A variety of perspectives were offered by residents regarding the proposed international student dormitory at the April 23 Oxford Twp. Planning Commission meeting.
A public hearing was held regarding a special land use for the project, which was later granted in a 4-1 vote (see story above).
‘I think it’s wrong for the community of Oxford,? said Gasper Cario.
‘We need to have this building to house these kids to bring them in,? said Tammie Barber. ‘I can’t express how important it is to continue on with this project and make sure that it is seen (through).?
Weiming Education Group, a company based in the People’s Republic of China, is looking to build a four-story, 58,279-square-foot dormitory, with classrooms, capable of housing up to 208 students on a 5-acre site located on the west side of N. Oxford Rd., just south of the high school football stadium.
Weiming has a 20-year deal with the school district through which Oxford agreed to educate 16-to-18-year-old students brought here. Most of these students will be from China, however, dorm rooms will be available for those from other countries as well, according to school officials.
Because the proposed dormitory site is zoned Multiple Family residential (RM), obtaining special land use approval was necessary. RM zoning allows for private elementary, middle or secondary schools, but only as special uses.
Sixteen residents spoke during the public hearing, which lasted nearly 40 minutes.
Many expressed concerns over the fact the proposed building has four stories.
‘Our master plan and current zoning do not allow for a four-story building,? said Bruce Meyers. ‘This would forever change the nature and the future of Oxford. It’s against the current zoning ordinance. It is against the spirit of the future development goals of our master plan.?
‘There are no four-story buildings in Oxford Township,? said Jonathan Hosking. ‘It’s planned so that doesn’t happen at the current stage.?
He’s worried about setting a ‘precedent.?
‘My fear is this gets approved and pretty soon we’ve got four-story buildings all the way up and down M-24,? Hosking said.
Eric Schlicht told commissioners he’s ‘not necessarily against the dorm,? but he is ‘against a four-story building.?
That’s because his home on Willow Lake Ct. would face it.
‘I’m totally against a four-story structure,? Schlicht said. ‘I might be selfish, but that is in my living room view and I’m not the only one. That’s my concern.?
Because the township zoning ordinance limits the number of stories a multiple family building can have to three, the proposed dormitory must receive a variance from the zoning board of appeals (ZBA) in order to have a fourth story.
There were those in the audience who felt the township should stick to its standards, ordinances and plans, and not bend for the Weiming dormitory project.
‘The best thing you can do as a planning commission is to enforce the ordinance(s) to their maximum and not give a waiver for something that could easily (cause) problems for the residents and the area as well,? said Ron Meyers.
‘You have ordinances to protect our property values and I can only encourage you to do so,? he added.
Although she’s in favor of the dormitory, Mary Sovis believes the building should ‘stay within? the township’s ‘parameters.?
Hosking urged the planning commission to stick to the township’s rules when it comes to the proposed dormitory, think long-term and don’t be intimidated into changing things to suit the developer’s wishes.
‘Anytime someone comes in and flexes their muscles a little bit, we want to back down,? he said. ‘I guess what I’m looking for, for once, is a board to take a look at the big picture, to take a look at the long view, rather than being worried about the here and now.
‘If I was sitting where you guys are, I wouldn’t want to be hung with the legacy of being the board that allowed something to happen that tied the hands of this community for 20, 30 or 40 years.?
A number of audience members spoke of the benefits of having foreign exchange students in Oxford because they’ve allowed these visitors to live in their homes.
‘It’s been a wonderful experience,? said Donna Babcock, who’s hosted a number of Chinese students. ‘I do love the program. I think it’s a very good program.?
Babcock believes cultural exchange programs such as this can help promote world peace and prevent wars. ‘I’m a firm believer in exchange programs,? she said.
Roger Sovis told the commission he was ‘blessed? to host exchange students from Paraguay, Italy, Brazil and China over the last few years. He believes exposing local children to these students and their cultures will help them later in life when they’re working in the global economy.
‘I can’t express enough, as a businessman, the importance of how all business is going international,? Sovis said. ‘I work for a very small company and we have systems all around the world.?
Sovis noted the Chinese students who come here bolster the local economy.
‘These exchange students typically come from the higher echelon of China and they spend a lot of money, believe it or not,? he said.
Barber, who told the commission she currently has five Chinese students living in her Oxford Lakes home, agreed.
She said four of her Chinese guests have memberships at a local gym and they spend their own money to go out to eat once a week.
‘They shop, they shop and they shop,? Barber said. ‘They spend more money than I spend in our community.?
But to Barber, the benefits are not financial, they’re personal
‘They are some of the most wonderful kids I’ve ever had in my home,? she said.
Opponents of the proposed dormitory agreed student exchange programs are a good thing that should be encouraged.
However, they pointed out dormitory life does not offer the same one-on-one experiences as living in local homes with local families, so it’s not a true cultural exchange program.
‘This is a group of like people in one place,? said Bruce Meyers. ‘It is just an extension of their country, so they won’t really have the same exchange with us that a live-in exchange student would have.?
‘I would rather see exchange students (living) in the community where they belong,? he noted.
Tom Corcoran argued without the experience of living with host families, the program becomes more of a business arrangement than a cultural exchange.
‘Once that’s gone,? he said, then all these students are doing is paying ‘a certain amount of money? to come here in order to graduate from an American high school and have a ‘better chance? of getting into college.
‘To me, it almost becomes ‘diplomas for sale,?? Corcoran said. ‘I don’t like that.?
Corcoran believes the exchange program using host families is a ‘great idea.?
‘Keep it going, expand it, but not in this nature (with a dormitory),? he said.
Mary Sovis pointed out ‘a dormitory is not for everyone.?
‘Some kids like to live in the homes,? she said. ‘Some kids like to live in the dormitory and they do that at Rochester College.?
Sovis believes the exchange students should have both options to choose from, so they can ‘get an education that they’re not able to get in China.?
‘I would want the best education for my child and (the Chinese parents are) doing nothing less than what I would want to do for my child,? she said.
Robert Stowers wondered ‘how in the world? are ?200 adolescents,? who are away from home and might do some ‘acting out, which is normal,? going to be controlled?
‘How are these children going to be supervised and who’s responsible for that?? he asked.
Babcock said the Chinese students should not present any behavioral problems.
‘It’s pretty well acknowledged that the Chinese are the most obedient people in the world,? she said. ‘The Chinese students are traditionally very, very obedient, very attentive, very studious. I’ve not known anyone that’s had a behavior problem.?
There was concern among some audience members about potential future uses for the dormitory should the agreement between Weiming and the school district end for whatever reason.
Barb Dery feared the community could be ‘stuck? with a building ‘that we have absolutely no use for.?
‘What is the next use for it? The only thing I can come up with would be like a halfway house, minimum security prison, group home,? Bruce Meyers said.
Ron Meyers wondered if it would eventually be used to house school-of-choice students from ‘Detroit, Flint, Pontiac, etc.? He also expressed a concern from a fellow citizen who wondered if the federal government could someday use it to house ‘illegal aliens.?
Babcock noted the building would not be unique in Oxford.
‘You already have dormitories for students,? she said.
She cited the Crossroads for Youth facility on E. Drahner Rd. and the Queen of the Family Retreat Center on W. Drahner Rd. as examples. The former houses troubled youth, while the latter has provided accommodations for visiting international students.
Jim Reis, president of the Oxford Board of Education, expressed his support for the proposed dormitory as a private citizen and provided written support for it from Congressman Mike Bishop, Dr. John Tyson, Jr. president of Rochester College, and Oakland County Executive L. Brooks Patterson.
Reis also expressed his concern that TEAM 20, a local group that’s been questioning and challenging the dormitory, is ‘totally driven? by Kallie Roesner-Meyers, who serves on the planning commission and zoning board of appeals. He said she’s written posts on Facebook urging people to call the U.S. Department of State, Federal Bureau of Investigation and Oakland County ‘with the sole purpose of shutting down this project.?
The fact that Roesner-Meyers is ‘leading the charge on this? and voting as an appointed township official ‘is beyond belief? to Reis.
‘I don’t see how that could be possible,? he said. ‘I think Kallie Roesner should recuse herself from the vote.?
This reporter later asked township Supervisor Bill Dunn about this.
‘She has a First Amendment right to express her opinion (about the Weiming project) as a resident just like everybody else does,? Dunn said. ‘This isn’t China.?
But the supervisor made it clear that Roesner-Meyers can only speak for herself and not on behalf of the planning commission.
‘If she’s just speaking her mind as a citizen, that’s fine. I can’t stop her from doing that and I wouldn’t want to,? he explained. ‘But if she does it and says she’s representing the planning commission, without authorization, she’ll be gone. That goes for any of them.?