibility of this being a full campus. But that was never likely what it was going to be (the land area was too small, among other reasons), and it shouldn't have been too difficult to get them to pledge that it wasn't going to be for that. It turned out the plan was for a data center. This was more about chasing away the UT brand and its footprint in Houston, which basically means chasing away UT money and its impact on Houston.

 

It also means we lose a rare chance to diversify our workforce and become a little more attractive to non-oil companies. Dallas owns the region on corporate relocations; they just pulled in McKesson last week, #6 on the Fortune 500. Not very big news up there though since it's only their third company in the Fortune top 10. 

 

 

I love my hometown and have defended Houston endlessly in the past, but there have been decisions made over the years that have accumulated and I think Houston may be at a crossroads. From all of the strip annexation that left vast amounts of unincorporated areas relying on a stretched thin county instead of allowing for more local incorporation. Then there's the weak flood control policies, failure at attracting non-energy companies, inadequate rail transit, no major amusement park=less outside tourism dollars, bad roadway planning (the arterial grid in Houston looks nice but the implementation of it leaves a lot to be desired --- the small things like dedicated turning lanes or right turn yield lanes can go a long way), very patchy sidewalk network, and arguably the worst of the bunch is not allowing the state's largest university system to build a school in town. If Houston just had a couple of those items (namely more incorporated suburbs and better flood control), then the future outlook would look brighter in my opinion.

 

There are other mid-size Southern cities that are starting to rise (Nashville, Raleigh, Orlando, Charlotte) who have become stronger competition than in the past. Like Nashville just landed Amazon's operational HQ that'll have up to 5,000 jobs. Houston would never be considering for something like that today. Houston is not even attracting medical companies. Those go to DFW. It's shouldn't be a mystery why the governor of the state who comes FROM the Houston area can't even get outside companies to relocate their HQ to it. The I-35 corridor has gotten all the love. Houston has made strides in many areas but there's a lot of work to do and I don't think residents want to be taxed to make these things happen.

Edited December 11, 2018 by Trae

[Mr.Clean19]

The PUF funds are a big deal. Some university is going to go in at Generation Park in the North East and pair with San Jac as a feeder school. That will be outside of the Houston city limits and there will be nothing UH can do about it. Sorry guys, as a Tech grad it sucks.