Q1: Is the Status Quo Residence Acceptable?

The president’s residence advisory committee was charged by you on July 17 to study the needs, resources, and issues relating to the potential renovation or replacement of the presidential residence. The residence currently provides living quarters for the president and his or her family and also serves as an important venue for select university gatherings hosted by the president. The composition of our committee is broad-based and includes University of Idaho administrators, University of Idaho Foundation, Inc. leaders, and faculty, staff, and student representatives.

The committee met from 9:30 am to 1:00 pm on August 7at the existing President’s Residence. With your charge as a guide, we organized our discussion and recommendations along three key questions.

Q1: Is the status quo residence acceptable?

The committee toured the president’s residence and grounds and reviewed in detail the “Executive ResidenceRenovation & Additions Feasibility Report” developed and prepared by NAC Architecture of Spokane, Washington. This report estimated the cost of renovation/improvement,primarily to the living quarters, but did not address additional major repairssuch as a new furnace, ADA compliance issues/improvements, replacement of windows, a new roof, air conditioning installation or removal of asbestos in the house. The total estimated costs for these needed repairs and renovations would substantially exceed a half a million dollars.

Based on this review, the committee unanimously agreed that renovating the house would not be cost effective nor would it address all the issues. There was also some doubt that external support from donors would be successful for a costly project with an imperfect outcome.

Q2: Should the university consider an allowance in lieu of an on campus residence?

The committee discussed this at length and unanimously agreed that a housing allowance was not a viable option and that an on campus residence is essential for the following reasons:

• It is important, especially on a residential campus like ours, to have the President at the center of campus life and engaged in campus culture.
• There is cultural importance in being able to meet with students, faculty, guests, dignitaries, alums in an on-campus, personal atmosphere at a residential university like ours. The personal nature of being on campus and hosting constituents at the president’s home is reflective of the campus culture and it is an important component for a successful presidency.
• With extensive travel nationally, a campus residence engages and connects the President to the campus and community in an important way.
• It would be difficult to find an appropriate home in Moscow, ID. There aren’t many appropriate choices, especially near campus.
• Limited housing inventory means resale is an issue – this could bring into question a guaranteed buyout provision during contract negotiations.
• The residence is an asset for the State of Idaho and is helpful with enrollment and fundraising efforts.

Q3: Should there be public space for entertainment and gatherings as a part of the residence? What is the desired scope?

The committee decided it would be advantageous to have flexible and functional event space incorporated into the project. Approximately 20-30 events occur at the president’s residence during the academic year and there is great value in these personalized in-home events. However, if the resulting cost of expanding this public event space proves prohibitive, the public space could be maintained at its current size or a second phase to be built at a later date could be considered.

Recommendation: Pursue design and cost estimates for one project with two distinct components:

1. A new energy-efficient residence – roughly 3,500 – 4,500 square feet (The existing home was built in 1967 for $121,900 or $877,000 in today’s dollars and is 5,400 square feet).
2. Adequate Entertainment spacethat would provides a modicum of privacy, yet retains the feel of the president’s home.

Additional Committee Comments:

• The committee agreed unanimously that the site of the current residence is ideal. Its location offers some privacy, yet is centrally located on campus.
• The committee felt that external (donor) funding for the residence is a necessary and vital component.
• We need to evaluate the decision to add entertainment or public space depending on the cost estimates and extent of donor funds raised.
• The residence could be a distinctive example of best architectural, environmental, and building practices.
• The home should reflect the values of Idaho and incorporate materials and architectural elements consistent with a leading national university located in the Pacific Northwest.
• The president’s residence is unoccupied and the search for our next president is moving forward quickly. Because timing is critical, we propose the following timeline: