A STUDY OF THE ESTABLESHMENT GF
GRAND VALLEY STATE COLLEGE

 

Thesis far the Degree cf W1. D.

MICHEGAN STATE UNEVERSETY

Marinus Mah‘hius Swat:
1963

 

 

 

A STUDY OF THE ESTABLESHMENT OF
GRAND VALLEY STATE COLLEGE

T110331 for the Dem» cf Ph. D.

MECHEGAN STATE UNWERSETY

Mat-inns Mafihius Swen
1963

THESIS ,
’ ‘33'35 I E

 

 

 

 

WEEE ENE/7E! EH”

 

Em _

This is to certify that the

thesis entitled

A Study of the Establishment of
Grand Valley State
College

presented by
Marinus Matthuis Swets

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for

EhD degree mm

k»

///‘W 2 C;{Z:/’7\__

Major professor

M
Date ay 14, 1963

 

0-169

   
    

  

LIBRAR Y
Michigan State

Universit"

PLACE IN RETURN BOX to move this checkout from your record.
TO AVOID FINES return on or before date due.

DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE

."

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

_
r“
¥¥

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

E
1

MSU Is An Affinnotive Action/Equal Opportunity Institution

 

 

 

. __ . __ I j‘l'll‘uin'fich.

H.v‘

 

 

'“L‘t‘ r. .

‘0
O

7‘

. 0'!
.l’ l.‘

6

Q'
U

D

U

\

A 37
£35..
".,; 51.: C

 

g... "“V

v-

E.
at

y
-
A

.--=-
4...:

t..-

. '9‘.
uk‘

3.x:
4'..-‘ .-

~V. '- I
..-... in; 1

‘ 9

“‘5.

r
s
‘

=3:.e ;

ABSTRACT

A STUDY OF THE ESTABLBHMENT OF
GRAND VALLEY STATE COLLEGE

by Marinus Matthius Swets

  
  
   
    
  
  
  
   
  
    
  
  
  

31‘
. «8 émd Valley state College, the tenth state-supported, four-year institution

\

. utilisation in Michigan,was established by Public Act 120 of the 70th
~ -* -of the State of Michigan, Regular Session, 1960. It serves these
“counties: Allogan. Barry. Ionia, Kent. Muskegon, Montcalm, Newaygo,

,3?”

" Q "juiguiivifles of several groups which culminated in Public Act 120 and the

b

which resulted from it up to the appointment of the first full-time

‘ .u.
- 31;; t;.‘~.

_¢~ - were studied in this dissertation.

Eff 0‘ too young men led by L. William Seidman gained community

“legislative approval for their efforts. They had, to begin with,

E A" ~ ~ -. that other groups had failed in their work to establish a branch

L“ one or another of the existing universities. But they also had faith

.0." .

.--m ‘ éjso, tremendous desire, great ability. and the facts of two surveys

m needs, the Rus____g__ellR sport (1), a study of statewide needs,

3 ‘ :1} '—-- : ~ crt (a a study of eight-county needs. Armed with these
“am who called themselves the CEFYC (Committee to
atom-year College) worked to gain their end: a new college for

‘7”?! a: s1

15;? '3'“

:3. the dissertation were gathered from newspaper morgue files,
a flea, minutes of meetings. records of speeches. personal

a q.-

3’;
- (_ f.
ufi- ._.-
o
- ~
' ;’
.- . ‘- ,
a _ ‘dfi ’
3’“ q;
'
'. o .

s-x’ . _.
't

o .- ~ " '

Jf‘- "' £ .' j ‘ V
- , 2“ “;

.' ' :‘ . _' h ‘J’
‘ 4* ~49 5 ‘
' I- _

, ‘ e - . ‘ ‘ -
V - ,__ _ .

 

Q
‘ , a
-Ai.
a- .o
J -
\1
um I
L s. n.
7 r . -

Q
A
4 a L
-3 a
'- _

__¢_-H .77

"l--C AD-

£573, Xuzauaxnté 3‘3.

.‘d- .I I

I?_f_§‘ Jn-N-t—‘Eé no u.‘

'4”
J
.
v

l~-“.-u‘ .
~4n.._1;‘15;{.:_:
.‘s‘

 

;‘DI.'—-- ,, ‘ s
.T“)':3 J. :1; I“ '

‘e....
v

I
-"

~ .‘ .
‘._L. .‘ .
‘ .\ Lfi“ 1‘- .
§~ho .

‘ ‘5‘.“
-. ~l15‘“ ‘. -.
“J’l-V’
‘1
\‘E‘.
".4'5 M4. -.-_.
hh ..
‘ 'O‘i‘~“
e "3

. 02
‘2‘- H
\In‘, .
.\T‘.‘-
sq s _‘

‘
- K‘ a.
s .I‘ ‘-
~J~~ _
. a. ,.‘
‘5‘. w:
4
‘ -
\ I,
'Q- \‘r
. ,6 '
- . -E r: -.
x i- “'
‘Q’i‘~
‘ -“
Ԥ.M.

x" ‘ a."
x - . .
‘
K K“ .
‘3‘ :1 ~ 0
Q \“
r ‘14.} ‘
‘Av. 3‘ ‘1
s. \’ I
‘. A

interviews, correspondence with principals in the venture, pamphlets, legis-
lative journals, brochures and other materials on activities pertaining to the
new college effort.

Besides recording the historical facts of legal sanctions, the raising of
funds, the securing of a site, the establishment of amicable relations with
other institutions of higher education, and the formation of a Citiz ens' Advisory
Council, these conclusions concerning the success of voluntary community enter-
prise were made:

1. The members of the group who lead the enterprise share characteristics
of intelligence, enthusiasm, integrity, decisiveness, faith in their commitments,
are articulate, and have sometime and enough money to work for community
benefltS.

2. They are not emotionally maladjusted or extreme in their beliefs.

3. They have high socio-economic status.

4. They are candid about their activities and their motives.

5. They divide the work to be done so each does what he is best suited for.

_ 6. They carry on a constmt community education program, utilizing press,
radio, television, personal contact, speeches, meetings, and other public
relations and promotional activities. They secure the backing and cooperation
of all news media managers, publishers, editors, and owners.

7. They are not motivated by selfishness nor do they seek personal profit

or glory.

8. They utilize the recommendations of "experts" to support their aims.

9. A conservative community will not inhibit their success if the com-

munity feels that it will derive social and economic benefits as a result of
their enterprise.

 

L‘s,

it

all 15w ill»... a t. :Kntl .. B'.ja

c

. “1" _ ° Marinas-Matthius Swets

   
  
   
   
   
  
  
 
 
    

We who must give legal sanction to their enterprise will not
-. i0 community voices neither approval or disapproval.
I - fid'fllfiliflited size of the voltmteer grow is an essential factor for
u care must be taken that plans and actions do not cutdistance

.';':. fl consideration of the worth of the individual and respectful acceptance
Qty-"aides and criticism is essential.~

' -;1& No purchase of favors is necessary.

I

The development of the curriculum and other details pertaining to instruc-

I

3“,, m. admissions policies, housing, and other growth details were

‘1": meet here. This study ended with the appointment of the first full-time

.Af-“ .
_-.. r- ,,‘
ZIII: a‘l‘ :"0 .
d...
_- \_
-\--
gr ‘ez‘. .“

(”v

fi\”_'

fi -M, John Dale to the Michian ve mCom-
mmgndmauofi Wee—m “Thaw ' ', 1953.

Jinnah John X., A N__e__w Co ollge, Center for the Study of Higher

Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan, 19 59.

 

1|- ‘

\— or

“‘7
k \
‘ .0 s!
r:
's
‘5

_
l 77 .. ..
O . I . 7 _
7
7
' . I A
7
7
_
7 7 7
. a
7 7 1‘ a In 7
_ . .
r 7 f
i l l .7 .\
t
.
7 c 7
_
v r.
u,
7 7 7
.
5
17 r 7 7
‘ .
_
7 4. 7 7
. .
_ 7 ~_
L 7. t
. l 7 7 a
4 C
7
7 7 77 ‘77 .t
. . s . 7 7
7
7 7 w
n '
_
A . <
n 7
'\ _
. 7 n
. 7
7 7.
7
7 . 7
A e 7
.
. 7 7
t
xx [
7 .7 f
v 7
_ . _ 7
a 7 7
_
7
7 7
7 7.
7 7.
. A 7
_
7 . V7
, 7
d7 . .
.. n.
. a II
A r 7
7 7
t 7
7
7 . .
7 a
. . 7 7 c
_ r
7 7 7 7 _

A STUDY OF THE ESTABLISHMENT OF

GRAND VALLEY STATE COLLEGE

By

Marinas Matthias Swets

A THE SIS

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

College of Education

19 63

 

 

 

 

‘ - .5 ‘I.
to... =. .
.
" ‘1 L1- \ .
‘4‘n-N .: 1" |~..t I-“
-.h_.‘.‘ -. ~

 

.- .
h‘- C. 5. ‘ .. _ " ..
M: v M ‘_. ,.‘ _-
"3- .. .
J -‘.'.. - o‘-t ~-.
. a. 5 “_“~ .. ‘
' I
y—.. y_. -_ .‘
do. u“ 5:._. J L
.t ~;.'
- v-o._ .7 .
--~.-‘. .nt‘.‘\->
5'“ ~
. “.
b h .- . “.x .
e ‘ ‘ n . ;
h“~.
fl. .‘ I I
. “I 3..
" ' ,a. . .
‘ .
‘ .I . ’-
‘E " kg

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I' appreci‘at‘edie help of Mrs. Isabel Craig of the

   
   
 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  

E Michigan Legislative Service Bureau, the staff of the
myds Press newspaper morgue, and the assistance
. 7 and coopeltflon of Mrs. Nancy Bryant, Mrs. Augusta

x : Eppinga, and Mr. L. William Seidman. I also thank the
members of the CEFYC who were willimg to take the
time to talk about their work in the establishment of

the new college. And I am grateful to Dr. Clyde Campbell,
Dr. Iwao Ishino,- and Dr. Bernard Corman for their
helpful criticism; to Dr. Harold J. Dillon, doctoral
committee chairman, for hi 8 continuous and valuable

. . advice and encouragement; and to my wife, Van, and

to Jody, J cc], and Jonathan for their years of patience.

‘
-‘oh 0 - ~\.

 

new!

F,‘-.--
'1: .'
o.- a“

, ‘—--.v-h--\ '
. '
. ...¢. ~~..J‘ Q

‘ a
.-Q

‘7 . .‘- ‘ -.
oo-utdul :th J.-p.

"'9...

cu... - ov~ '0
vow L ‘4‘ “wt b
4 o-&..-ool.. 3....-.-
“1....
t--.
"“"ooocoo. o o
- '
‘5 $173.--“ . .
-‘ —-~~H .._ g
A
'97
¥~‘«' i.'." . .
. - .-_. -.
b'h" "~h'.~...t. I‘
1.... ,3 a “
‘ .~t..: . .
-
‘ ta‘ ’0.
A ’ .“ lv‘ -
“ - 1
‘. ..‘.-‘
on
Q‘ -0- ‘
~: ~\-v- -
~o~.~ ‘ —
." .1-

 

he
. U.
0 :Li"" .
“n.1,. . .
---
b. o
‘u‘ .‘ .
‘ .~ ~
-0
D
..‘
-"~o " ‘ .
h ‘\
‘Mo ,
\ ig‘ :
V
.
O o ‘-
“\ L‘.
‘. g ‘Q
‘ \‘\ -1
\‘-\
7““
o“ _\“
R. O- A‘.‘
~.‘¥L: 'oh
‘\
’~ {
-‘v. . ‘
O
\
' 5
., ..
‘-~'.-.
I k .
“\. L ‘
. u
-‘ :§§
\
.
Q ~ L‘.
I“ alt...
‘R , V-
s‘ ‘n
| ~'~.
- \
--\. t".
"k y
M\.\-‘. 1“
‘.

 

' . v I; "' _—
. '-—x r- - '
I." ‘1 '2...
| ‘3 ’ ‘.'.. r'
I 1 ‘3‘. I
,A"‘a. ‘.
.‘I'
I ,‘q

TABLE OF CONTENTS

  
   
  
  
 
 
      
 

_ ProcedureandOrganization.................
“-7? II. m SITUATION PRECEDING THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE
CEFYC.
The Existing Higher Education Facilities in the Eight-

Countyarea........................
Early Activities Connected with Higher Education in the

GrandRapidsArea....................
The Grand Rapids Board of Education Activities . . . . . .
Events Surrounding the Michigan State University

AltnnniGroup'sActivitieS................
' TheRussellReport.

mesons: EARLYACTIVITIES .. . . . . . .. . .. ..

‘ IThe'EstablishmentandAims................
TheJ'anuary7,.1959,Meeting...............
_ 2’, ‘5‘, Otheerhvities Preceding the Jamrich Report. . . . . .
' f7... ‘ .melsIATIVE SANCTION, THE JAMRICH REPORT,

.3‘ :l
J

immaanYcAcTTVITIEs- 1959........

H’Qarahon for Getting Legislative Sanction . . . . . . .
mJMhReportoooooooooooooooooooo

3",“

m, WNevemherso 1959, Meeting. , , . . , , , , , , , ,

-,‘:' ‘It 77;};

.7: 7, - .~ m477- LEGISLATIVE ACTION . . . . . . . . .

a. -

‘
I..-

o‘ M
"% _';- ’ _
‘-\ f.» .
- .1 .
'I'“
0'

PAGE

10

10

14
18

89

48
54

59

67

79

83

 

CHAPTER PAGE

VI. EARLY PROBLEMS: THE BOARD OF CONTROL, INTER-
INSTITUTIONAL RELATIONSHIPS, THE EARLY ADMIN-
ISTMTIVE MY 0 O O O O O O O 0 O O O O O O C O O O O O O O O 100

The ward Of contml O O O O O O 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 101
Inter-Institutional Relationships and Early Administration. . 102

ThePlanningConsultants................... 110

The January 11, 12, 13 Planning Session . . . . . . . . . . 119

VII. THESELECTIONOFTHESITE................ 123
Early Site Proposals and Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124

Board of Control Planning on Sites . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130
MuskegonActivities..................... 133
FurtherBoardActivities................... 134
Muskegon and Rockford Actions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135

Board Site Decisions--and Reactions . . . . . . . . . . . . 138

VIII. THE CITIZENS' ADVISORY COUNCIL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 156
IX. TI-IEMILLIONDOLLARFUNDDRIVE.............. 164
Preliminary Fund Raising Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165
TheFundCampaignMethods................. 168
TheMuskegonReaction.................... 170
FurtherBoardReports.................... 171
TheProgressoftheFundDrive........,,.... , 173

Labor and Special Gifts Fund Drives. . . . . . . . , , . , , 175

179

TheResultsoftheEffortS..................

iv

 

'on ~.‘fi-A -:." An...
3.} .\.‘..'..\.' m... L'.."......'

  

'- .01- Qh-‘Q-‘l

LIL”; .f.‘£..\S-.\(:.D

Eltm'h'h'c .4

x. -w. . ‘
o‘ L‘}‘:"“ ‘ .5. I
.. 4- mu!

0
:‘fitww- u...
‘..H.-.|‘:Q d-h-N.~.. I”
llbg' ‘... .
' v
q

-‘~\"' "-

" "Wm-‘43:: 13:0 '1': ' ‘

Ob\“
\h“'.’,‘
M: r\c-~"
0’..m :
.r. .
«SK-t" .

\.:
-.‘:-
‘1‘." ‘: ‘_ A
C‘ k: ' “Q
‘ i
~12 .7
t?’\
~ 1 ‘
0" ~ .
\ ‘: a “ . -
. 9““ ‘l
‘
~‘.
\'.:' ,1 .
' ~~ 2‘. :
~3C .3 9'.
h.‘
x; .
‘ u}. *o.
'on-
‘QJ‘: a *
's “,
. ‘
u.
o " -
*9 lite.
‘I4"
‘3
C
5"“ ' o
\\ '-: I o.‘
.s. Q ~‘N
\ UH '
‘Q ..1
.
Iti“. . ‘
'V

CHAPTER PAGE
X.ONNAMINGTHECOLLEGE................182
XI.SOMEOPINIONS—~MILDTOSTRONG. . . . . . . . . . . .185
TheSeyferfllPa-mphlet..................185
TheMrs. SeigelW. JuddLetters. . . . . . . . . . . . . 191
The Grand Valley Citizens for a Better College Proposal . . 202
TheEldersveldLetter..................205
XII. INTERVIEWSWITHTHECEFYC. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 208
XIII. CONCLUSIONSANDIMPLICATIONS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 218
Personal Characteristics of the CEFYC and Others . . . . . 220
Community Characteristics and Inhibiting Factors . . . , . . 223
Socio~Economic and Prestige Factors. . . . . . . . . . . 227
Opposition and Leadership Commitn'mnt. . . . . . . . . . 231
InterainstitutionalRelationships. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 233
Voluntary Enterprise as an American Phenomenon .7 . . . . . 234
Operative Characteristics of Volunteer Groups . . . . . . . 234
ImplicaflonsforOtherS..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . 235
EstablishinstheNeed.................. 235
ImplementafionoftheFacts. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 236
The Conditions of the Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . 236

OtherFaotorS.....................241

BIBI‘IwRAPHYOOI00.00.00.000000000246

APPENDICES.O...0.00.00.00.0000000252

ll

1‘

J I

[-I

["1” 1’ Iv

’ /

.41

r.
. .
"¢¢.
I" . _
~‘0'u~’_ :-
q 0
\ - .
-
f‘*~.,_‘
,
u’“
a.

‘ ‘~-..

‘

. 5‘

A “. ‘1
.7.‘ \

p

u".

v " .,
ck-
- ...
.h
i .
k‘ .

"-1

A
.u‘
H‘_I

rs

.

b_ ~
'-‘~

.-

 

"..__b'
2"
..‘I
V‘.
V
kuQc—V“
.\‘
-
‘
.
s
'I
‘h
‘ ~
A _‘.‘
‘
A
'\
~‘ “
u.‘
A
‘w.
\s
q l
\.
(N
, .
§
‘1
a.
“‘
'4
\‘
y

LIST OF TABLES

PAGE
Joint Committee to Study Michigan Needs in Higher
Education ..... ..... 18
Citizens' Advisory Committee on Higher Education . . . 20

Significant Events and Activities Leading to the Estab—
' lishment of Grand Valley State College . . . . . . . . . . 36
The Committee to Establish a Four—Year College . . . . . 40
Organizations Supporting the Resolution Favoring the
Establishment of a Four-Year College in the
.GrandRaPidsArea....................42
7. Groups Supporting the Walker Township Resolutions Urg-
ing Support of a‘Four-Year College . . . . . . ..... 47
Citizens at a Meeting at University Club January 7, 1959,
Grand Rapids, Michigan ....... . . . . . . . . . . 49
Legislative and Citizens Committees to Study the Need
for a Four-Year State-Supported College. ..... . . . 68
Time Chart of House Bill NO. 477 , State of Michigan,
70th Legislature, Regular Session of 1960 . . . . . . . 88
S Grand Valley State College First Board Of Control . . . . 103

Grand Valley Projects for the Planning Commission. . . . 115.

   

“a .gfibllege Site Proposals up to February 22,1961. . . . 131
“I;
‘-~7V771).me~.0008u1tant8 o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o 136

\
1.:

a em clutens Council of Grand Valley State College . .g. the
f 7 .E ;, v-l

 

51

’-n

v

A

moo-c... ‘,

  

P
310

C‘.ogo:o'oooooooooo

"iii .. _él ‘ .

 

Mam .5

.
e
.
C
O Q
.
q
7
t
h
. . 1
u i
C ’ Q
r 7
I '
0 - ‘.
\ . a .g. t
t t O I
t... . _. 0v .-
. . o 7 n
. 6... .u.o -4 L. D 1‘
r6 . .
7f 3 ‘1‘ t o . c. 7.‘ '4
O i ' ‘ . C III
.I u A
r). u. is I

 

'

 

. . .7.7 e . . 7 . . l. .
.77 See...

 

r V . . .
7

 

.I.
.. ...r

4205;” 5‘». ..

 

n.5,.

-I---b

1

en...”
1.21"

 

:- . ~

' O
ubuidhguf
Q

Q...‘ . O‘ I
‘o~.. ‘.“.'

Cc.-"o-
\- . un-‘
bdé.1-.& :.|

v._'_“ - '
I . l ' ‘ ‘fl - ' c- ‘
a '_ ‘ 0
.> ' .. \‘ f .
\. g -_ . - '
‘ ‘ ‘q. ‘
5—, v ‘ u
‘1’.”

LIST OF FIGURES

PAGE

  
  
   
  
   
  

Schematic Diagram of Events and Activities Leading to

the Establishment of Grand Valley State College
andiheirRelationshiptoEachOther........... 38
The Eight-County Area Studied for the Establishment of
the‘NewCollege...................... 71

,7 5.". inflamaphical Relationship of the Eight-County Area to

Z"?

I.‘vnlrit,lh;' 1', I,.
. 3'

55.»:

the Total State of Michigan and to the Locations of

' I

. A". 1"
1' .

Other Institutions of Higher Education . . . . . . . . . . 72

.9. _‘dPA. .-
i

V
\' 1'; " .
4. .

.o

‘9‘
I *1.
i 5". ’31:“,
, .
NR

i-n',

M

53.37;. H _.._

{,4

".3

.0 ‘
. c h... ‘
‘ ' ‘h- f.

I
|

2|!" ,, .

0

I i“ 5' no.
0
\n '
.k' g'
0
V
_l I

‘. ‘3”
“’4 'r- ,i " a'?
I

Q
“10" 't o

a
. .,p
'1‘.

. .
on
’ I“, .
J.

i
0”

1
i. v
u’.

. . .?
t 'v D
'4‘
f-
’1

f!
it” '4' r

\ r a
.. V
'I:.¢“ u-V“. .‘

A
(9..
‘1:

-l(.‘
.‘q.'

3’ 0'!
v
M

.-

I.
i
.’-'K‘ . I

r.
‘ "1}. _1
7'5

11".“ I
3,‘
I

1‘

 

 

Il-‘Illl'u‘ll .1 ta. _ i
N o . .
a . k .c m .
to. . . . . tn
.3 .« ”L L . .
Q .
V. ”J 9.. .‘m ..\
..... k . . D
_ _ .I. a
:7“, D. c. 1: .Q.
.._.m .“3 fit“ cu. “I‘-
. .. .o . Q 1-
. . .
to» in“ fig

. .
. I. v ‘.
.._ ..u ..
O. O. t
. . L .
A . a t
.s .3 Q
4 . M‘ H.
a. ;
an. to .3
.\o.
. w

.59 .s

..

.. .M
P . _
w... C

.

. .-
... 1
r... V.
‘-

‘ud
‘

. i. _ e
o H 3.. O .
_ t . . . .
“B a . .
t . .
.; t~ 0‘. uOL
go .2 . .. ..
.5. U. .\. I
a S

:4

..
S. Q
h. A
.\ .
-
_.\
?. ‘\
_i L.
2 . ..
t ;
~ a...»

fix

LIST OF APPENDICES
' : m P AGE

A College for the Western Michigan Area--The Needs
andPotential......................-.. 252
A Four-Year College for the Grand Rapids Area—Fifteen
QuesfionsandAnswers................... 255
Is a New Degree-Granting College Needed in the Grand
RapidSArea........................ 26°
Seidman's Letter to the Legislature Urging Support of
aNéwCollege....................... 263
Announcement of Citizens' Committee Officers and
November30Meeting................j... 26‘
Brochure Prepared For Distribution to Demonstrate
NewCollegeProgress................... 265
Michigan 70th Legislative Regular Session of 1960--
HouseBillNo.477..................... 266
House Education Committee Amendments to House Bill
No.477................‘.........'.. 268

Senate Educatinn Committee Amendments to House Bill

   
 

No. 477 0 Q Q Q Q 0 O . O O O C I O O O C O C O C C O O 0 . O 270

Leter Urging Legislative Support of House Bill No. 477‘ . . 271

13:43 -I General Guidelines Suggested by Educational Con-
b‘:‘f ‘moooooooooooooooooooooone... 272

 

I

...|

.3 :I I5.

IhJ z . .u‘.
I . . ... . \ ‘

Z I. u. .54 a Z l i Z Z \,\ 5.. f If.

T"
l

I I
I
I .
I t
I
I I
t
I I I
I
I l I
V
I I I v
I I
I I l
I I
I
I I I
I
l
I Q r
I I r
t
I £ t I
t I
I
v I I I
I I I
l I I
I I I
I
l
I I .
t I I
I I
I I I
a I. I
I I I I
I
I I O
I I I
6
I I I
. I t
I I
I I I
O u
I I
r I
l I
s I
z I
I
I I v
v I
I
I t
I I
. . . .
I I
I I
I I
1 I r
o I
I I
I
t I
I

 

Guidelines for Site Proposals . . . . . . . . . . . . .
State Building Division Criteria for Site Selection . .
Plans for Site Reviews and Hearings . . . . . . . . .
Architects Supplement to Guidelines for Site Proposal
. Report by Executive Group of Site Selection Com-
mitteeofCitizens' Council. . . . . . . . . . . .
Seidman's Letter Asking for Final Site Proposals. .
Arguments Presented Before Legislature Hearings
onSite..... ......
..l.;.MuskegonSiteProposal. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Butcher's Letter Presenting Board of Control
Position on Site Selection . . . . . . . . . . . .
Correspondence "Between T. A. Saunders and
SeidmanonCostFactors. . . . . . . . . . . .
'BoardActiononSiteSelection. . . . . . . . . . .
Buildlng Division Comparison of Sites . . . . . .
. Recommendations Regarding Citizens' Council
'to the Board of Control as Suggested by
Educaflonal Consultants (February 8,‘ and
9,19H)._......-.............
Citizens: Catmcil- Program Plans . . . . . . . . .
5 Educational Material Used to Solicit thds. . . .

Names Proposed fortheNew College. . . . . .

PAGE

277
279
284

289

293

296

298
307

317

324
328

330

337
341
342
34p

 

"‘3 ~ 3 5:42;- " ‘

.lr‘: t. , .
"fl S£.~u J. tutti i
.n’
”4:; -I M
-‘ ‘4. :-' ~o
.. . 3 .i
5“:
‘ri: i'“'-'.'-'« n
‘4‘: 493& ti,
:5“ I.

‘\V
\Lf‘.“
-4.- -.,-
‘.
J... “.1”
‘5
::\.

Q
s
5
'£ I‘"~.'.
..
“\flt S. _I.
Nt~IL~
‘§ '5‘
t .i
. ‘1' "\\-V
5-» h‘ ‘.
I.»
“‘50 I
O. '3
.‘. .
L 0’,‘ -
‘ \ ‘Q'
\Q t. \v.‘.

CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION

Grand Valley State College opens its doors for the first time in the fall
of 1963. The first freshman class numbers approximately two hundred fifty
students. Most of these students live within a thirty mile radius of the
college. That these students may attend a state-supported institution of
higher education close to their homes is the result of a chain of events that
seem to be unique.

Grand Valley State College is the tenth state-supported institution of
higher education in Michigan. It is located upon high banks of the Grand River
at Highway M—50 about twelve miles west of Grand Rapids. (See Figure II.)

It was established by Public Act 120 of the 70th Legislature of the State of
Michigan, Regular Session, 1960.

The simple statement of the act of the Legislature does not indicate in any
way the complexity of the series of events that preceded the Legislative act,
nor does it hint ‘at the effects resulting from the act. (Table m, Figure 1)

It was the purpose of this study to reveal the series of cause and effect
relationships that culminated in the establishment of the new college and to
arrive at some conclusions that may be helpful for others who engage in
activities aimed at solving a social problem requiring both extensive community
support and legal sanction.

In addition to the possibility that some significant generalizations can be
made, the fact that Grand Valley State College is an independent public institu-

tion has some implications that are not immediately apparent.

1

-t..

\J

 

 

.1.

J

Imi‘

.1.

L,

2

Because there is a widespread awareness of the necessity of providing
facilities for those who want to and are able to attend college, several states
have tmdertaken surveys of their higher education facilities as they relate to
anticipated possible enrollments in the future. Algo Henderson describes the
contemporary situation in this way: (10)

The urgency of the problem for the states is shown by the

numerous state and national surveys of higher education that have

been undertaken in recent years and especially since the war.

Among the national studies have been those of the President's

Commission on Higher Education, the Commission on Financing

Higher Education, the Commission on Human Resources and

Advanced Training, and more recently, the President's Committee

on Education Beyond the High School. . . . Numerous of the states

have recently made statewide surveys, among them California,

New York, Georgia, Florida, Louisiana, Illinois and Michigan;

and nearly all of them have been concerned with the . . . problem

of the overall planning and coordination of higher education.

An examination of the recommendations made by several study committees
or survey teams reveals that there is no consistent pattern for meeting anticipated
needs. The conclusions of the surveys made in Illinois, Florida, Minnesota,
California, and New York may serve to illustrate:

In Illinois, the Joint Council on Higher Education authorized a study of
public higher education in that state. (Steiner, 32) The major findings and
recommendations were these: .

1. State institutions of higher education will bear the burden of educating
the college youth.

2. State support of junior colleges seems likely.

3. The junior colleges can assume the responsibility of immediate post-

high school education while the state universities can emphasize quality higher
education.

4. There should be an emphasis upon the development of junior colleges.

-- Also --

h’

 

  

3

5. There should be an emphasis upon the expansion of existing offerings
and functions.

6. There should be an increase in the building programs of higher education
institutions.

7. There should be either an expansion of existing institutions of higher
education or the buflding of new institutions of higher education in addition to
the development of new junior colleges.

Florida, too, has surveyed its needs in higher education. (Brumbaugh, 1)
The recommendations of the staff report are similar to those of the recommenda-
tions previously cited:

1. Florida institutions of higher education must seek ways to serve at least
three times the number of students served in 1955 in the near future.

2. Diversified programs of education must be developed.

3. Existing institutions of higher education must be expanded to enable
them to meet increasing demands and they must be adequately supported to
be able to continue to improve.

4. They must be realistic about the resources they can expect to support
the programs they want.

5. Community colleges must be developed.

6. Immediate steps must be taken to establish additional state degree-
granting institutions in the Tampa Bay area and the lower East Coast - and in
other areas when the necessity for them becomes apparent.

The Minnesota Commission on Higher Education also conducted a survey
of higher education needs. (23) This survey differs from the Michigan survey
in. that “Was done not by an outside state team but by members of educational
institutions of Minnesota. This group undertook studies of the setting of higher

educatiOn in Minnesota, of student potential, junior college education, liberal

.v-": "P ""“.9 "
g.- 1‘...:...... K2; .3... 11...}.

..... ........ .,,,. ;
xx." x... c! :

-...‘.

 

‘C-‘o‘... ,‘, . - .
- \ . ‘ ‘— -; .
~—-.~—.'..:, & . . “
' I---

 

 

\ -
~ A. .'
a.“ r ‘. ‘ .
-~‘.:‘ ..4 '
~§ ‘ “
firs “
.“'~, ‘..!- .
x‘h-‘ -.
A. 4 \‘
\
:t“'¢. ‘ ‘
‘-§ 2 ’..
~ _. .‘ .
‘ ’n-ftz l.
0
§::‘ ’4‘
h“. 0 ’5‘,
. o~o . ~.-.
“K
...c‘ l.
-.“'\-.
. . ‘ . _
. Q. ~\- ‘
‘ ;“ 0.
‘Q ‘
.
‘:
n. .“._. “
{.3 ‘:‘ . .,
s‘; " j.
w. ‘h .1
h u
"
.‘~.'.._~-~
'3... K.
! ~4- '-:.,
x-..o-V _
' u. \
a
‘.
.-..
\,. .y. ‘-
I e" ~,,
“\_ ~ ~ .
_ ‘H-;. u ‘
"_.i

.,\-
.. \
'8' -
.\=.J. ":
J -
C
. t‘kfi. -
." '5.
\:.. .. 1
‘. 'Q.
~ “.
MK .1.
Q ‘éfi
u-“ '-
.. A
‘\K ‘5 “"
. .-
o
“-‘E -‘.
:“|_;.
\ N .0
t. at t
\>- - .4.
‘a ...\
\u'.
‘EZ‘: ~‘-..
3“; ‘-.~ '
\.. c,
I ‘ ..—
_\' "\ “I
\:‘ N
in: ‘1
u'"\
“\ §~~
b‘N..
\- * io-'.
\: h!
n‘;\ c
b \‘
t -.
'0 [)‘I
‘ o
1“ ~
.“ .

 

  

4

arts education, teacher education, the University of Minnesota itself - and
the expectations for the future. It recommended, among other things, a
lower economic barrier for college admission (facilitated by increases in
scholarships especially), state aid to junior colleges comparable to state aid
to high schools, no establishment of new institutions of higher education until
all existing institutions are fully utilized, new regional junior colleges to
fulfill needs in educationally barren areas, new experimentations in educ a-
tion, and a revitalization of the programs of existing colleges.

California, too, studied its needs in higher education. (Holy, 13) Here
investigations were made into potential enrollments in publicly and independently
controlled colleges and universities and projected them from 19 54 to 19 55, 1960,
and 1965. It studied the possible physical expansion necessary to handle pro-
jected enrollments. It also investigated the function, the organization, and
I the educational progress of the junior colleges, the state colleges, the
University of California, and the independent institutions. It surveyed the
~ governing and administration of public education. It investigated the financing
of and the types of educational offerings of the four types - junior colleges,
state colleges, the university, and independent institutions.

Important recommendations were these: there should be no new state
colleges established before 1965. The potential enrollment should be cared
for by expansion of existing facilities. Enrollment projections should be
made to 1970 and then new decisions concerning new institutions should be
made. There should be no enrollment ceilings for state institutions. New
junior colleges should be created.

-A master plan survey team issued recommendations that went further than

didthe restudy. (21) In 1960, it made these recommendations:

_,.
' v
‘ O

.'-
1- ‘4
m- —

(«S
‘-

. .
. --~;’;‘.‘
“'5"

~5-fi'
. H Q‘

‘7‘. ‘4‘-

n-v‘

q f‘
- g. - 0.
‘~' \IJu-.x.-..J

 

Jfé,‘~'

N.‘..
“-4.3

 

 

  

5

The 50, 000 students who could be expected to enroll in the state colleges

and universities in 1975 should enroll in the junior colleges. Continuing this
practice would slowly reduce the numbers of undergraduates at freshman and
sophomore levels in the four-year institutions. Thus, the recommendations

of the restudy that no new four-year institutions be established tmtil adequate
junior colleges had been provided would be carried out, especially if recom-
mendations that already approved new state colleges open their doors to only
upper division undergraduates were followed.

The Heald Committee (9) in New York also made recommendations concom-
ing development of institutions of higher education in New York. Here emphasis
was laid not only on the development of two new institutions but also upon the
transformation of existing teachers colleges into libe ral arts colleges which
provided teacher training as part of their offering.

These surveys reveal that there is little agreement on how new institutions
of higher education should be established. For example, California has con-
tinuously’ established branches of existing institutions. Minnesota's survey
was conducted by in-state experts, and this suggests that the University of
Minnesota may favor the establishment of branches when and where new
institutions of higher education are to be established. New York has recently
converted the city colleges into institutions under the control of the state
system. When new institutions of higher education are established, the
decision must be made: is the new institution to be a branch of an existing
institution, or is the new institution to be an autonomous unit that is supported
by the state but is initiated by the community which it will serve? This study
examined in detail the establishment of an institution that was a manifestation
of the philosophy that branches were less desirable than separate institutions.

No- judgmsnt is made upon the wisdom of that decision. The arguments that

‘

.C -'.- '-\-~i . (2..., -
d. .k\A-:oju no... :-

0.- Us

. .u .
. . _ . _ .
\I’ ”‘Q } 9.0"y..~

"Uh 0‘ o.- o-oxo . u

-. au‘o- a... ‘
I; $1-7..3 C._ -‘t‘

--V‘” Ic- O I
uuw ‘5‘ “_.‘h‘
.

_‘ro.
-' ‘ I‘ -‘ u. ..
5K \ ~ 2 r:- ‘
'1- ~
"N ‘

U
5.: r
" ‘I-K “'.‘..v- _
y‘x é
‘. \
‘E-kfi'.» z..- ._.
.‘N.~.~. -- ‘.
‘
- t... ‘J
u‘ .
“flit . -_ -
-. -o~
D 4‘~.=. o.. ‘ ‘
G “
.O‘IO.
~.::."~- ' _ ..
\l l 93“ v. .
“‘bu‘“0<‘
U ‘ ~
I.“ ~
‘ (in.
“ u
ufl’flt a. .7
;.\_

.
(5..
\- .‘.
\‘55 3‘ 0‘. .
; "‘..t‘
A‘.‘
‘V.“\_ .
k
~ ‘:L;"‘ ‘
- ‘
‘A
\:
Q:‘\_
\;‘.
\‘d‘ :5"
L . A
‘ u Ht‘ ' .
V t
\
a“: ‘I", ,
V 5'-
~Q._'n ‘. .
- k~1‘ w
‘v
"
\~_\ ‘5 ‘
"H]-“u- :
. g \._‘.
Met. ‘
{_ -
\ .‘v ,
‘ .‘ ‘J 0‘
.. 3‘ 5‘
‘3 iv-
\‘ ‘
~‘Jh
\ -

N
~ -‘~..
‘4 4:”. .
k. b,
fit ’~.

0 ~ '\
‘_ -.‘
“b.

‘I
~.\}‘ . ‘
"' w
I“A ..
"‘~. u}. .
V‘ ~ '- s

‘ k
V,
'\h‘-.

5:}

 

 
 

6

made the decision firm are presented on pages 29 to31 . In years to

come, it will be interesting to see what the national trend becomes and what
the judgments that come to be made in the future have to say about each system
of establishing new institutions of higher education.

There. is a basic issue involved here: the issue of whether greater
centralization is desirable or whether greater dispersion of control is desir-
able. This issue reaches into many facets of institutionalized behavior and
intomany policy decisions that have to be made. It seems, of course, that as
events occur in a rapidly changing world, greater centralization will be
inevitable in state, national, international, and - looking ahead - cosmic
affairs. One universe as a concept that needs governing, regulating, legislat-
ing, and patroling will be a natural concept, possibly, in the mind of the citizen
of the not-too-distant future. Yet, the American dream of local autonomy will
not easily be dispelled. Sterling M. McMurrin, as resigning United States
Commissioner of Education, in a parting message in the February 16, 1963,
§ajurday Review, stated the case: "The point is that we do not want a mono-
lithic structuring of our educational establishment and program, for this would
destroy much of the basic pluralism of our culture which is the lifeblood of our
democratic institutions and way of life. " He referred to Federal control, but
the statement applies equally to centralized state institution control.

- The decision made here in the establishment of Grand Valley State College
has tremendous interest because it demonstrates the results of a decision
iii—favor of dispersion of control.

This study also tried to answer some of these questions:

~1.- How did- the community become aware of the problem?

“:2.” .7 Where did the support come from for the establishment of Grand Valley
State College?

4‘

04-.

 

£ "" l .
.._ 'p
“lint ..~: ttJ
I n
. -c—
'5 f- " o
I. u.‘ .33 3“ ;_.
t n. . .
1. ‘5‘“ '~ .. \hc- ‘
u'. b.“ _‘
' T
.;.~
" ‘“‘-‘r&h:3 «
I .
q i“. \‘- “ "q
3.. .-~'t~.' 3. -‘
' v
. ~
31‘.:.‘~'I"'l
“f“..fi.‘ I
—‘
.;~‘ ;. v .
.‘c: ““ n
«J! L O .
a I '
O a... 3|
‘._;_‘. -.
k D
ID“ ,~:'-. ..
I.
. . _ -
‘lx: -.‘. ' .
7 u..‘V~‘.‘. ..
~“H
A ’ g .
2‘ .
\u. - .
."'~" ‘2‘-
‘l 4--C."'" 4
— -. . . “‘4‘
‘.-\‘~‘ 0
.'o.‘ , ' . ‘
...:"L‘.“ 0‘
< ‘ 1 ’ V“ mg:
‘o
I‘ I
\z .5 p.
.m‘= W.-. - .
I , I 1 H v “A“: b.‘.lo-
n J
Y' ' F -‘ .3 1
“w“ ”‘- ""“" \, ‘.:
.".\"‘u.
a ‘.V
Nhi.‘.--
‘5 J I
' e
. 7 A 1 l _ A i ‘5
K. ' .
\-. .“..
‘ tn; .
l" J) ‘
‘~
_ M i
l . .
.~ : ‘
'~._: t...
Y ‘1'}.- _
. _ A, . . , ~ 3.
7.8. .
'\‘_’e\
'u.
~~‘. ‘- o
. I ¢ ‘1 ‘
i , -- .4 -. ‘ n
i . M
‘ \‘:.
~MI>~*‘-
‘4“-' .
A , _ -~ .
. a _
\-
\‘

~~'—‘
a. ‘1’-
\"T\Ԥ
0‘ . M4 ‘
r k N_ .
.‘_ “ I.
‘J‘.
.I
. ‘iv
,, .
31--.
\ ".-.
1 _ _ _ l
: wt. ..
._ 'I'
. N
\.._‘ -
\‘H‘
“-Q; I.
_ V - i _ I. Y‘
o J‘ A .
'- Ԥ"'..

‘ .- ‘
, i a- _ , I , ‘ ‘. s -
fl ' N. “b
\ ‘0; '
~. ‘1
‘Vt \. ' '-
“_‘h
__ . “‘ ‘.-“
. .
‘N‘w .
3' ‘x i '
. "1
.g . '4 .
“ \_ h
.’\.‘\‘
.\ - ‘
\2 1
«d __
I Q ~
”'3‘ e.
‘e

D
M
l

7'?

Where did the money come from? How was it raised?
' Who were the leaders ? What kinds of people are they?
How is a site gotten? I '
'What is the chronology of significant events ?

What mistakes were made? .

' "What conclusions can be drawn?

  
   
  
   
   
 
   
  
   
 
   
   

’ .- What implications are here for other communities?

Thisv'study did not presume to investigate motivations, to find secret desires,
to analyze fulfillment of psychological needs , to arrive at statistically determined
‘ - -analyses of socio-economic factors, or other specific, closely controlled,

_’

empirically determined facts. Rather, this was an attempt to produce a faith-
Mrecord of events that are unique, and to suggest by these facts a method

when others may solve problems of a similar nature, should they arise.

, :Procedure and Organization. Preliminary investigations into available

- ." maternal materials were made: newspaper'files, correspondence files, and
--. Sl'upchives that had been. gathered and maintained.

,73'actsfrom these sources, from interviews with principal figures in the

-. ”establishment, and from journals of the Legislature were gathered. Letters

’ idem information from individuals were sent whenever necessary. Minutes

1.

a vMineetings held were reviewed for facts whenever they were available. All

information was compared; in fact, wherever possible, several

.- 4‘; ‘ of identical events were sought for the sake of accuracy and reliability.

-. :W for accuracy was made by L. William Seidman, who was the
7' “.3.- . n- .. ~-
Z, 1- figure in the activities to establish the new college.

1:;-
-_-. 1.9
- "TN” .

NI.‘ - C.
' ‘r- -
ti

1,17; , did not happen concurrently. When several important

; duh eollected was arranged chronologically when several important

.\ og‘vi . -
' .

0‘ -‘
- ‘
~~~ .
‘ . s
. .
‘--- ‘
' h ‘ ,
s - .~
v. ‘- " .
-~ -
.— . g. ' .
0‘ - 5- . .
-‘ “v

.7 7a.

7 .. - .

v .o- “‘0‘ -d‘-e 0‘ In

gL-k—t-n‘ Add .01.... .
.

no". nua~6\t’.

0*“ n;l;~.‘t k' \ .. ..
\...~

‘9
Quit. I
f- ‘ I'.‘ v
4.. \p-~... ,
"h Jo ...:= I
a "“
'
\
‘ " o .
..' u “ ’ :F‘w‘ 9'
'h “4... -
‘b ‘t
k.‘ :5. ”.9— _
I." ‘5. .trt '5 '1
5-.
‘
‘
u. - ‘
‘e. P . “9‘ '
‘. .3 'W‘ Oil, % .4
“us

fld happen concurrently, each was recorded separately, but

   
   
   
   
  
  
  

I v"... .
'E "‘7’ We to concurrent events was made so the total picture of

J?

.1 """ jeeflld be kept in the mind of the reader.

'»- a hem the facts, recommendatinns for other commmities were made.
with the original committee to establish the college were made to

° 3% both crisis points and specific methods used to overcome hurdles.
3-’ . .

5!

from the interviews was compared with inferences drawn by
' '3", and were compared with apparent historical fact.
-_, is included a substantial appendix of copies of letters, papers, and

’ n -‘ nod by the principle figures in the establishment of the new college.
m and figures, where necessary for clarification of the text, are

Li.

the history, an analysis of the ingredients of success was made.

 

‘ I
‘ \ lac)
ilk
‘I _ s 2‘
.1.~
. .1;I.'\.rl 4

ac)

¢ no; ‘5
.s
.
.
" m
d m.—
.~J.t .

«9A

. A;
.O‘J

L . t i 1 1.1:- 1.... . _. 4318..
.L-. 1:11.” .1»- l
[Ln] 1‘. \v- ;.< I L x). -u I.
,. - Ln 1.3 .. L , ,.
.2 . t3“ 4 J ; J : L) n . I.
.‘ I‘iu sen-J- C Q ~ , .‘
H; -d VI‘J.‘ LA a-..) 3‘“; Ix. ILAUJA'
1 {Au r u ll .-~U i "H .
~; " U 1.3 .1 LL12 '7“ .1 l
A we; ,1»; at J? '; 1
c..i!.;l , -.’ «1 any :::5_
p“ . - .4 -1 , 4. , -. J
.L'll,’ \

Li

I;

CHAPTER II
THE SITUATION PRECEDING THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE CEFYC

That the efforts of a group of ten young men from Grand Rapids to establish
a new college in the Grand Rapids area would succeed was not a foregone con-
clusion in the fall of 1958. This group, who titled themselves the CEFYC
(Committee to Establish a Four-Year College, Table IV) was not the first to
attempt this, nor was it the first time that any interest had been shown in the~

higher education needs of the area.

The existing higher education facflities in the eight-county area. Already in

 

 

 

ezdstence in the eight-county area were these institutions of higher education:

--Calvin College and Seminary: a four-year liberal arts college and seminary
in Grand Rapids supported by the Christian Reformed Church.

--Aquinas College: a four-year liberal arts college in Grand Rapids supported
by the Catholic Church, Dominican Sisters.

--Hope College and Seminary: a four-year liberal arts college and seminary
in Holland supported by the Reformed Church in Americas

--Grand Rapids Junior College: a two-year community-junior college offering
pre-professional and liberal arts, and terminal curricula. (Grand Rapids Board
of Education) -

--Muskegon Community College: a two-year community-junior college
offering pro-professional and liberal arts, and terminal curricula. (Muskegon

Board of Education)
In addition to these liberal arts institutions, there are several

private. church-related institutions offering missionary and religious leadership
9

g. . ..
'-o .I- .Q j
.‘_.u A. b.-

.- V'A‘“- {0-
. r .-.-r . .-
.nb- .‘I-n- v

C ' ,

- J3; “IIan .0.

n-a- O’Dr‘-~ . 0-:
. .

 

Ir." .D- ”v ‘. . ‘; II-
---¢A .- § I o
no. :u.-... . t.“
A

 

‘..: --.§I<.. .. .__.' -
.s‘.‘\ “‘2..“H ‘
'I
l, u... ‘h-. -
tg‘“ , .__._ ..
-u.|t o. a |
- .N_~. v
4
o.
. .'_.‘- ‘
3 K r \i' , ‘
'- ' §~I~-»
‘ " . ‘ .
n.“~ _ a. h . ‘
C—\ Q. " 93:r--‘ . .
£...,,.“
‘-
‘I -
s..._ .
‘ h
'J‘l \ ’. J. " " ~
' ‘ o
c Q .5.‘ > 7“
-. .1
n
“
. , .
“u ‘
H‘:“i: ":t v;
. _.
k“..’_'
N
\ ‘.
" Q
3“ -~ " .-- 1 -
‘.5% I
O. . n
a
‘n.
\j "
"~q4 “‘
.tc . .. _h
..-._;‘. '.‘
~-u.\.
\ I \—,
s ' u - ' w-
8,; .hp ‘
&_ 3";‘0 "
a“ .g.
t
‘g- '-
‘5. .;‘-.
.A‘.. ‘ -‘
$-‘ t ‘ ~ ‘
~‘..
. M....-
‘_
\“ii'~'.
.
\.~::‘
~~
o
0"

. s. .
“J 'Ko .
A" a ‘. .
i:- u ..
‘. ‘ 0U!
\ ._‘
w;- ..
"J"; -'~‘ '.. -
Jl . .._
u N . ‘
‘\ _-\.
\T\ . .
\”x -
‘ §
‘ F
I"
I “t ‘I‘-
‘ M.‘.‘Q " I
K . .-
. \‘ ‘
"t;‘\-
‘: .
‘ol ’
Q“:::. .
¥
K “ ~.
',‘\
“:‘
$1 ' s
\t 3._. ._
:- »..
‘:'~' “3 i
4\;:.\
s
.' a
‘vi‘
‘ "m :
\ -‘ ,\.~| S
\:'~--:~
~ \~\--~z b
\2 .. \ C)
\t‘4. \ \.
‘q‘:‘. -‘ ‘-
u. _1‘ ‘;
h ‘ n
t L2"-
. ‘I

1-0

   
  
  
   
   
  
   
  
  
   
  
  
   
 
 
   
    
 

. . training, and two business colleges. The two largest of the religious institutions
'- site the Wealthy Street Baptist Church institution and the Grand Rapids School
of Bible and Music, both of which are in Grand Rapids. In 1961, Grace Bible
College opened its doors in Wyoming City. Also, a business college, Davenport
Institute, has prospered in Grand Rapids for over three decades, as has
Muskegon Business College. 'in Muskegon.

The two large institutions, Michigan State University and the University
df‘flifihigan, have maintained extension centers in the Grand Rapids Junior
Bellege'bufldings for several post-war years. These centers offer a variety

- ot'graduate and under-graduate courses. Also, Western Michigan University
liaia'Division of Field Services Center in Muskegon. All three universities
oflfer' courses at different places at different times depending upon demand
thionghout the area. Aside from the private and community colleges and the
university utension courses , the public four-year colleges nearest the Grand
Rapids area are Western Michigan University, fifty-five miles south of Grand
Rapids, Ferris, sixty miles north, and Michigan State University, sixty-five
piles southeast.

V E311 activity connected with gghjr education i_n_ t_h_e Grand M £29;-
Onecalt paint to at least two and possibly three early movements to create a
public institution of higher education in the Grand Rapids area in the middle

I
I ,
U L-

.- 5i :- one by the Grand Rapids Board of Education and one by a Michigan

‘i

“University alumni group; and possibly, one by a University of Michigan

11,...”

. . .' . group, the details of which are not documented here except in incidental

' (The. Grand Rap—EBaard__ of Education activities. Dr. Jay Pylman, Deputy

‘.“.‘ '

F--'.

 

. ~ — -t of the Grand Rapids Public Schools, stated in an interview in

3 '1.

g'ec‘ - _
.;?-’

, -_ ‘u... -1
._ . .
a- . ,7 :
_" s 4
‘ ‘ f
O
L' '5‘ '

"" né-ooi

a 4' of '
lu—' a0~ ”b ‘5‘-
A

 

 

"‘- '
«u- " ‘
~... g ‘
* «1.3.5. .
‘ a
"
“
a Li} o. .‘_..‘ v_ ‘ '
. ‘rn.’.;3t «v o.
a . _.. ‘
Q
-..':‘3"— ' -
K 0
‘u”_..,“: '. ’F; £.
-‘ ‘.. _. ‘
‘1
o
~v.‘ . -
~"-~.""-~{- ‘ ._.
c..- p .
«A. > .
9H.
_-
-‘t'~-
"K “" n
-‘h.‘ ' 1“-
.g‘:‘ P.'I~
. . '
§:\..‘
~M. 5‘ Us.-{ .. '
‘ .
r‘U‘M :- ‘, in
g. I
t. .
s-‘
\‘4 1' '.
u g... f..- ~.
\‘5 -. 0.
d I. . _ ‘
““
O
' .
\ u ..
-.‘ ‘,
~du ‘
H “C S“ o. ‘
I
3‘
._. ~‘
~‘n 9 .
' “t“- s
' _13¥1,,
‘- a '
1. I
\. ‘ "5
f‘.
‘ .
~J::‘-.‘- '
. .a' 9. 1‘ ‘
Q
" u
‘\\
‘K
.g ".
s . ‘\ E o
.5
”“1 1 .
i \
.“\ "
'._ s .
\f-.‘
‘fifi'n‘;
n~ r. ‘4 i
'k.‘
“x ’.
\“ .
-.7‘.
' “; V
\. 1"“... 4
.k...‘ ‘
I “ g“
‘on- "

 

11

January , 1963, that the Board of Education's interest in higher education

had its roots in a survey of Grand Rapids needs for education called the

SOS (save our schools) campaign made in the late 1940's and early 19 50's.

The Board found that a massive building and expansion program was needed.
To provide for the booming enrollments , many new elementary schools were
built, and as the age cohorts grew, junior high schools were provided and

high school facilities were expanded. The Board was aware that higher educa-
tion needs would also have to be met, and in 1956, 1957, and 1958 began to
take steps to provide for these needs.

It was reported in the April 3, 1956, edition of the Grand Rapids Press
that the Grand Rapids School Board expected to study the needs for higher
education in the Grand Rapids area. Robert Tubbs of the Board stated: "We
are in the best position here to determine what is needed. " He stated that
Lansing (Michigan State University) or Ann Arbor (University of Michigan)
should not make the study without the Board's knowing what was happening.

He stated that the Board's physical facilities would be available for meetings
and public hearings, that community support would be enlisted, that citizens'
advisory groups would be solicited for help, that records would be kept,
recommendations would be made, reports would be issued, and requests for
appropriations deemed necessary would be made by the Board after its survey
of needs.

Consequently, Dr. John E. Tirrell, then Dean of the Grand Rapids Junior
College, was appointed by the Board as a consultant to the Special Committee
on Higher Education to study the need for a publicly supported four-year
college in Grand Rapids. Dr. Jay Pylman in a conversation in January, 19 63,

confirmed the newspaper reports that contained the above information.

 

.1 u
an
4...: c
.. L
a in o o
.h w.‘
n. NJ.
.I 1.0-
a.” ,n.
Y. m“
a . .n
_ m .u

Aw

0"
h..“‘
C

p

'0.
.o.

o.

9
“vi

2"? ‘
a."

nur‘”
a-“

I

'1‘.
. O
nan-D-

t

v .
‘V§. . 3‘
. ..
u in
. ...: PM
Va Po .
.t ... .«h
_ o

. ‘

C

.
out.

C
u

v
.‘..
I
I
‘.

 

‘V.-

;
“
o.
"
"
‘0
vs-

1:

«has

C
k
yd

M. 5‘.

_ . -‘-
v
'~.‘~

w-s ._.
"--.‘

‘1
"c ed A

 

fi-,
50

' ‘t. .‘
. , "n I
.‘

- ~
“ k...

t..
Q~H

.3
.W\

\ .-
. ‘ .
. ¢
:. .3.
.‘ Q
a a
u...“ .o
‘ M .1.“
.'§ .
... ... x
a. .85
. .
.\ \w
.. .J
. .V \ x
‘ .Q. ‘W- at

.i . .. n .
3‘s .\ \ es
.s C.
J‘q e h a .-
H‘ ‘K .t I
St OIMI ‘ a b k
1‘ a. .J .t
s .1. e
«5 in. 4a fa
a s as . 5 LW
I d. ..
1..- ... .
I .FJ .5
‘
_...\ r e\ a .
.K. u ~ .
o u n I
e.u . n s at. p
«a s \ \\ es
\ ... . .

 

 

  

12

Tirrell's report was prepared in April, 1956.

When asked about his activities concerning the new college, Tirrell, in a
lower dated February 6, 1963, gave this information: (1) In October, 1955,
he had presented a paper to the National Office Managers Association at their
annual spring dinner in Spring Lake, Michigan. Here he said that he had
indicated that a four-year college was definitely needed in the area. (2) He
said in his letter that he had presented a paper before a group at the Park
Congregational Church in Grand Rapids in which he stated that any new college
in the area would enroll 10, 000 students by 1970. (3) Tirrell stated that as a
result of these activities : the fact that Calvin College was going to move to a
new campus in the near future, and the agitation being made by the University
of Michigan alumni group to establish a medical school in Grand Rapids, he
produced his report for the Grand Rapids Board of Education.

(Just at this time Senate Concurrent Resolution Number 2 of the Regular
Session of 19 56 continued the Legislative Study Committee on Higher Education
to study needs of Michigan's higher education. (See page 19 ). This study would
culminate in the Russell Report (pages 18 to 32 ), a report which would have
tremendous influence in determining the educational opportunities for thousands
of yet unborn children in Michigan and the eight—county area.)

Tirrell reported to the Grand Rapids Board of Education in November, 1956,
that a four-year college would be needed in the Grand Rapids area to serve from
4,000 to 10,000 students by 1970. The Special Board Committee decided in
November, 1956, to meet with educators from the Grand Rapids area to discuss

these needs. It stated in the November 13, 1956, edition of the Grand Rapids

 

Herald (now defunct) that the Special Committee expected to have a report ready
for the full board of education as well as for the area legislatures by January,

- 1, 1957. The tentative plans were to probably expand Grand Rapids Junior

‘

 

 

I..- ‘
"n... .0 1 ~ N'. 1...
.. ”‘1. N .-
.‘-...' . ..
-~-¢~. air-:5 l:
In

Eo-w;u;‘., .
§--§|‘~.t “ .1? ...
~ u.. _,

2;. F.- -.. ~
In... a . ‘ -
F..~.‘:. a? ‘0
4c...
.
.V
'o
s. -., . .
In‘h-C , 3‘3
; n
\. .
a'.;l.‘.' _...
.. . , .- __ _ ‘
“‘rwb 4:11 1
’-‘\.
.. --‘

s n- 'v,
M.J ‘ - a
‘0‘} .a at.
‘1
a
I.
i .~ t.,
M LI...".Q
a ”:‘n .
fl
‘«
.fih...
'\-;'-1.
”*e.\ ~. ‘
e ‘K. .p,‘ ,
4“ .
‘Q

I“
z!

1
;.
"K_
. '\
“a!
'5
._‘ _
‘Ht 1‘..
‘J_";, -
s '3 , -
~ I.
.
.1
q o
JO e
I. . Z- ‘a
‘II .JN‘I‘
. .
. 3O.“ .'- _
‘. \
h .3
\_.
.. .
\‘ -._.
~ _ .
\xn‘ -L
" b-
\ re 'v—
-‘Nt t
Q.
..'~
~ '-
“ ‘
4".-
-~ K-.. ‘
H“ 5 ‘
‘ o “‘1‘ ‘
‘ \
\\‘.‘.
.. .“
‘- \ ‘0. ..
\.‘ .‘
u .“ .. .
. ‘3 04
a \ ‘1
x. {L- ,o.
a l.
1“
‘R‘ 0‘ .
r ‘ a"
\\‘\_>\ 1
\~ '5‘
C
“. ‘
4 .--,
'v b
‘ t‘ .a ‘1
".. _ kt]
.“_"
n ; ‘
x.‘ .4
KoJul.
\\~~:‘
J" '4‘...
“‘ . .
"‘h t
\‘1-

13

‘ . m

  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
   
 
  
   
  

.711 fits“: a four-year, city-supported college. Benjamin Buikema, super-
We! the Grand Rapids School System, is reported in the November 14,
m: 6mm Press as stating that the Special Board Committee had

U I “1.0,b» v

M the need, that the facts of the needs would be known to everyone in the

0.0'.‘ ‘

«nullity, and that city control compared favorably with city control of other
W colleges in the comtry. And in October, 19 57, Buikema stated at
a conference between the Special Board Committee on Higher Education and
tires legislators, Senator Perry Greene and Representatives Andrew Bolt,
., Edward Bergman, and Thomas Whinery that he foresaw a four-year college in
the Grand Rapids area in a reasonable length of time. It would, he said,
‘e‘eme about in one of four ways:

- 1. It could be an independent institution supported by the State.
. . 2. ‘It could be a branch of an existing State institution of higher education.
3. It could be an institution supported cooperatively by the State, by the

-x'.

- Grand Rapids Board of Education, and by a wide community base.
. 1, '

Q

4. It could be a city college supported entirely by the Grand Rapids Board
QIEducation.

In

_. : (fl‘he'above was reported in the Grand Rapids Pressg October 4,1957.)
. 0‘ D2. Jay Pylman confirmed the abovein the January interview. He
Mashed the point that although difierent individual members of the Board
"' “Education may have been prejudiced in favor of one or another of the exist-
m’ M institutions establishing a branch in Grand Rapids, depending upon
1. End allegiance, the total Board's position was never one that favored
t.) -' . s . over another. He stated that one of the Board members had

seine independent surveying of area needs, and that there was some con-

to :9?

{the minds of some area citizens that the survey done by the individual

5 ‘_..£ "

‘ “715!» . ,,
' a”: --

A;

v" .
"at ‘-
v \-

,.
. ‘ . -
Ce "
. 4—,
-.‘~“- . - -
5-5 . , ’
\fi" l‘-
‘ ".-

. .
hr - I
is." nwzw" ‘
..:-olol‘.‘- ed one-g:

‘ "' has ' . .'
.z. ' .. m: " "
~- is “L k L:
"'-lv. '
, 59‘ a..- ‘
I a
a Ju..;.,= '2; s.
.1
‘ . J 0.. ‘
.. ‘L ~J ‘A‘ 3‘ . .1
‘N

‘.
‘.

a J‘_-
\n 5. ¥
‘ -
'i. \ g u.
'\ H“
_‘l . q
w- ‘
§ ‘ V
A “.
\ \‘
t w. “
k . ~ 'I.
n -k‘ -
. ..
. ." ‘ .
\.-.“ l “
' n 1

14 7

   

was Board sanctioned, but that subsequent events minimized that person's
activities. Pylman also stated that the Grand Rapids Board was fully in
support of providing higher education facilities for the Grand Rapids area.

He stated that Benjamin Buikema, superintendent, and L. William Seidman,
the chairman of the CEFYC, had spent many hours in conference, and that
many tabulations and statistics produced in the J amrich ijort were provided
by and tabulated by the Board facilities and personnel. He stated that because
of the urgent need for elementary, junior high, and high school facilities, the
Board had delayed action on higher education needs until the mid—fifties despite
their knowledge in 19 50 that the population growth would make greater higher

education facilities absolutely necessary in the sixties.

Events surrounding the Michigan State alumni group's movement. Harold
W. Rockwell, Chairman of a Committee for a Four—Year College for Western

Michigan in 1958, stated in a telephone interview (December 17, 1962) that he

 

and the Michigan State University alumni group actively worked to establish

a four-year branch college in the Grand Rapids area during the'19 57 -19 58

    
   
   
  
   
   

period. The group's main arguments were presented before various service
clubs and business and professional groups at this time. Their efforts went

.' to the point of their securing a resolution by the State Board of Agriculture
that a one hundred-acre site, the Graham Experimental Station gmmds just
west of Grand Rapids, would be made available for the purposes of a branch
college of Michigan State University should the Legislature approve and
should there be sufficient interest on the part of the people in the Grand Rapids
area. In the arguments presented in support of the branch, mention is made"
of statistics concerning enrollment ratios, desirability of a branch over a

separate institution, and why it should be a branch of Michigan State University.
(Bee Appendix I.)

.‘

 

 

5—-

-.04- ."’

v7 .
t--'f

u. ‘
'.-__ oe-
I‘§ ‘ .

.1311...“

 

‘

1
b
u

a at“.

9' I
,.a’ 3‘

«‘3‘

’5

”-r
.0...-

..:..‘<' )3 '3; K‘C

.0.
h‘

.4

-

..
OI...

.-
..—e
b
no.

4 o

‘0.

|

ah

i a"
~ ‘

-.
§
‘0

Ig‘ ‘

15

Included in the group that advocated a branch were L. William Seidman,
Robert Van Ess, and Robert Watkins. It will be seen later that their beliefs
on the wisdom of a branch changed. Dr. Melvin C. Buschman, then Director
of the Michigan State University Continuing Education Center at Grand Rapids,
Michigan, stated in a conversation concerning the matter of Seidman's CEFYC
that because of the recommendations of the Russell Report concerning branches
and because of the possible impending battle for a branch between Michigan
State University and the University of Michigan, Seidman and his committee
decided to strike out for an independent State-supported institution of higher
education. That there was a definite change in thinking on the part of the CEFYC
principals, several of whom were active in seeking a branch, is apparent from
an examination of another information item distributed to principal citizens
and groups in the eight-country area.

This information item which was used to educate area citizens on the need
for a new-college consisted of fifteen questions and answers. The series of
questions and answers used before the change from advocating a branch to
advocating a separate institution is the same as those found in Appendix II
with this exception. Answer number 10 in the series that was distributed
urging a branch gave three locations where branches of the state universities
should. be established (or are established). It stated: "Of the three studied,
Saginaw seems to offer somewhat the best potentiality of service to a large
number of students, and Grand Rapids also seems to afford the possibility of
developing a degree-gram ing institution that would serve a fairly large popula-
tion group. " In the margin of one copy of these original questions and answers
is ink "get new figures. "

The answer to question 12 is also different from the question 12 found in

Appendix II. On the series originally used to urge a branch, answer 12

so... '.‘!\.,. F

. . , .
r .l
u ;-5 A: ~- » d I‘
- ' 0' - I
37‘"... ‘C 7 o-‘\
nun-.- n.‘ --.b~o ..
.
. "
...‘-... ._.h
It be . .
~' xn‘t . . . '
“fir =.~,~o. . 'o
”kn-u. unbu'
.

I‘I' \ '.'.(4 "‘ -- I -‘
-"~- _n-d int, 35‘...
.‘.V I :;‘;c 0" . n O. I
‘9‘ _‘.~ 1 ~h1‘t- ‘
a

C
e .
h .
v" ' '*' 9.
~.._. a .
“‘5‘. q‘L:“ .'..“

.“‘ ~ 90 v
‘ i. _ ~
’.
c“-fi;-
' "‘" "Ti 2293»- .-
' x.
‘J h.
‘* :a:):‘.‘;~'.1 ' .
.“ t LJ.
N‘_
u.
\j .-3" '.,
.a\J"I:;;-§ ., .
w

.133 ‘.
£31..
v“:s R F-
' t..." \'
Tye .
II§ “A.‘
A.
"“4: 19.».
3 ‘ --
3., ’.
.\‘~ ’2
A
t‘ . 1~
‘4‘?! .
‘w2L 7P ‘;
N “4‘, C
'n

' ‘ %.2‘ ‘0
C. !
:\, ».
\f; ._.v .
‘ a. Hn‘L
. Xq-r ‘14 ._
h. “ ....
Vs ..
1‘, 5.3\
‘ -
\l' "‘-1' n
.t“ ‘_ M‘-
). 9’ ‘:
Vi‘. \_‘ .4
\2 C
‘ 3%. ~—_
stifle—“L .
;§‘\ ~ \e'.‘t. “:
\‘ .
“I; -( t
\ 4‘ Er“,
' “$42? .. .
‘I' 's f-‘é
is“. -‘d'
’3»;
‘ 352.
Q “in“.

16

  

(flutes: "MSU has agreed to make available a 100 acre site on M50 west of’
Grand Rapids for establishing a branch in this area. This ideal location
would readily serve . . . ."

Further, question 14 originally stated, ”What is the situation at MSU
(which is inked out) and other (here "state" is inserted) institutions ?"
It can be seen that question 14 in the copy in Appendix Ii is not aimed to
refer specifically to MSU, but to the enrollment of both major universities.

These fifteen questions and answers are based upon information gotten
from the Russell Report, the report made to the Michigan Legislative Study
Committee on Higher Education. It is clear that the Governor and the
Legislature were aware of the agitation for a new college in the eight-county
area. For on April 1, 1957, the Grand Rapids Press reported that the
comments of Coloma Senator Robert E. Faulkner, who had talked about
financing university construction, were'welcomed by William J. Schuiling of
the Michigan State University alumni committee to establish a four—year.
college in Grand Rapids and by Fred Vogt, chairman of a Grand Rapids

. Citizens' Committee on Medical Education. They saw hope for their ideas

to borrow on anticipated student fees to build schools. ' And on April 5, 19 57,

Senator Charles R. Feenstra stated, according to a Grand Rapids Press

report, that he would support legislation for Michigan State University to

establish a branch in the Grand Rapid s area. In October, 1957, the State

Legislative Study Committee released a news bulletin that new four-year

institutions of higher education were needed near Grand Rapids, Pontiac,

Dearborn, Flint, and Saginaw. They cited the Russell Report's statements
concerning the geographical distribution of students according to the contiguity

0! institutions of higher education. Governor G. Mennen Williams, at a Michi-

  

an Association of Osteopathic Physicians and Surgeons banquet in October, 1957 ,

 

 

  
 

» vs -
9‘... fl...-‘-a .- .v i‘

i h In.

Jad‘vo‘li. In? -

t

‘u.

 

.
. » o n p
t. v 4 .
“on {$.a‘noauto. ‘§\ - o A.

..

.
.IF.
‘.
a“.

F u

 

Q '.
. - .
" 1' \' ,.

ls Fens—o“. ., g...
-

 

I III ' -

.‘~.~.- .¢ --1 - h-un Lenn-
-u I v\ .' ~ . .
Nun-s1. sum...” .6 Logo-hue.

c'
u.
v '.
. . .' _.

.- .. I, F -.
’0“.~ It. £.‘.‘.'\“ ‘
.:._ -~. .. . ‘ ‘

. r-n 2’ "~ ;q. o.
Nu-M..- .’ _‘ V}. ..t ‘
‘., _ cl-

:..__: ' “. .‘ 'z 0; e

I. d- .

\ ‘ J .‘:~A§('.‘

 

‘A V.
.3493”. _ ,_ _
..~-.‘:‘\ . ~ -1
- .~Q-A.‘J
‘ ‘1
.:; 'O ‘m;‘ In
.-.._. u t. F...
‘ “‘....-
a
-2.“ ,
‘h 'h ‘ 'y
\~J .. ‘3’
"- 5‘ '-
O.
\ I
‘."~; .‘.'
.'-~ .0 "' .
“‘d‘ .“e 9‘
H‘_‘
o
3: ‘
' H
‘5‘: ~ v
“to; 05:: O- ..
u.‘
‘ u
.“.
‘\a;éb‘ .
. o- _
fie- ". ‘.
‘ne'd

 

:4

 

-r
e. “- ‘
.1, a.
~‘z ' , _
"u ‘,, .
‘.,J,- .-
‘\
'\' .Y .
. *x I
\i’ ‘1. ‘ "
\ 'e .u ,
.\. s. .
Q L_
..‘~-
\fe.."
‘ -‘t-a\ ‘
. &‘ .~
‘fh'; . “'§
" I“ H
'-L. , _. _
‘o ‘.
Ԥ -sfi
h‘.

  

  

17

stated that Grand Rapids was the logical site for a new four-year institution

 

of higher education, according to the Grand Rapids Herald of October 3,
1957. .

Both. Michigan State University and the University of Michigan were in the
process of establishing branches in 1957 and 1958-- Michigan State University
at Oakland and University of Michigan at Dearborn. The advocates of establish-
ing a_ branch were heartened and optimistic about their chances when the news

of the establishment of these branches was made known. The Grand Rapids

 

133383 in 1957 reported that both Presidents, John Hannah. of Michigan State
University and Harlan Hatcher of the University of Michigan were still
interested in establishing a branch at Grand Rapids. I

Tirrell in his February, 1963, letter, stated that as late as 1959, because
of a million dollar gift, one of the major institutions was attempting to change
he decision to make any new institution in the Grand Rapids area an independent
one. Tirrell stated that this information was not made public. Yet, he said, it
did indicate the tremendous desire of the large institutions to establish any new
college as a branch. Tirrell, in 1959, was an official in the alumni relations
'office at the University of Michigan.

Tirrell also stated this: that on a personal basis he had counseled L.
William Seidman, Richard VanderVeen and others that should a four-year
college is established, it should not be a branch. He saidthat prestige,
accreditation, and an immediate faculty supply would not compensate for the
risk of cutbacks should legislative appropriations become lean. Tirrell stated
that just this happened in 19 57 or 19 58 when reduced legislative appropriations
caused both Michigan State University and the University of Michigan to threaten

curtailment of plans for their branches at Oakland and Dearborn, respectively.

A

 

.‘r. £2: 04-;- Parsil ant :.

.1; ......

. 'r'. . ._ -~l .
........'_:..:hsf‘t hint

 

 

 

-\
$“:a n.‘ ., h c
C I.
“—1.3: CL! lC 31°.
. r.
0-i‘
h ‘ ‘
..
~--(. ‘51 31.:“"n . .1
"5 his
I. \.
O. "‘ , I
'N_ .I . -
Q )_r 0'. ‘~ .~
“w
‘0..~ ,._
. ‘| '. 5-.
‘K. ‘. :. - ~‘
at. *:~)‘.:; I .3
" o
.
“ .'
n‘:.-
w

."
or. \ o‘
\ <-.‘ .
I z.
.\ .'-
N‘s.
'H
.“
\‘. V

 

18

The Russell Report. Because of its tremendous influence upon forming

 

decisions that were made concerning the new college, the findings of
Dr. John Dale Russell and his team in their survey of higher education needs
in Michigan are here reviewed. From these findings the movement to
establish a new college in the Grand Rapids area stopped its milling, and
Seidman and the CEFYC set upon a firm course to establish a new independent
college. '

In 19 55 the Michigan State Legislature adopted the Senate Concurrent
Resolution Number 30. This legislative action created a joint committee to

consist of five members of the House and five members of the Senate.

(Table I)

Table I. Joint Committee to Study Michigan's Needs in
Higher Education

 

 

Senators Representatives
Don Vander Werp, chairman Allison Green, vice chairman
Frank Beadle Charles Boyer
Patrick Doyle Arnell Engstrom
Edward Hutchinson ‘ John Penczak
Carlton Morris Frank Williams

 

 

The purpose of creating this committee was "to study and recommend ways and
means whereby the increasing needs of the state for higher education may be '
met in the most effective and economical matter." (Russell, 30-VI, VII)

The legislature authorized 25, 000 dollars for expenses entailed in this study.

A
O'L "t'-'.:'

-\O§ .. I

v v
--~.. ‘..-.. “0“ 7 .‘
IOO:I0.. .JJtnddsv ‘At {Kg -.

e» to.

' ‘0
. . . . .
?- .'- his: 2.)?!

I“ .0 - I.» «Iv-i
. . ‘. -. .

o , ‘ ‘f \
0‘1... obey-0d“ .- . ‘noi'

3:23:35}: ~.

..'..- 3
fwd-A -» .

‘ . . '
.. .. . -. ‘
to... il a c, t p t
7" “ff“ “‘1an ~r1
.
‘.u.
to 4
q, -. . l

w
" “no
I, _
l‘. . ‘\ N~~.oo
a m»J.....,‘..(o_‘
N
‘Ifi,
. A” -
". "Qe.
. - ““"“§4 ,k 1‘ _
‘V M .
e
-‘w‘
\:..‘ -O»," ‘- .
"'N~\§L 32‘“ —..
L I! “ “.
~§

N. .
3“ 3': “y‘.‘ 1“:L
"':x_ ‘ V-‘JYLJ‘- . .
“I: in: . ‘5 a.
if ~: . t u.
“s - _ “~33
-\ ' p , ..,
dz; “ax 13“: e; u
N‘ 3"» . T“ v.
“E16,,
t‘

19

The Senate Concurrent Resolution Number 2 of the 1956 legislative
session continued the existence of the joint committee and appropriated
50,000 dollars more to assist in continuance of the study. . Senate Con—
current Resolution Number 36 of the 1956 legislative session added the
balance of the original 25, 000 dollars appropriation that was not spent.

Also, upon application by the joint committee, the W. K. Kellogg Foundation
made a grant of 86, 000 dollars for use in the study of Michigan higher
education needs. (Russell, 30-VI, VII)

This joint committee, called the Michigan Legislative Study Committee
on Higher Education, appointed ten citizens of Michigan who were not
directly connected with any institution of higher education in Michigan. These
citizens made up what was called the Citizens' Advisory Committee on Higher
Education. (Table II)

(The members of this committee, it will be seen, are all high in socio—
economic status according to scales referred to in the last chapter. The
implications of this fact will be considered in Chapter m)

The ForWard in the Preliminary Report (30) sets forth the commission
and the responsibility of the Citizens' Advisory Committee as stated by the
Legislative Joint Committee.

The Legislative Committee recognizes the necessity of

providing adequate opportunities for an increasing number of

young people who will be wanting to continue their education in

the years immediately ahead. There is no question that the

burden of providing adequate support for the facilities of higher

education will increase and it is hoped that an equitable distribu-

tion of this load through public and private enterprises and at
local and state levels can be encouraged.

.. v? '
.& ~z

tat- II. Cruz:

 

‘-

R_.

 

.-..';:' 1r. PIE-$113.21. .\'..

 

' a
12 3.1.1. PW“; "' '
~ ‘I oealr~ub 5‘
I "
r. 3 ”no
-.... an it... . ~
. a '-
. h... o
" iv; .p.—.. L.
"" g ton..-.~.-..l
$ “.. .
- . ' -
K‘s-C0 \_C' Prv“ ‘..
w. .v
.D L';"= ‘ ‘
-s. ‘
Fat~.." ‘r‘fi‘. "
e r us
35-1. .
-H

'5'
"N. I--.'
‘ a “'
o-l ’ H
' _ w. \. 'uv-
.. V H,‘ 9:. '
"' n ‘. ‘ ‘
- p. ‘
h“:‘ I
S
v:‘ ‘
\‘u . ‘-

20

Table II. Citizens' Advisory Committee on Higher Education

 

 

George Dean, President, Michigan Federation of Labor, Lansing.
S. D. Den Uyl, President, Bohn Aluminum and Brass Corp. , Detroit.

Merritt D. Hill, Manager, Tractor and Implement Division, Ford Motor
Company, Birmingham.

Benjamin Levinson, President, Michigan Mortgage Corporation, Detroit.

W. D. Merrifield, Director of Industrial Education, Chrysler Corporation,
Detroit.

Stephen S. Nisbet, Vice President, Publications, Gerber Products Company,
Fremont.

Stanley M. Powell, Legislative Counsel, Michigan Farm Bureau, Ionia.
Don Stevens, Education Director, Michigan 010 Council, Grand Rapids.

Robert L. Taylor, Secretary-Treasurer, State Mutual Cyclone Insurance Co. ,
Lapeer.

James M. Ver Meulen, Vice President, American Seating Company, Grand
Rapids.

u-o-q""'.‘\1t Inn .0' 3

I
.'.._-v a'.» ad. s v””"‘: ' fl .-
C

. _‘- R ‘ '
.0. "' '

n—nts‘u I‘ll 3‘. '1' -J‘L‘t :.
:I‘:-:‘ 4*: ‘ 3f \‘. ‘h. - t- .A. "

[n.tufl‘mo .

ynuq

.25-; u. Exezm'c Sn; r-’

 

3;: - ‘--
n .-'—I. ..-:-‘.:'3&-i:. 3.; 1:“ is..-

-
1.0.9 ‘ .
.332 ‘ in
Email h....r‘.r-|.‘~.= s‘t ~

u

- . ‘

" '. ‘w ‘.I' ‘1‘. .:n Q" l “‘ . ‘

.‘s It “I 9.. Ab .’d‘ 2 A a L U -4. t.
I

~

'0'-

n

. ~”.“ - ‘w- :9

-... ‘.o“ a ." '
“- ~03 cult:

L. «saga In. .1

I.- bqu- " ""LL

.-
'yld¢as so s.

‘
9‘ ‘. v.» I
~. .- ....-, :- ‘
\ -._‘_.: “Fla-0.
§ ' 54.x...“ J. 9“. h
\\ “- '
I
‘.
..\*5
Q.'
~ 'Q. in: F' :1. '0.-- h
‘\ “ la... ' r L ""
‘ h.“ I- ' .4
-...,

. mix-3- 1553.11 2 ‘ ..
T\;;“ j" , . ‘
rhmt “ - '
“' {£244,- 9
"925‘; “.5 .'
u. ‘ - . .
£21013, - _.
g ‘Q..'
\ vuk‘fl " :
I ‘- “Am "!
. r.‘ .
‘i‘ \E.
H ‘J‘ “. \
n J a.
‘ msalir.s
.\.' “"‘bt' ‘
\k “L? '
c-‘. )1 m
t 52.1: -
\r‘ -c s fi'.i ‘
\K“

\_‘ -
h‘)~ ::;h ‘.
warran
. “’5 a?"
. ‘H S i“
"a. V. ‘ I
“':“I' W
‘8“! -
JJ~3. gm
0 - ' I ‘
A '~‘ t}-
;1... ~ .9. ..*
.‘. :1-\ . ‘

21

Acting upon this commission and responsibility, the Citizens' Advisory
Committee hired Dr. John Dale Russell as director of a survey of higher
education needs of Michigan. At the time of his appointment Dr. Russell was
Chancellor and Executive Secretary of the New Mexico Board of Educational
Finance. His was a part-time responsibility. His full-time assistant was
Dr. Orvin T. Richardson of the faculty of Washington University of St. Louis.

Thus began a comprehensive survey of the needs of Michigan in higher educa—
tion. The survey findings led ultimately, among other things, to the establishment
of Grand Valley State College as an independent institution.

There are fourteen publications resulting from the reports of the survey. In
addition to Russell's Preliminagy Report _to_ the Michigan Legislative Study Com-

mittee (a Higher Education, there are twelve staff studies and the Final Report

 

31 the Suwggol Higher Education __i_n Michigan.

The preliminary report by Russell (30) examines certain aspects of the higher
education picture in Michigan, 3g; , Michigan's economic resources and growth
compared with the rest of the nation's; Michigan's population and enrollment
figures compared with the rest of the nation's and with the North Central States,
Production of bachelor's, . master's, and doctor's degrees of Michigan compared
With the rest of the nation's and with the North Central States, the role and
function of the legislature and of the department of public instruction in higher
edUCation administration and control in Michigan.

Russell (30-3) states that the average of the personal income of the citizens
Of Michigan was 17. 6 per cent above the average personal income for the
nation, and that the 6. 18 per cent of the national total of Federal personal income
tax was higher than would be expected from the Michigan population ratio of the

total United States population. Russell (30 ~4) mentioned, incidentally, that the

. .
.I-. "v 11" -
l-u non..-“ ," .

9- nv"‘ “
..
ML»..: .

uv'

. D
.u‘h“‘- ‘.

Z’

 

..'. . 4
‘11.

'__-
L...

u-‘
K1,.

I ~u‘.’

22

amount the Federal government collected in taxes on alcohol, 92, 27 7, 000
dollars, was two times the amount of state and local taxes collected to provide
for education in the state. Russell (30—5, 6) also found that 5. 98 per cent of
the total Series E and H bonds purchased in the United States are purchased
by Michigan citizens, and that 4. 79 per cent of the total retail sales of the
country in 19 54, the 4. 63 per cent of life insurance paid for, and the 4. 98 per
cent of cars registered were all higher than could be expected for the Michigan
percentage of the total population of the nation. In bank assets, 3. 37 per cent,
Michigan was slightly lower than could be expected.

Russell concludes from the above that Michigan might be expected to also
have a higher level of education than the average of the rest of the nation.
Russell used the following criteria:

Michigan had in 1955 fifty—four institutions of higher education, 2. 92 per
cent of the total number, 1, 847, (30-6) in the United States. (Hawes lists 2, 028)
(8) Michigan would need thirty-one more to reach the level adequate for a state
having the wealth of Michigan on the basis of the average for the rest of the
nation. The total enrollment in 1955 (30-7) in institutions of higher education
in Michigan was 4. 45 per cent of the national total. There would need to be
5,330 more enrolled to reach the recommended 4. 6 per cent of the national
tOtal. From 1952 to 1955, 4. 03 per cent of the bachelor's degrees were
granted by Michigan institutions of higher education, 5. 22 per cent of the
matter's degrees, and 5. 00 per cent of the doctor's degrees. Michigan lags
in the granting of bachelor's degrees. Also, Michigan is below in recommended
Studentenrollments. Russell (30-7) states that 1, 730 more bachelor's degrees
Should have been granted between 1952 and 1955 to bring the rate up to the
exDected level. Also, in Michigan, 77 per cent of the students enrolbd in college

attend public colleges; in the nation the average of college enrollees enrolled in

huh-..- .~
. .-

A ‘p r. ' O s
' f. .th~.O-‘ 1.. I. 9" p0 ‘
I ~‘I. ' .
p“. t

. ‘ ‘
M- .::.~~h* ‘. A: h‘ -i. .-
....- -. . ‘uwu 9155 J. “0‘... ~ .

...~..:. .143...» 31"»;- 1 ..
\. 4"”;VA- ‘7'

‘0
\g . ,
‘ ‘5'; ."'"‘8..‘ u
N ‘5 t , ~-.‘ .
3““) . rte c , ~. ‘1
‘4
‘5
"if: . .
Ir. J' 1:" .4“...
n. 4*_‘.‘ ‘,.V
y . ”t _ ‘1
'FQC‘O,
M. 5': ".3...
k

\-\r1. 0 v»
‘.
\‘:£ 2‘ I v .
‘13: Of ?Lo" 1..
‘\
.‘..
P . . .
J: ‘..*.
“»‘- 'o-
' V
' M.) .
n mt e‘“ .F.
" - .a H
.. ‘ y d
" Q
\I \‘v.'
~K '5
“t Cans»-
» t n
‘v :t'fi\h- Q .
o..~ Ll
‘
f'.‘p.
av -. .
s. ‘N
g‘;‘_ _ u 11 is t
‘. ‘ ‘ I
‘5 2‘ ‘__ ‘ er .l
.‘ ’b.._.1$ ‘ . .
A .ll‘ ‘ 'J ‘h .
Mud...“ MI“ .. ‘
~ § V 5
“’~ ,u‘ m- . .
"9: A "t vX‘J'”J] (ti
g‘“ u‘ . . s-
q" . ~ . ‘Jf P. ’: -._
\ "44."; ;
u ‘ IN.) "fOQ‘ . - ‘1
T‘ . l ‘ .5“: ‘9 .
\‘54 ‘4’: C‘ W W
\ . JJ$1\§?N’ ‘ . .
\ "h 5;. 7‘.
\K‘ .“kl .r ‘L
.. ‘ '3 ‘ - 1 v ‘
.:‘.~\ ‘x‘ a?- .‘ Lt.“‘
. Qgt‘mg ' 5" CD“.
2” NJ : ’ o.‘~.~ .
. 'y ‘ > ‘
~2‘\;- . J‘ h "L
‘ N‘: 1"- l5‘-'£ i
: " ‘ ' ’r-
N _, 1 __It , ‘
“"9; - ,
. “~! . .'l‘.. .
‘ a]!
_. r, at -.
.5:L’;, 1&1“
.‘\,‘ Rant. r. :5 d :1
.v ,_ , “h
4; \\Bra:l~ ‘ “‘46.?
\\ . .. ‘ . .
\., \_~.. t ‘Jb' r ‘ q
\
4". Sq I.?..‘
‘K

23

public institutions is 56 per cent. Russell concludes that Michigan in 19 55

was lower than the average of the rest of the country in educational opportunities,
expenditures, and benefits. (30—9)

These same proportions exist when Michigan is compared with two group—
ings of North Central States. (30-14) Michigan in 19 55 had fewer than the
norm of institutions of higher education but a higher enrollment population than
the nom Fewer bachelor's degrees, an unusually large amount of master's

degrees, and fewer doctor's degrees were granted by Michigan institutions of

higher education when compared with the North Central States. Expenditures

for higher education were lower. Michigan colleges would have to spend several

million dollars more to reach the average of expenditures in the North Central
States. (30-15)

Concerning the location of the colleges in \Michigan, Russell (30-26) found
that of the eighty-three counties in Michigan there were fifty—five with no

college, two with highly specialized colleges, one open summers only, and only

twenty-five counties with a college or colleges.

S_taff Stud} Number I, conducted by S. V. Martorana (20) surveyed the
facilities and needs of the junior colleges in the state. The point that bears
sPacifically upon the events that culminated in the establishment of Grand
Valley State College seems to be this conclusion drawn by Martorana:

Finally, it is recommended that in those instances in Michigan
where the needs of the population are such that two or more types
of post—high-school educational institutions are necessary, the
State adopt the policy that is now being followed in California.
This policy puts the community college as the first type of post-
high-school institution that should be developed and supported.

On later study and continued evidence of need for additional types
of institutions of higher education, these are also authorized.
When this is done, however, the new typeof institution is not
established by allowing a metamorphosis of the community
college to occur; rather, a new institution is created with its own

administrative organization, fiscal structure, and program of
offerings.

.gq \
D. 5; ‘u

‘ n .’
'- 'C-u- .0» -, 4' or. .;
.gi-u—nnsuhu mh‘ttu has

13:52:: 2 at: par)“: 3:): ' '1

’ --
o- 1'./--- 4, I . 0 I
z. ‘ .23: J. J- pt? (‘1... .
" .:;"?‘k"‘. tunY-‘_' ’ .Q.
‘ " -» :t’. it... L.I&‘.\"fl-‘t do. ‘
g.

0.
n. p.‘ .-.-}I ..._., ‘
.: -Jv. “.3341 :H.(,« U . n

5‘:

.9..." A—., ' n '_
:k' “ ”Chit Fifi" .'.

 

'7‘» . ..
w: -'- q..
. . . 7-
.: .5" N‘A-JCC C "v- ‘.
_r‘u- ‘ o.~ I“...
.‘L._'t: at. .‘4‘. ‘ ~
:5, . tJM.‘ \‘
1..“ - .,v.v - .gh‘
K JJLfva .... . “
‘5 ‘ 3‘ est ‘." {
I ' . '
‘kf .1.) '9‘. II . u
“‘6.
- .0 . ‘
“1". 3"“:1.\ '\n
.4, .

I | ‘
. O . I. a . -
- ‘ kt. a .. ..
5\“}l o.,‘.\" tn‘ ‘.“. .‘
.’ ‘5"‘11‘ lnz‘ . l
:‘t‘ 1“ a. . “‘tfl Ct '- o w
k q. .' ’
.V‘“-'~i.e-‘t_ ~...~
Q“ J J')‘ a‘ .
\_A‘ s" u .
5" k 3‘“ 1.:9; . . -Ot.
‘ £5»? k 7 a.“ . y-
u - . . .‘1
NE. (UH-0‘ ...‘
‘ V»: O
'.,_ i
Q
“Q '.
‘53' 37-» n
s “~.: h. F .
\'.-:*.'_-, 4““
Hgk‘fiJ
‘h‘: Ct“.
H ”ATS “ ‘1‘ P
‘);\i_ ‘u ‘5 ’. Z
'5 (in
‘ t '1’".
‘tafl
I. \II S'.~.
Q}! ,-. "l 5 w ‘
“'x 'u ~
\ Lw‘
“‘13:. !
LJr f)"
$ ‘r\"‘. ‘ .
2‘ . 4‘? _
~\“- 6 1. ‘

24

The connection between the above quotation and other statements by
Russell become especially important when viewed in the light of anticipated
enrollments in both public and private institutions of higher education and
the facts pertaining to geographic origins of college students. Russell (30-51)
found an increase of 50 per cent in enrollment of state—supported colleges and
only a 29. 8 per cent increase in enrollments of private colleges. The enroll-
ment in community colleges increased 300 per cent during the same period,
1950-19 55. Russell stated that the public institutions of higher education would
apparently carry the burden of the college enrollments in Michigan at about an
80 — 20 per cent public to private ratio; the national ratio is 55 - 45 per cent.
(30-55)

Concerning rate of college attendance in different counties, Russell states:

The highest rate of college attendance in Michigan is found
in counties that have a State controlled institution. The presence

of a privately controlled college in a county also tends to raise the

percentage of young people attending college but not as markedly
as in the presence of a State controlled institution.

The significance conclusion from the study of the county origins
of students attending Michigan colleges is that an important stimu-
lation to college attendance arises from the presence of an institution
in the locality. It seems clear that, if the goal of the State is to pro-
vide the widest possible opportunity to young people to continue
beyond the high school, one of the important means of achieving that
goal is to distribute facilities for higher education as widely as pos-
sible. . . . It seems much wiser to create new institutions at
strategically located centers in the state where facilities for higher
education are not now available than to attempt to concentrate more

and more students at the existing centers as enrollments increase
in the future. (30-58, 59, 60)

Thus, as new centers bring more into college who would not have attended,
the established centers will continue to grow. And the community colleges
have the same affect, says Russell. (30-97) As more are established, more
need will arise for four—year institutions, which are not more expensive to

create than junior colleges; conversely, the junior colleges are not cheaper,

_ t - l

,. .. - a 0
ox ‘ ‘ ”y P ,“ ‘ 'I. ' ' c I
.. .. Q... Why“- - ‘fl. ‘

. a; . u .

‘9... ‘0...1.- b‘ L. p '

.~ -n.“ o d..-
——A

I b
.g 3.7”...“ ,. -.- . .'
b.:-...—‘.ds 45‘s.: .-

'0'o- ~ ‘
It.:: 3“ mu.“ & fi~ul
0‘s 4“. . .. o.-.~

. .
..
"P or

“ V‘
I-a ‘. uh. bi“:‘.t. F r
_ -

....;nq . t I.

A a . '-

"h ....- A-- . . '-
“- cu“ \~‘._.-‘.‘ ..

tog.
5“ ..
-k. -‘ ‘-. t
, ““1255, 3:15;.
- “a
‘a . _
.‘f‘ I?)
C
. ‘; -:._
a. “
A. L: d ,.“°y~.
«a ..,.
9..
9..
fi. t I v33! -\f .
v.
u 'I “At ".‘
n
"In.
~24; -.f...
.r ‘j'v-Iw __
‘~’\\ ' ‘.
. aw!
.
.Jfi‘ “o.
h.l IQ T5.
. nus fi“~ -.
5--.,-
'§
\t‘L'
43$" 3!-
‘ “ .g R W
~ -...{ n
1 c
s [1%-
5‘ Rwy-0..
s‘.-'-"'.
~\ I
:'\
‘71? ._ _u
u- ‘ -
“Nt: u ‘L
a... “‘
"l
. t

i.
5.
3“
'\ -g.
s_‘—.
‘ 0-? ‘
.‘-. 37‘s-
1*4r: '
s. 14
l 4
\ 3‘5:
-_u-t
"~ ~¢T
1 V
‘ JSL'.7
.‘
.\
\‘I'u
\. -
. t";-
‘5.“ '.-._. -'
g ._
- Jl \'
A“ “.4
\"
\‘é‘k‘
, _ L |
- .r '5.
3n." 0".
5 ‘.'
\fT;
\
Q
\
.Jl-lfi.
an
‘cmn~ k
, O
No. .u. .
' 5"5: .

  

25

' nor is their educational offering inferior.

Staff Study Number 2_ (27) concerned itself specifically with this problem:
the geographic origins of students attending colleges; the conclusions stated
therein are quite pertinent to the selection of the eight-county area as the site
for the new college. For the second study summarized numbers of students
attending each college in Michigan by origin from each county in the State,
from other states, and from other countries. Separate analyses and summaries
were made for each origin and for each college: the state controlled, the com-

mtmity colleges, and the private colleges. These statements were made:

 

(27-84, 88)
1. There is an extremely wide range in the rate of production of college
( number attendinchollegf-L )
students in each of the eighty-three counties. ( rate = college aged youth )

The rate of counties with highest rate was five times the rate of counties with the
lowest rate. Thus, chances of a college-aged youth attending college is five
times as great in some counties as in other counties.

2.’ In the twenty-seven counties with colleges the rate is twice that of the
fifty-six counties without.

3. In. the twenty-seven counties with colleges there are seven times as many
enrollees per square mfle as there are in counties without a college.

4. Students from all over the state are enrolled in state-controlled colleges,
but the percentage of students from the county within which the state college
exists is higher than the percentage from counties within which there is no
college.

Concerning the establishment of any new institutions:

1. It should be established in a county with enough population to warrant it.

2. It should be in a county with a high rate of economic ability of the people.

 

‘ L

L!

- I c u .-
u. n. "a ‘ - ‘ .7 -. . t-
‘4: :tJJ‘ ‘C\:J: I an”. o..°.

H .
-.o-, ~'-l.~: nM-‘a‘-";\ , l
E..- .3u1‘l about. “gaunt 1.. q

1 . -
~.- ' -‘ -A "4 -.,’ phr- O.
.u_:: E: 1353.“; “4‘... ~~' , h.
. n
.. _ .
._. A.- u r. , A rtt H t 0'. 1
a.»
"a... :4. J‘p'Jc H 'o. ‘- n..'. 4.

tzrzgrsakr if the z. -

$.14.

1
b l

\

r"-«r 4.3“. "-
.:-_..tq;:h'L { -Isl

' o
In .
."'o- _
o — ‘0 ‘ ~. . __ .
.-.:, ¢.'..1-l“"“ 3".“ ‘0. 1., ‘
'~ 5“ “wit ,
. .
v-og‘l. 'J" ‘ ". - .
“-.. -“.
It _5‘ L-d’sk’: .\“h n‘
‘_ _

 

 

26

The conclusions concerning the geographic areas of college attendance state
this:

The study leads to the inescapable conclusion that to a large

extent college attendance is geographically determined. If a

college is located nearby, the number of students who go to

college in proportion to the college age population will normally

be much greater if the nearest college is in the next county or

even more distant. (27-8 8)

These following staff studies were not particularly relevant to the establish-
ment of the new college: Number _3_ on medicine and nursing education; Number
4, a survey of existing physical plants which made no recommendations for any
new colleges; Number 5, which studied student and personnel services; Number 6,
which surveyed instructional programs; Number 8_, which surveyed financial
assistance to students; Number _9, which studied space utilization and value of
existing physical plants; Number 19, a study of faculties; and Number 1__2_, a

survey of control and coordination of higher education.

Staff Study Number _1__1_, Institutional Planningfgr Higher Education 11; Michi-

 

gag (28) contained the following reports: 1, A review of the present status of
the institutions of higher education in Michigan; 2, statements obtained from
interviews and questionnaires on what improvements the administrative officials
of the institutions visited would like to see made in terms of finance, staff
additions, plant facilities; 3, statements on the nature of the planning for future
development; and 4, "attitudes and opinions of officials on a wide range of
issues with respect to public policy about higher education in Michigan. " (29-V)
It was found (Russell, 29-44) that the physical 'plants of existing institutions
are up to the limit of enrollments that can be accommodated. Practically all
officials interviewed said they needed additions to the physical plant facilities;
they also needed more faculty members, more classrooms, greater library

facilities, housing, laboratories, and more funds.

C
V
a n- ' .
. -IIO‘ ‘ 0
"Li; i“'{~{-h§ fa)“ “"‘i "
‘ In. no
0-”' '

 

\
“'| o- O' c-“"“
u “‘0’ ' ~ ~
«.1 c ‘J_,.... r)" “so.“
.... .4.-
1 "
- ~pr. H
.... ~:-hw-P. f‘c‘j“ 4 5
"1- ' “t“ ‘ 55‘ L00C..b~0
fin ' -
..
“'"‘;" 3' '3 '"d 3'.) 3.
....'_.'.n. iii-IV. -

u-v 1,-90 vu‘av {L w! -
ans. J:- gtuh Enslhh‘ r

-..’. ~‘3nvo' “
.--.:.: .34..” 1: 1:'-
" 1' ' ' .. --

"" ‘3‘ ‘ Eruthatfl D: 135! . O-

I
‘ H

.‘. F.-. .0 . . ¥

. on 4 " \0 I. .
"‘1’"‘-‘ s «D;- ' a

C - .
"~..' 3" u ,
“°*‘-‘- -3 Apart" "it I
\~ |
.3- ... :
. , -. .. _
atl....‘:- H‘. .

 

l~_ .
‘3. h“ “53" ‘
-' “~44.“ 'l- ’ '- c 2‘;. -
* r --t «mg
'~.. 1. h'» 1.
...JJ,‘-‘ {'7 ii) .
a. In. 9... s
' ' ‘c U. v.
;, -...
l‘ .. 1' AA ..
Minis 3° 1‘) H_.‘ ‘:
!~.I h
‘fi'hs- In
0‘ 'Iul‘lm‘h
. s M."' _
543, UJJ. 5.: \’
as‘i“ “W.
N s: .""‘ y
' “- ‘ "4 - €
” “on ‘r "o- .
. v.“ ‘ -.‘I
12?;-
~. u
‘x '. -
at ‘4. mum-- ..
“‘-x« K '.
32;
i":\ - ‘
‘n, n V». ~
1 th:{‘*: b‘. D. H
. out-4331.1 ‘.
.-
I>~
\ “-*
. .Jt 1:50,..1‘-
“N“Jr‘.’ & ‘ ‘-
'u«t <'
)3 ' 5".
\ZC-n -
A“, g {-F' ‘ .
a”, kill 5 ~-
..
: :r’ln \. I-
,“ ..
(”x
. , 'h-
‘\= ;,f 9*.
mgr; \ . .9
diary... ‘
,.

 

 

 

27

 

These statementsfind ample support in studies made by Goldberg (7)

and Thaden (36), who have projected enrollments and populations. Goldberg (7 -10)
sees arctmd a 300, 000 potential college enrollment in Michigan in 1970, and a
potential freshman class enrollment (7-17) of around 80, 000. These figures
compare with 160,261 and 36,913, respectively, in 1960. This is the result

of a 23 per cent growth rate as seen by Thaden (36—9) increasing the state-popu—
lation from 7,823, 194 in 1960 to around 9, 600,000 in 1970. Russell (30-27)

sees 150,000 enrolled by 1957, and projects enrollments to over 300, 000 in the
1970's.

Comparing the above with further results obtained in Staff Study Number Ll,

 

one conclusion is apparent: the present institutions are unable to take care of
the expected increase. For Russell (29) found that officials tend to under-
estimate the rate of increase. Also, they plan usually in ten-year projections.
Also, many officials place ceilings on enrollments. Therefore, by 1965 there
will be no room for 15, 000; by 1970, no room for 38,000. The maximum
capacity cited was 93, 170, only 216 more than were enrolled in the fall of 1957.
Community colleges, too, set ceilings as did private colleges. The methods
of setting ceilings vary from establishing higher fees to more rigorous entrance
requirements or to restricting enrollments to only in-state students.

Questions raised by Russell include these: how large should enrollments
in any one institution become; should new institutions of higher education be
developed; where will support come from for necessary expansion; what should
be the nature of the instructional program; what is the ability of the Michigan
economy to support an expanded program of higher education?

The Final Report (28) summarizes the findings of the staff studies, arrives

at conclusions, and makes specific recommendations concerning higher education

 

‘ n

I
I *zc‘l-O ”A. - -.~ 5'.» -. 1- -
:A-;-' but; its:.: ‘o-*'~".o v
I A

-:-»_‘_:--w 3‘ ”fine c" *"' ‘

- —~ut ’0 an- inn-.o-‘.oo

F;u;:.§ l,“ T n\~w~-~«.O‘
. A“. \Ju....n....| \
O

;_-:---- . ’-u u . .. ~ ~
a“: .2 “tr-flu! C 113.33? 1'

. ‘ l‘
"Pws. .. i

P .. - . v .
t“¥?""‘: 431's: {1‘ '“ “SIC" '

v an. 5. h

'v"~""k. --“ .. .
u. ‘\ .a 2‘ «a-.. . '
nan; ‘ t . i‘“ ‘ '
5 ~ «a .mn..w.a .

.
...-.. x; .-.~.—. new.
- .1.5. sx‘u'st {I "-

. .t

"g. 1.1.4212: here. fur 1f 1:

hr . "t" A -
' "A HC‘ 1:15 C 1‘.‘
u a-
. ‘ "- , .
\..._-:.' 11‘ 0B ' _. .
‘ (Kn-s: . l“:’
t. .,
5.; .
\ " '~‘
\_ . ' .
.-~.o .f‘t‘ 4 p
\u "g I -
at} J" g f
u, ’-
“o
.:'_“,l:
n. I 5
‘“k“‘u Pr,;‘£l"
n P ‘
J; I
T‘ I“ a"
VHLA’I'” ..
N.» a“; 4 c
Hhc)" c‘l'lll' '(. an
~* ,
\":‘ _ “
.x .
\ ‘-'
“'s Ar‘flk

' fat? .
«412111 b
' ‘ E‘ _V,‘ .
‘ , ‘ b. I'1
‘3 :4 ~..\.
' 91194:,» ..
k )f 'f.
A “I; n
0.; - 0y.
. t .'_ n.
‘:\L" - ‘
‘hu "-
t ‘1}... “'3:
Q
\
w._
45:?“ .
‘\i’ f
., ,
I 4.3g *1 f
".
Wu; . ‘ C- -
.M‘
4 "9
f' nid.(.1'_ .,
.. “=4“-
\"H . “‘“ ‘K
“N‘ I..-
\t"; -
‘~ arc. x.
‘ t 0 his
"4;. ‘bt
I‘ N'.‘ "‘ .
\dtl‘ -'
‘ $3.“... .:
Ethyl
\fiv', All" ‘
.‘.H- l‘ \‘Jc Y.
‘ké‘vmg u
“w ‘ i
“'J:‘ u., ,
" If“: '

 

28

in Michigan. One of the important concepts is contained in the inter-
relationship that exists between population rise, enrollment increase, and
establishment of more community or junior colleges: as enrollments in-
crease and as more community colleges are established, the need for more
facilities in four-year colleges intensifies. This follows from the study of
geographical areas from which enrollees come.

Concurrent with the above is a statement concerning the extension services
and branch colleges maintained by existent four-year colleges and universities.

The branch college concept and the extension services practice came up for
sharp examination here, for if any recommendations for new colleges were to
be made, the new colleges could be established as branches of existing institutions.
That the need for new ones exists is reiterated: (Russell, 30-57) "Michigan
needs not only all its existing institutions of higher education but a number of
strategically located new ones too. " For ". . . the presently existing insti-
tutions in Michigan will probably be inadequate to serve the numbers of students
who will want to attend college in the state in 1965 and 1970. . . . The institu-
tions from which data were gathered will lack accommodations for at least
15,000 of the Michigan yOImg people who should be attending college in 1965.

By 1970 the deficit will have grown to 38, 000, " if forecasts are realistic.
Thus, the question of where these new institutions will arise and how becomes
extremely important.

Russell (29) found that few community leaders or institution administrators
expected new private institutions of higher education to develop, in spite of the
met that there are two large cities, Pontiac and Flint, with no private institu-
tion of higher education. Also, it was not expected that any currently privately

controlled institutions would become publicly controlled. Further, most

l 1 _
-- VA‘ A‘wm"~~t\‘ 1 » c. ‘-
:L.:.‘~uJ-o \.ms—n_b ' LQA...

..........,.t‘ .- .-y\.-;, ;

-- --
.4

‘1' DvMU-‘t: r2u‘adnnton .‘o.

u \

\“.1

'_...17 ,)r ....' ‘o
fr::;.:.3‘131"h'} u.) L
1:";- ....'.... i5 Kilt 3':'.'i‘...:f.z.t

12: 2:22:21.- or b :r <
i .. L

n .

" hI'Ii ‘9 W. O.” - O- . ‘
. \ p n

a -.-_c\.. ‘- ...t“.-.\ ~ . - q..-

 

=“~" ":2: Jfa m p_..

I
2. , .
z... ‘33 364:) $31!. ‘21....
uo-o. v.1

«712;:th
5.4... H‘ 311125 a: t.\ 01

.‘ .f
1...... 3‘1». .1.
"enen'... ‘3‘. va-
0.
I
2.».
"\ u
‘I “I - h . “ o ‘ ‘
u . ' O
k“ 1‘ §dho§ \.o ‘
“~. I
"by. .
‘
K J D-
-.K.‘ 5,2“ J ‘9 . “V
9 “5' .‘ “.
:h. 'i“~-t.
\_ ‘-.~: .. .‘ ’
‘M o -
- W St. '3; J ,.
. i s;
‘.
.'-, D.,.‘_'
\‘.‘~. .. a
' "Q‘V " - o
5. 9 "
. ‘ .‘35‘3‘ to '
.\ ' ‘
\.
\‘u..‘.
\-.. '5 ~,
. g . '
h‘ «1.3.3au6‘.’
o ‘5‘) t
QA“_}..‘ 1
5
‘;~.
\til';
\

u. ”o . .
' Q ’ o
u a‘ 4“}..‘u. _
.. ‘V ‘
.§I
‘ ‘h :‘2.~_ .!
W: ”t. n
‘4. J11)
5 1K “Ix"
s
~ .“-
. 8.?5‘.‘
3‘3.

 

 

29

educational and community leaders were convinced there should be new
community colleges established.

Russell (29-134—140) found that branch colleges often occur because a
physical plant is made available or because generous gifts are donated to
existing institutions, or both. Sometimes university extension centers develop
into branches. Sometimes promotional groups in the community strive for the
establishment of a branch. Russell states that the branch colleges are not
established by deliberate planning by the legislature and exist without legis-
lative sanction. He cites as examples the Michigan State Oakland branch, the
University of Michigan Dearborn branch, the Michigan College of Mining and
Technology branch at Sault Ste. Marie, and the Central Michigan University
branch. Often community pressure groups encourage competitive bidding by
state institutions to set up branches. Administrators from five state institutions
categorically expressed the opinion that branch expansion was unwise. One
thought them unobjectionable; generally, state institution leaders opposed
them except for experimental purposes or to "keep up with the J oneses. "

Summarizing. the advantages and disadvantages of establishing branches,
Russell states the following:

Advantages:

1. The parent institution has experience in administration and instruction.

2. Physical plant is usually provided.

3. Major central services continue in the parent institution.

4. The accreditation of the parent institution transfers to the branch.

5. The prestige and name of the parent institution attracts the students.

6. Payroll and benefits go to the local community without extra tax burden.

Disadvantages:

1. There is no autonomy in the branch. This is bad for the growth and

‘

 

  

‘. - -L ‘.". .‘ru *u; vyfl. ‘-
q ‘3: .‘nbl‘nu‘st lb’vaw-M Q's.

 

.- ' ' '
u... v-O' - "’1‘!
w:-L’u:: Sufi-cum

~.u~ .u-O.

I I
F v\' 1;n.‘~‘l 1"
ug-...oo.~‘.n a...

e. an: sup...“-

‘3- I:M-.~.h~ _‘. r-

.-..-:J.--.:_. y .1:1-.s T)“

. my”;

.. ‘ ;- .. F .-
~ .Ilb Ann-a5“ ::n.brr-’k:~k-
“:~.;.o; . ,“.'
*.~..~L :&1-.
s
t ~:~.".. ‘.' ‘ “
“ ‘ . ‘1‘ 'fl, "
~~uvs &h A. érh‘hho.

s...
.~4 n‘...
I u
*. "‘htC’ Ibo-n...
-.........“.
o
.
I
u .-.
‘0 ~‘ h ~35 ‘~
““‘H‘ in. Jf 3"“ L
“Q. ._'_ ‘
"~. _ '1.
k- *‘n
"k«.' 1" "~ .‘h- ‘_
‘n... . “t l_c~-
v ‘ M-
I
-
I -_ '
’ a “Q- ‘ .
“ml.- 3.1:]:«zo; , .-
t-“‘~-u .. . ‘
.1
s 3‘5“
.

 

30

strength of the branch.

2. The absentee landlord relation creates no faculty voice in the management
of affairs of the branch.

3. The central administration usually favors the campus over the branch
when retrenchment policies become necessary.

4. The branch is not programmed or staffed as well as the parent institution.
The students suffer. '

5. Branches usually parallel the parent which does not necessarily reflect
the needs of the community.

6. Establishment of branches often fosters the spirit of competition and
empire building among the large instititions.

7 : There is a duplication of administrative details between the branch and
the parent.

8. The establishment of branches takes the authority of establishing new
institutions away from the legislature. While it is true that both Michigan State
University in its establishment of the Oakland branch and the University of
Michigan in its establishment of the Dearborn branch did refer their proposals
to the legislature, neither had to do so legally.

Final recommendations concerning branches are these: the encouragement
of the establishment of branch colleges in Michigan is unwise. It ought not to
be the policy of the State of Michigan; rather, the establishment of community
colleges where needed and new four-year colleges under state control where
needed should be encouraged. Also, each state institution branch college ought
to be given its own board of control and administrative staff as soon as possible.

Russell (29-140-141) summarized the needs as follows:

1. Coming enrollments cannot be handled by existing institutions.

1355:
-o
' -..’-'~
’ o
- -o 1 - ~
I 7.“, “£11,? {Jr :.J.‘ I..
' ‘ n “.5.
b! u" h“. A

~ '. . ‘tzzlb: 'c 93.)“: ;:.--
; 1,:._“¢‘AA.L - ‘
.

. . . .3.-. .4
'w-n :un ,c .
«2‘1. .“E‘C‘ '......L .11: -4. .. .

'
.--w p as A’~~V“.‘.* “'1 N h
4.1...“ .1516 .:.:3 4..
1“; .0; .
\....“.“

. _ . : -. . . _ -

‘ 3.2:: Z‘fléujfilc :-
..";“: d' | t . .
"“--'°1--"2 an an :le: :‘

". .
Mu ....
...._.4“ .vq. ‘ n. 9.. .
HA.) nt‘ “-:L.._:‘1
v .v
l":
3%.. ,. - ~ .
' \ u. ..
me ' .“~ ‘;
33‘; J
«minim; w...“ 1‘
kahuna"... C" u _
0 ‘uk‘
7‘.
“‘,I'FL' .
OQJ.“ . - g _
. a. . .. -,
b Lr «jg-:41} .F '1.
Hm
<1‘K'I“ ‘-
-. [1“101
I 1 )
i=3“ _1_
‘ ' I n
" ‘..‘ ¥Adl ",1 ,
.Q -\ rtfl

\I: ' w ‘ c '.

\t": 41 ‘- - 1‘. “15)!‘2‘ ‘

~ ' ‘ 3 H‘r., .

‘3‘; . ta “":n€'5 :1"
‘5JLE~. u.‘ ‘ ‘ ' ‘-

‘cx. ~ ‘

 

J».

1‘ .‘I .n'
. 0;. TR ‘ t.
.3111”; 0 {33”, “r.
Lei-”“1, D . ‘ '
mtg-fin L. tn: .115 L.
'f‘ :' Q:"'e a:§lv _ v ‘.
"HM. 5‘ ['1' ‘0. r

\N‘ I’

 

V . 's 1 ,
.M‘ A.qup“ ‘u A:
-.;‘~. - w.‘ .5
’ .m.
. d '

 

31

2. It is as economical to build new as. to enlarge old institutions of higher
education.

3. It is cheaper for students to commute to a local institution.

4. Decentralization encourages more to attend college; students go when the
college is near.

Russell recommended that initially the new institution be a liberal arts
college. Then business administration courses should be added, followed by
teacher training courses and masters programs in teacher education and school
administration.

One sees an essential difference in recommendations made in the Michigan
survey and those made in the other state surveys reviewed: there is definite
recommendation that new state institutions of higher education are needed in
Michigan. Russell (28-141) states that there is no detailed study at present
to determine where a new state institution should exist. He does recommend,
however, that any new institution should be established where a community
college already exists. This, he says, is his recommendation because the
existence of a community college indicates that the people of the community
will support higher education, and concerning the establishment of a new
institution: (28-141)

A superficial review of the Michigan situation leads to the con-
clusion that the most likely location for another State controlled

college is Grand Rapids. This city has a flourishing community

college, which should continue to render effective service when and

if a State college is also established in or near the city. Three

theological seminaries are also located in Grand Rapids, but a

State college would in no way duplicate the services of those

institutions. Two church-related colleges of liberal arts are also

located in Grand Rapids. Leaders in both these liberal arts

colleges have assured the Director of the Survey that the location

of a State college in Grand Rapids would not affect those institutions

adversely. Grand Rapids is the second largest city in the State,

only Detroit having a larger population. Grand Rapids is suffici-
ently distant from other State institutions so there would be no

' ,. r.-- ;
-.r.’222.'~.lé )‘L‘izi, ,.. -_ J; a
""v 4.11:: “with Lash-C ...:

'—
.-&u~~o i-.

t .

474;. '; 14.: F . 0" '1 --Q .
...... 3.1.3.“)..‘1fbA .u.-.’. g
‘ ' n

"""vmn -H. ...,= _
mm...“ 5.11 to 9;; J... 3"

‘.' ’t ‘V 1'. -\ foug- '
I - . 1 ‘ F '-
-~.... - R
- :¢J.§s .iLuJ: C4...

.0 .5.

~---. ' ‘ 5 .
.4. F a - . .‘5A ‘.
‘W- h .%.4. tv‘Iiyéfi a. 1
u

'5'.
\ g.
. - \\ ".~
u o..3.u,} .3! r, ‘
O
-X.‘ .‘c.
..:. ' 1»... u . _
k.4...4.. 1:5 3:; 1‘. _
A. 5. —..
\-
.,_

;;'-f N. . ~
“.'"-¢.{' 1' :5“-

9’
W”. I

 

.4“!' 1w- I
“".. On.l ‘o..l
'5‘.
“A
“5.".
"‘~:.1‘.": q.
\*\-.__ _v. : o
eh""ru‘..; ‘3 .
~. a.
' - ;
:s.
‘Q..' h.
‘3‘} i ‘t
4‘ a r. 'v-\
cob“."_ :- I‘
l.\‘_‘.
\NH ‘0. n.
o .
‘u mi“. “-v
Ix, l
I'- \- .

“9'11. a?» .
all} x... - ‘
“x ‘ .0.
“I h4-
(1,233. ..
*r'J- :‘t.
54“:. TL.
kl; Y‘t' '
‘h‘ " 1911.1
\: ‘ A
‘i: .1;. i.
new .
' t‘: ' .
“1‘0 If. H
0‘ ‘J 'H‘O; r,
n ."‘.I t
'4"-
'“l 1! --
‘ 3:” a _
21'". . '" \
\‘i,\. ‘ h. '
fit '.-. ’ --
‘Jtfixy
‘ “§'| VI
\. "’M b.9~
? . ‘sfio , .. ..
' ‘s. :
’L‘Ifi ' *4
~An' 'f‘ .
a _ -
.hltrgil.’
i .1
\“E 4i;\ L‘

32

objectionable overlapping of services in the new area if a new
State college were located there.

Russell (28-168, 169) states also that the State can support a new institution
of higher education if the future growth of the state is consistent with the growth
of the past. He says that there should be no increase in student fees; he encourages
philanthropic effort to encourage education; he states that a suitable program for
sufficient public flmds can be maintained by a restructure of the state tax program.
In May, 1957, Russell, at a meeting with the Grand Rapids Board of Education
Committee on Higher Education said that he opposed establishment of branch
colleges. Russell's statements before the Board coupled with other factors ~2—
mainly the impossibility of resolving the conflicts between the two alumni groups --
influenced Seidman and his group to stop working for a branch and begin working
for a separate institution. Tirrell stated that Seidman and his group were
successful in avoiding any involvement in rivalry between the two large alumni

groups.

Legislators, editorials, and speeches. Representative Charles Boyer, of

 

 

Manistee, who was a member of the Legislative Study Committee, spoke before
a Community Council meeting in Grand Rapids in January, 1958. He, while
speaking of the state needs for higher education, told the Community Chmcil
that if they felt they needed a college they should go to the legislature and ask
for it. Tirrell, who was at the meeting, stated that the effort should not need
to depend upon gifts. This ideal conception was later to be dispelled in the '
conditions established in House Bill 477 , final form. C

On March 1, 19 58, a ten-column-inch editorial in the Grand Rapids Press

 

lauded the competition between the Michigan State alumni for a branch and

the University of Michigan alumni seeking a medical school, who were, at this

Ne ; ‘
‘25:". ‘ ‘L‘n‘il t -‘
Nab». w'. I .

'x‘; n...

_ rk‘JUEEr.
18!: 0 “"- “j I
\, uV A.
\‘kir .

" :, Q‘sf'a ..
\-&. «as “3 {NJ
It
“~ 5"- as»;

a.”- .I’.;;.

. I . I § .
fiw-vfin. -1 .,\ o.
.6- ...u..-.ulr.' then-r tn A'v. s“.

-----

LI. ~.. he 51314.0 1:32 '3.
Pun“:-

.-.,...__:.axj; stain-s. AL:

‘

k

:.'.;-; 2.2: In: 1?me f. .4.

LEL“',2
\“ RE. I
~ ~t b-
. fl -f‘Jre 0}
‘:.~.‘-‘.‘:.‘
\Q. a;

 

 

33

time, under the leadership of Fred Vogt, a Grand Rapids industrialist. The
editorial stated that the competition would serve to make the legislature aware
of the interest in higher education in the Grand Rapids area.

The Grand Rapids Board of Education spokesman, Robert Tubbs, objected

to the Michigan State alumni agitation. In the Grand Rapids Press report of

 

March 4, T958, he stated that the Board should be consulted since it had done
some preliminary studies. Also, he referred to the State Survey then going on
and stated that the reports forthcoming from this survey should be noted. He
said that the Grand Rapids area would be able to get both a four-year college

‘ and a medical school after Wayne State had expanded its medical school.

 

In July, 1958, according to the Grand Rapids Press of July 10, 1958,
Arthur Hannah, Grand Rapids poultry businessman and brother of John Hannah,
president of Michigan State University, spoke before the Grand Rapids West
Kiwanis Club. He advocated the establishment of a Michigan State University
branch because it would derive from the parent institution prestige, status, and
experience in administration; and the curriculum would develop as the parent
developed.

Russell had stated before the Board in May that a branch was not desirable.

The Grand Ragids Herald, in an editorial dated September 29, 1958, stated

 

that no branch was wanted. It stated that there were enough students in the
area to fill a new four-year college. It stated that the Board had dropped its
interest since the State had shown such vigorous interest. DeanJohn Tirrell,
of the Grand Rapids Junior College, had left to join the staff of the University

of Michigan. The editorial expressed the hope that the new dean at Grand

 

Rapids Junior College would revive interest in a new college. The Grand Rapids

Herald also ran a story on October 10, 1958, reviewing the Russell Report

 

 

-;...~,-,‘2“ "4 d.

n
.Au—c—swb‘. 55“

“001. I: r'

u .- .
:7. J7;
u «my.
-

FT“

.3. 1935. H: '

. ‘ '0

‘l'\;‘ "n N

M-. u - ..
[.su‘ q‘V—gui'gi

' ‘4

.t... “-‘f. "1‘ ‘ 0'
.- -::3 0. :3: b '

s‘ ‘ '
.:~ ‘7" 3.... ‘
‘. Jt 53. 3e: 3 fir
I

-‘_r:.:)-::14;:&. ~ ..
~ s’J‘ '-
‘i H.

wg,‘
. - - _'
‘N..‘::.\ 2“"
. -~|“e L: :7
e 'I
h.
_ ‘ ‘c .
... . -.-0- '
a... ~‘m .k't f-
5.5
"y“ j .

ml; 2‘ I.
‘ . M.‘ ..~’ ‘
"~ “Lg . L ‘

34

recommendations that a new four-year college might logically be established

in the Grand Rapids area. The Grand Rapids Press also ran a story on October
11 stating the same thing: that Grand Rapids was the most logical place for a
new college.

October, 1958, was a mouth full of action for the new college. Richard
VanderVeen, attorney, one of the not yet formed CEFYC members, spoke in
Alaska, Michigan, before the organizational meeting of the Alaska Democratic
Party and told of the boost to the economy a new college would bring. In this -

meeting he favored a branch. Oh October 13, a Grand Rapids Press article

 

of October 14 states, the Kent County Farm Bureau made a resolution to call
on the legislature to provide funds for a new college in the next session. Their
resolution cited the facts of the Russell Repogt. The Resolution Committee
chairman was Martin Buth, not yet then a State Representative, who was to
become an integral part of the CEFYC.

L. William Seidman, chairman of the CEFYC, was continuously active in
efforts to start a new college in the area. In June, 1958, he had made a speech
before the Wyoming Rotary Club urging the establishment of a four-year college.
Here, he advocated a branch of Michigan State University. (For speech see
Appendix III.) He had been on the steering. committee of the Michigan State
alumni group. He had engaged in much activity concerning the establishment
of a new college in Grand Rapids. He stated in a conversation in the fall of
1962 that at the time of his first activities for a new college he did not care
whether the college was a branch or an independent school. He said, ”Grand
Rapids is a pretty good place to live. If it had a four—year college then, why,
you couldn't find a better place. At first we went along with the idea of a

branch. But when the Russell Report came out with the strong recommendations

 

for separate institutions wherever new colleges are established, we aimed in

II-V . _ Q .'
......_..~~,,, " l'“. at H . ¥
fl~----'~ ‘MH-o . . _ ‘

 

-.... -Q. .. . - ‘0',
-15.} '1: O 7 3d JCT. 0.x.-.

.~"_u‘-t0-' q‘ \'- \‘h‘ V... ‘ n ..‘
_‘~...l.‘ OI. why—““4 Ldo--a~‘ t.
‘

...'.._.... . . \( '

c r“ ‘ ‘ |...,..‘ 5 I

‘ixnu sane... J -' kyott‘gsta. \‘A‘u.
\-

I ‘,“'~"‘I ~U-O . ‘. .
“1'4 Iut.‘-—4.g :‘LsL—fl F .. .~

cog... 5..

.
....:....L '

.
..... tau-.4... )8 Jlt'll’ ‘3 '.‘

R“ '
_n 2‘ -_.-~ ~ '
I... .4: “C“. r). r )f 1:. .

 

35

that direction. " Thus, on October 25, 19 58, Seidman and his group of nine
organized to establish a four-year college in the Grand Rapids area. Their .
allegiance was to no one. Although there were both Michigan State and
University of Michigan alumni in this committee of ten, they transcended

old school ties, and, in spite of predictions of doom and failure by the leader
of a University of Michigan alumnus who had been working for a medical
school, (Seidman stated that the alumnus had predicted. absolute failure), the
CEFYC went forth on their mission. Mrs. Augusta Eppinga, Seidman's
secretary, staed on December 14, 1962, in a conversation in Seidman's
office, that one member of the CEFYC had said in retrospect: "Had we

known what we were in for, I don't believe we ever would have begun. "

.. a .
12": '1 ‘. v
“ n: mo~ ...‘

N ‘
M

'0-

 

. _

{.‘e an.-- _ ‘ .

u—s‘."' it \ a .
.a.-- I

I ..
. ~ . '
.§ ab ’31 .F. .F‘L I?
'—~- g~U 5L “4‘ .n“
h
.
.
u

\y 1. ‘ . ‘
I) .H‘F“ \. c. ‘ Y «1
.A.. ~ ~.k\-.t -‘ .-‘
.Q
‘.:.; ~F"'.Vu
.‘ ‘
5*“ N “. ~... I
o

u
-

V—"mnn . .'
v\.-“‘ ' Mu; r“

‘s'
q:._.-.1l;_: -.

Nsu i~~.:.‘;.l
.
n;- _. ‘ ~‘

~

I‘ ' . --

. .J., ._ “I"
‘ -,‘ u -
~.:~‘¥

10

11

12

Table III. Significant Events and Activities Leading to the Establishment
of Grand Valley State College

Legislative sanction for the survey of needs of higher education in Michigan
which led to the Russell Report.

 

Grand Rapids Board of Education's activities concerning higher education
needs in the Grand Rapids area.

Michigan State University alumni activities to establish a branch of Michigan
State University in the Grand Rapids area.

The formation of the Committee to establish a four-year college, L. William
Seidman, Chairman, October, 1958.

The January 7, 1959, meeting between the CEFYC and community leaders
and area legislators.

The 7, 500 dollar grant of the Grand Rapids Foundation to finance a study of
the eight-county needs for higher education.

Legislative sanction for the survey of the eight-county higher education
needs which led to the J amrich Report.

The November 30, 1959, meeting between the CEFYC and area leaders and
legislators at which J amrich presented his report.

H. B. 477 signed into Public Act 120 by Governor G. Mennen Williams,
April 26, 1960.

Meeting between Seidman and CEFYC members and educational leaders
from other institutions of higher education in Michigan at Seidman's
home June 2, 1960.

Board of Control appointed for Grand Valley State College by Williams on
October 5, 1960.

Various Board activities which affected the new college:

a. The favorable relationships established with other institutions
of higher education throughout the state.

b. The appointment of a planning body consisting of consultants
loaned by other institutions of higher education in the state.

c. The securing of the site and the million dollars.

.1.
.2”:

_..-

IIl(C

wt.»
0»
.mm

.‘u‘....-

F1W~n4

lit

c.
\f a .‘ g
"to.

$422 .
bx

It!

.3.
:11

C

-'1;

a 1
M

37

Table III. (Continued) Significant Events and Activities Leading to
the Establishment of Grand Valley State College

v—' v—

d. The formation of the Citizens' Advisory Council.

e. The naming of the college.

f. Senate confirmation of the first Board of Control and first appropriations
made by the legislature, April, 1961.

13. Appointment of Philip Buchen as first full-time administrator, June, 1961.

‘. -. .0:
l‘t'tnAa. D.
. '- v' .' ‘. . ,l
1‘ iLt‘g 3.4.L K.

.
.V.
Bnh-U

_1
.-u‘ k

.
. 9

II.
-n 'b.

‘stwa

I
‘0
0

 

L C .3

BOA

Figure 1. Schematic Diagram of Events Leading to the Establishment of
Grand Valley State College as Recorded in Table III and Their Relation-
ships to each other.

5 1

IO

 

2 fine: i 7

 

//

 

 

 

 

 

IZ- a 6' d f

 

Legislative activities

Community activities

Board of Control activities

[>013

38

v

un:-- “""‘.H I‘. ,
"-::. In~¢'\ g“ A‘.
‘ . ~"V.h-u r
~- $1.14..“ \“ .1
:4“. .4 yo

_.

' I . ‘
-.- ”.2“ p._‘ hr.
.J'Z... m.“ .1“ M“,

F‘.‘ :‘ ‘ L
1'.“ - F“ ~ .
“I" 2 LA “‘3‘“.
.TA‘. ‘ ‘ .
.~ . VA .-
'\5-‘ 3&1}. Q“ - l
b
O
.5... :’-1.
.. . _ . ,. ‘ |
\o .I: “ta. I
‘Vq. .
."xx‘ .
x \ u I. ._ .,
.N.
ha. JD. .11“
I
‘I‘u'.
‘1‘. 77".“- ‘
b‘u‘: .‘J _ 1‘
Sr" . .
“3.. ‘1’; "1'“ h
e g 4‘ -‘-
’\.~P
afiiz):

'§' v.
~. K:
O
.‘D v‘
k. ‘| t M.
-. 'Jt R.» n
I“
"“5 D?- L
July- .:
' I
.. e)“;
I
.. _

CHAPTER III
THE CEFYC - EARLY ACTIVITIES

The establishment and aims. According to the Grand Rapids Herald of
October 26, 1958, other newspaper accounts, and correspondence in the
Seidman files, the CEFYC was officially established the weekend of October
25, 1958. These men, Seidman, McKee, Idema, Watkins, Dutcher, Buth,

Van Ess, Bennett, Harold Rockwell, and John Annulis were present at the
initial meeting. Shortly thereafter Rockwell and Annulis dropped out and
Lawford and VanderVeen joined. (Table IV)

These men had had some experience in what procedure should be followed,
but not much. Some of them had been working with the Michigan State
University group. The Grand Rapids Herald article of October 26 gives their
stated aims and methods. They had, it stated, discussed at this first meeting
plans for obtaining legislative support for locating a four-year college in the
Grand Rapids area. Seidman had stated that the group represented no exist-
ing institution. It just wanted a college in the area. Further, Seidman stated
that the group would actively seek the support of business, labor, fraternal,
Social, and educational interests in the community.

These points of the Russell Report were cited by the committee: Grand
Rapids was the best place to establish a new college, the community college
should continue separately, a new college would not overlap the services
offered by other existing institutions. They pledged to meet again November

7. (According to Seidman and Mrs. Augusta Eppinga, the CEFYC usually

39

 

 

' F
'W- 0.
‘ o

‘ 5“ “A ‘l

':‘ I 1“”
1 "- .— 4 ._ ‘ .
k . .-.~.J‘ l..:‘r
: F 9'. _
.‘fi at D. v-
N

 

Table IV. The Committee to Establish a Four-Year College
(All Were Residents of the Grand Rapids
Metropolitan Area in 19 58)

 

W h F— * v—w v—.
vvr r—— ——

Rgbert H. Bennett, J r, , vice president in charge of manufacturing, Stow-Davis
Furniture Company, Grand Rapids.

Martin Buth, dairy farmer, elected state representative, Kent County, third
district, in 1958.

David EL Dutcher, attorney.

James Idema, insurance representative, Aetna Insurance Company (now, 1963,
with the Denver Post).

 

Harg Lawfordp southern division manager, Michigan Bell Telephone Company,
Grand Rapids (Michigan State University alumni‘president, 19 58).

F, William McKee, attorney.

L. William Seidman, certified public accountant, Seidman and Seidman, Grand
Rapids branch.

Richard VanderVeen, attorney.

Robert Van-Ess, public accountant (University of Michigan alumni president,
1958).

Robert G, Watkins, president, States Associates, Grand Rapids.

 

40

~ I
. -...'.‘.-&.~ «0
-. "‘ l

A - ».w4)u:.....-k 5.. I

 

.2.

("l-J" I" P F ‘\

um...1.r.:'..i .3. t ‘
O

 

2:31:21 jam; _\‘_.- p

one

‘ ~ -
"10".‘:_ ' .
5:“ Win-1: B L

5.. n
- 'n ‘ _ .
m -..\y.:~:w =.
9‘4 .. -
‘1-
As. 4" hi... _
“" 3...'c§:
.L- .,
. F .-
'O‘ . 4
. .‘Nuh.’n 313 V‘.
-...'.
“'12:. 5,.9“_
N~1§‘_‘.“ Tc-

'-
‘~: “1.. g 1
“‘Ji’; 1. we.
a d y.
w»... ‘9 't
I'l‘ 1-‘1 ‘
v' g 0.1“.
‘5‘.
a.
I - : ‘ .
: L: or. g ,
M tr...
I

‘ .1 O
5‘ hit I"
"'5J~~-‘
“‘33-‘1‘4 _
. :L “A _y ‘
.6JT?."_
‘ "I"? u—‘.‘.
‘ (J A,.
~.
L. y.
“fi‘ ~.
“ ‘tfilewi,
““J-i “j
I
H.
'.\;h‘l
_
. 3F~"
'2'“ JLp-‘qf
\33. Ir.
.,J
.‘L
. .\ .
‘4_ ‘ .
"xi-3L, .
t C _n
\-
.K,
54‘...\::‘1 6‘
I
e sh'r .
(is): .
. ‘ "s
‘tsz‘ k.
\ "\
V4; 5' \'
I Q‘ '

C.
«a. »
.‘.:\
‘.'c. u
“U: L.
‘.'
bu.'7~ ,
a :r J]
3&5 1*
'& n.
V:
an,
. 7,.
1‘ 4‘.”ng
‘,"~s.
an. I

41

met for Friday lunch at the Peach Nook in the Pantlind Hotel. Seidman said
it was all business; there was a limitation of one cocktail each.)

The establishment of the CEFYC did not automatically stop other activi—
ties. The Michigan State University group was still active. Harold Rockwell
stated in a telephone conversation in December, 1962, that he had continued
to favor a branch. Apparently, he dropped from the CEFYC for this reason.
In a letter dated November 3, 1958, Seidman wrote to Watkins, Van Ess, and
Buth that Melvin Buschman (then Director of the Michigan State University
Extension Center in Grand Rapids) sought their presence at a Phi Delta Kappa
dinner on November 20 to discuss in round table manner the new college idea.

The main business of the November 7, 1958, meeting of the CEFYC was
the preparation of a resolution to be presented for adoption to various people
and organizations. This was the resolution:

The final report to the Michigan Legislative Committee on

Higher Education indicates that the Grand Rapids area is the most

desirable location for the establishment of a state-supported four-

year college.

We in this area would welcome and work for such a college.
We urge the Legislature to act promptly in pursuing this
recommendation of the report, with the objective of establishing

a four-year college in the Grand Rapids area.

This resolution was distributed to every service, social, educational,
citizens', professional, business, or other type of organization, association
or brotherhood the committee could think of. By division of labor each member
garnered the support of these organizations. Seidman's correspondence files
reveal that by May, 1959, at least thirty. organizations had given their support
to some form of the resolution. (Table V) This organizational support
constituted the support of at least five hundred individuals.

Seidman annmmced that about one hundred signatures had been gotten at

a November 20 meeting of the CEFYC. The work of getting support continued

 

I

\n

2"
n/.
'.~
1

o‘.,‘ .-
‘ r: r-., ‘1
H._._‘
‘ ..
Arid a“...
s...‘
..
12,-3‘
u“ ."
1 k
i n C?” w}
I“;‘
3' '7
‘._.s1
.1
“N
W V
“ l...
|‘~_ “
\.
Cg,
u. .9
I .‘
’4':
Y"
~
.}( l
.. ..
AU‘)‘
ll‘.‘:
‘9. -.
I ~\
. ‘1‘

Table V. Organizations Supporting the Resolution Favoring the

Date Received

Establishment of a Four-Year College in the

Grand Rapids Area

 

 

:— 1:—
‘ ‘-
Organization

Emendations

 

 

12-26-58

12-12-58
1-3-59

1-5-59

1-14-59
1-14- 59

1-13-59

2-9-59
11-13-58

12-18-58

Kent County Board of Education

Grand Rapids Lodge 97, Fraternal Order
of Police

National Association of Junior Accountants
of Grand Rapids

Furniture Manufacturers Association

West Michigan and Kent County Dental
Societies

Grand Rapids Business and Professional
Women's Club

Kent .C ounty Medical Society

Grand Rapids Board of Education

YWCA Board of Directors
Civitan Club

Optimist Club

Dependent upon
solving the state's
fiscal problems

With the exclusion
of offering to work
for the new college
effort

Cautiously recom-
mended that the
legislature review

the Bussell Rppgpt;

and adopt the recom-
mendation of establish-
ing a new college in
the Grand Rapids area

7132: Y. :C r

M.—
'v
I—
5.4.

}-\w
I

V' .~'
n q.

u..
)5 "
b.‘

43

Table V. (Continued) Organizations Supporting the Resolution Favoring

the Establishment of a Four-Year College in the
Grand Rapids Area

 

 

 

Date Received Organization Emendations

 

 

1-16-59

Kent County Council of PTA's

Business and Professional Women's
Association of Grand Rapids, Michigan

Progressive Business and Professional
Women's Club of Grand Rapids,

American Association of University
Women of Grand Rapids

Coopersville Rotary

Grand Rapids Junior Chamber of Commerce
Board of Directors

Kent County Board of Supervisors

Inter Club Council

Education Committee of the Grand
Rapids Chamber of Commerce (a point in

their pbrk plans for the year)

Grand Rapids Chamber of Commerce

 

 

51

i

u

L. ‘3'! 1333 as

.‘U‘
A

5

’~ '.I' -‘\.
’JJ:..\‘ '1

lb

LIKES:
0

p

8.

W33] 3 3‘; 4'

~32
..

7.. 0.. J
.‘U'JJ

43*; ~
4 'o‘

p
.h
as...

x; '3‘-
H‘n‘..1

hi.

‘3. .

.3,-

:26

$7313»

.7. O
\~.5
"J.’l&l on.

A. .

N

iii-‘16-

~\~

44

well into 1959 as is seen from the dates of the resolutions.

Correspondence indicates that there was some groping for procedure on
the part of the CEFYC. They apparently wanted all the weight of community
support they could gain. At the November 7, 1958, meeting of the CEFYC it
was decided to get statements from Calvin and Aquinas concerning their
attitudes toward a new college. Watkins stated in an interview in February ,
1963, that he had visited with Msgr. Arthur Bukowski, of Aquinas College and
that Seidman had visited with President William Spoelhof, of Calvin College, and
that neither college opposed a new state-supported college. And a letter dated
November 26, 1958, from Seidman to the CEFYC members states that although
both he and several others had missed the last meeting, they should consider
these points at the next meeting, December 5, 1958:

1. They should plan a meeting with the legislators of the area at some

event sponsored by the Grand Rapids Chamber of Commerce.

2. They should work to get the Grand Rapids City Commission, the

East Grand Rapids City Commission, and the Kent County Board
of Supervisors to support the resolution.

3. They should continue their program to have various fraternal and

social organizations to support the resolution.

4. They should get more radio and TV publicity.

5. They should contact groups from surrounding towns to coordinate

their program with the Grand Rapids effort. (Seidman had
spoken before the Muskegon Rotary on the topic of a new college
on October 16, 1958.)

A memo in the Seidman correspondence that must have been written late in

1958 states the following plans, and is headed "Ideas on what needs to be done

in Western Michigan. "

~0 -w.....oo '
1. Gt. cannuaaotkLs
.0 sap..- raw,-
2. Gt. hag—4" no .s O
£41.5Ae; .',."
& '4¢.J.a..-u...
. I '
.‘q‘w.-"F-
't“':ourrfi.

‘ ‘
h islnniir:

C. T15; wr';

.' Cw ’,‘ 5 1 u.
' t" )3 3'- 1.12"
' 1
1'“ ‘-‘-" w»
| I. .. “I‘d. b
1 an .
a“! - - r- .
H .54..th a- c“.
fi‘l“;'-
".*-~:=
.
d 3"» _ ‘ .
u ‘ A“ 1“: 3“!"
6
.. ‘
I C‘tb Ira-’1'49 ‘
- .‘ .,
;\. ~
' ‘-
‘.. ’y. .
' “‘N' 3" o .
t ...1 h. h,
. ' -
‘ a
‘K H. ‘~
"he: ‘hcl ~ _-
b"u I: ‘
h 1
.‘i ‘1. .
.~“: 1 n ‘
‘
3“ka b. ._‘
‘~

\
m.
”a: ‘2 Jiv-
\‘.:‘H. T
O
.1: ‘L;._
\ H
N
k kcl‘e 1“
‘4
j‘s:_-
\‘g 1"“.
‘1‘ 5‘ r- .
‘ s
t.~,
.3 L,
‘\ \_.
“th1- m .
4“;
:\,~.
\ '1
N.
‘4 M.
\k. .‘I“
‘K‘“L‘.. I
r. 1'8:
s YT".
N..- P-K‘M
cup
.‘I F- ~
‘qu ~ -
‘~:e~ .
I
"1);“
«3‘ .- \
\: 04'.
“'sr.-
."~ \.
it . .

45

1. Get committees fully organized, including radio, T.V., and newspaper.
2. Get some major sub-committees to study:
a. Educational needs of the area or types of programs that need to
be developed.
b. Financial requirements needed.
c. Branch or independent?
d. Best location.

3. Get 500 dollars in treasury so can get letterhead stationery, and the
Q-A material must be duplicated and easy to read.

4. Organize an aggressive program with the Speakers Bureau in three
counties.

5. Print and develop a system to distribute fifteen Q and A.

6. Get resolutions signed and ready to be presented to State Board of
Agriculture and to legislators from W. Mich. area. I
This memo shows some ambivalence in Seidman's attitude toward how the
college should be established, as references to the State Board of Agriculture
indicate. Not all the ideas, as events transpired, were followed.

At the December 5 meeting the CEFYC did form plans to meet with legis-
lators on January 7, 19 59, at the University Club.

At this time, in addition to the forthcoming meeting with the legislators
which will be reviewed in detail later, an interesting correspondence was going
on between Seidman and A. Jack Bronkema, a businessman from Standale, a
small community ten miles west of Grand Rapids.

In the morgue files of the Grand Rapids Press in 1962 there was a mime-
ographed sheet. This sheet was, and maybe still is, in an envelope containing

clippings on Grand Valley State College from the Grand Rapids Press of 1957,

 

1958, and 1959. On this mimeographed sheet there is an item concerning

"4“. '(
t Pkg-I11. '.‘ ml.» -.
L13...

' . A . u‘:
"'" 3:3: It! 11‘. .1-

- ~ ("w
""'""" I.)

I
'. . I v .
.4..." ::h stut

" ‘ ‘Pn‘rw- ‘
r" ht}; :L‘JNCQ a:
h...

" ‘ 0'. ‘
llI‘ I ‘ .---.. ‘
al A . : '.)-:" ‘ 1C .\ Q‘l

if:
Q..“ ‘.- ' . ‘
C - “I: ’ #1 ob-
“‘~' m5“. a... ..
“‘VL'. ' .
a 9-, ‘ .. .
-~...'~)¢: LJA ‘ at “ C .
-.
.‘._ ' T
V. —. .,.. .
. i . u I.
n... ..:J..4'H -‘L.' 13.21
uh
‘5‘. y- ' _v .
-~. ."‘:i5~a '32. l
o .
I. '- .. 5
\I..‘I.A.:1J'u ‘3‘ '7‘.

3x"; ~.. . '
4.... QP: I ~,' _
. 5yuo me \ to.
”N. , .
., ‘ “.011 ' ‘
‘ r» .
1..» J4“:
w.
a» _
\S- F f ‘ _u
“h" .
. -‘ c ..
\t. ‘1'“ I“ .
. 41‘ ft: ;
u

.b-
‘ v
{is £55 ”.1.-
““At‘f‘ja-
§.'
\5- _
.: aft $391". -.
"' ‘14» .1
L..
.tg “_ v
"Q :1." ‘ 1
J M1
“ ‘. ~
.. [18.5 )C‘;
3‘“

46

Mr. Harold B. White of Walker Township who was talking to various PTA
groups there to arouse their interest in a new college to be established there,
in Walker Township. (Walker Township lies roughly west and north of the
northwest corner of Grand Rapids.) The correspondence between Bronkema
and Seidman concerns these speeches. White had urged the PTA groups in
Walker Township to support a resolution to be presented to the State Legis-
lature which stated that the State Legislature should use their efforts to
locate a college in Walker Township, that Walker Township was a desirable
location for a four-year college, that land was available in Walker Township,
that the residents there would cooperate to the fullest extent for services for
the new college, and that zoning and planning in Walker Township was the most
desirable for a new college.

This resolution passed the Walker Township Board meeting of January 6,
1959. Bronkema objected in: a letter to Seidman, stating that he thought
White's action was premature. Both Bronkema and White were running for
township clerk. Bronkema offered Seidman and the CEFYC the support of the
people west of the city. The correspondence between Bronkema and Seidman
continued until around February, 19 59. Bronkema was elected clerk. And
in the files of resolutions supporting the establishment of the college are
contained similar resolutions signed by the Walker Township groups. (Table VI)
But what might have ended in separate movements came to be merged in the
greater area movement, not necessarily through any one individual effort.
Chances are that had White been elected Walker Township clerk the same
results would have occurred. The Walker Group were merely interested in
getting the college in Walker Township. The Walker Township Board in its

decision to press the Legislature to establish a college in Walker Township

i

.8

\

47

Table VI. Groups Supporting Walker Township Resolutions Urging
Support of a Four-Year College

 

 

 

 

Date Group

1-7-59 Walker Township Board
2-20-59 Fairview PTA

--- Simon School Board
2-9-59 Shawmut Hills School Board
1-29-59 Beech Grove School Board
2-19-59 Standale Business Association
2 - 59 Walker Township District Number 1 Board
2-16-59 Walker Station School Board
2-9-59 Walker District Number 5 Fr. Board
2-20-59 Shawmut Hills PTA
2-19-59 Oakleigh School Board
2-26-59 Zinser PTA
2—10-59

Walker Township District Number 13 Fr.
Board

Walker Christian School

I I Q
'4‘. 92.,“ .‘ . ~ ‘ N:
_aLu. an. H'. r. I“ ~. .

.5 .
3.; )- 'NL
“ ‘HJQV . -
“J; g.
o -5
‘1
J";-_
g‘d‘ 2n '1
. ,c ‘ ‘
K" '2
‘1‘"‘1 .1
A
:5-3 3
-“ A'F‘I." ‘
. u": Ch'.~‘
um“.
I
~._.
"x

n
i
,.
. "\- 1.
”1“.“
“J's ’ .3.
J Ls.‘
L-‘__
'Q';\§
‘5‘ thi-
‘ re; 7.
\«‘m
:6
. (\-
K‘KSNH‘ .
J.”
”:an 0L
‘ .
. ‘O‘
<‘?~.
‘.JI""
Q‘ ‘
”I 3841‘
\ ~ .‘
‘ ji‘f-l; ‘
\4 -'
lg“ ,,
IK ‘ .‘
.Q"_.
Rh. u.‘-
. ‘H‘k .
. ‘wg; ‘u
v,“ u.

48

did no damage. It hardly seems probable, in light of the many problems the
CEFYC had to overcome, that the Walker Township efforts would have gone
much farther. It seems that no organized group existed there apart from the
Township Board and no one there had the time or the information or the neces-
sary backing to carry the effort to a successful conclusion. Yet,the work of
the Walker Township Board in obtaining the resolutions did work well into

the plans of the CEFYC.

The January _7 meeypg. Anticipating the forthcoming meeting on January
7, 1959, the CEFYC sent letters to several principal figures in the area.

By division of labor, clearing their workthrough Chairman Seidman, the CEFYC
invited to the January 7 meeting area legislators, superintendents of schools,
selected business and industrial leaders, mayors, and newspapermen.

(Table VII) A speakers' bureau had already been organized to dispense informa—
tion about the need for the new college. The January 7, 1959, meeting was
held on Thursday at the University Club in the Michigan Trust Building, a
business and legal office center in Grand Rapids. The sponsor was the

Grand Rapids Chamber of Commerce. Here is the first challenge the CEFYC
faced. , Arranging the dinner was a bold move. If it succeeded, well; if it

failed, it would be a severe setback.

According to the recorded minutes of the meeting and the correspondence
ensuing, the results of the meeting were favorable to the aims of the CEFYC.
Seidman opened the meeting with these humorous comments: "Our committee
is non-partisan. My purpose is to be coach of the football team. " The com-
mittee had decided that this meeting was to acquaint principals in the
c ommunity with the purposes and the progress of the CEFYC. The Committee

wanted to give the legislators a chance to ask questions and to discuss the

L's-I: \TL t" ,

s.

1.4."...P:

. n
~‘M-._,\ ‘ ~
.

‘H -VN;:‘ .1
. . ‘-
e~:~}‘ . B
-.....‘ l‘k‘d‘r
I C‘
" -\
I an?! n 64 h
“ t: ‘.~‘.~
.
p
.‘
‘“.‘E YE.“-
. ~“~-..-

a;
l:‘y_1‘l ‘
~ A
B‘s J‘. 3...: ‘
t.
x.
“i
5

t._ l
3‘.IH' u
\. ‘17- ”.1
“fi.
\v
:13“; i
‘
M" d"’- L
h.
§\ ~.
‘
'u‘t‘n’

Table VII. Citizens at Meeting at University Club on January 7,1959,
Grand Rapids, Michigan

 

 

Legislators

Perry Greene - Grand Rapids

' Charles Feenstra - Grani Rapids
Andrew Bolt - Grand Rapids
Edward Borgman - Grand Rapids
Thomas Whinery - Grand Rapids
T. Charles Rapp - Muskegon County
Harry Emmons - Kent County
Ben Lohman - Allegan County
Carroll Newton - Eaton, Clinton Counties
Edward Hutchinson - Allegan County

Clyde Geerlings - Ottawa County

CEFYC
.Robert Bennett, Jr. ' F. William McKee
Martin Buth L. William Seidman
David Dutcher Richard VanderVeen
James Idema Robert Van Ess

Harry Lawford

 

o . 1"
*2‘L‘\ . H.
Q...-

N

“‘7 '-v- '-
Cndhc‘.‘

-

~\~
\

9" I

0.1:“ J F'._."

--.""‘ u a»!
.

1" "V Pa-_”:'h
at. N“ ‘&a....'

; , I've- ‘
n.3,L“.J

. I
I ‘Z’fi‘ ‘ii!.fi;" T‘
EQ v.
1 I‘m _
W \ V;‘:"1

I
~‘ i

50

Table VII. (Continued) Citizens at Meeting at University Club on

January 7 , 1959, Grand Rapids, Michigan

 

 

Citizens

Occupation or Position

Home

 

 

Edward J. Frey
Arthur Hannah

John Visser
Benjamin Buikema
Robert Richardson

Stan Davis
William Doorn
Henry Koster

Wendell Miles

Walter Scott

Dr. John Kitchell
Ralph Van Volkinburg

Joe La Valley
Ross Shoecraft

Vidian Roe

Irvin Helmey

Banker
Poultry raiser

Dean, Grand Rapids
Junior College

Superintendent of
Schools, Grand Rapids

Mayor, East Grand
Rapids

Mayor, Grand Rapids
Mayor, Wyoming
Mayor, Grandville

Board of Education,
Holland

Superintendent of
Schools , Holland

Board of Education
Grand Haven

Superintendent of
Schools, Grand Haven

Department store owner

Editor, Fremont News-
paper

' Editor, Wayland

Newspaper

East Grand Rapids

Grand Rapids

Grand Rapids

Grand Rapids

Grand Rapids
Grand Rapids
Wyoming

Grandville

Holland

Holland

Grand Haven

Grand Haven
Allegan

Fremont

Fremont

Wayland

51

Table VII (Continued) Citizens at Meeting at University Club on January
7, 1959, Grand Rapids, Michigan

 

r— r——'v

 

Citizens

Occupation or Position

Home

 

 

Bernard Passage
Jack Bronkema

John Wurz

Lee Woodruff

City Manager, Grandville
Discount store owner

Managing Editor,
Grand Rapids Herald

 

Managing Editor,
Grand Rapids Press

 

Grandville

Standale
Grand Rapids

Grand Rapids

 

 

1

'.~"

‘1

‘MMA

- I-
.'L.u\a
Q
‘D-
-.-\QO‘ ‘ ' .V
aufiiorl‘ ‘
. o
.- .:- -.'
‘¥ bwa'r .‘.\
Q

~ at
-.. .
l
n' k. "
II -

...

 

.. t.-. ._ . w c ..
I. ‘ 1 ill . i ‘
~ . .1.\ \ .3 K . s n ‘ be a“ MV‘ \:A\ v J.“
r.. . l u ..- .2 . ~ ... .J -.
a... . a . . . .4 .. m C . Nu 3.
n O u .
. .9 a .1 v1 31.. u ”N i.
. . ..d . a
Hula. ‘4‘ .u ... _w.. . a. m M.“ .5 . .J. r
. .. l I I J
... v1 ‘15 t .3 I .3: NH. fits Lu
ex Lu F 1%“ JIM .u v u. JG .1.“ 3‘— ..N
INN L. ’4 J]. I . .,..J h .3 P NJ» dun
... _ s :1 he .11. r.» .IJ. 1% s \\ ..\U
D .J— at“ ~Kb .\ .14 . a \- \ .Au.
. .... a \ .... .pu .\ . c ., ..B 7.: . . ..
..\ . .u a. .5 . yak ~\. 5.6 .l u .. .
.. ... . u n u n.& ..Q KIM. kl. .. .. ...r .b Q
. i .. . .. .. . ... ...
1 M.\ 1 .
II. 1 n

('3

various aspects of the establishment of a new college. Seidman presented the

facts of the Russell Report again, as he had done other times in other places.

 

He emphasized the need resulting from population and enrollment figures.

He stressed the Russell statements concerning geographical distribution of
students. He pointed out that the private colleges and junior colleges could
not adequately fulfill the needed educational service. He introduced Edward
Frey, President of the Grand Rapids Chamber of Commerce and President
of The Union Bank. Martin Buth introduced the guests. David Dutcher
commented upon the fifteen questions and answers that had been sent out to
various citizens in the community. Seidman again took the floor and dropped
the names of the many individuals and organizations who had officially stated
they would support and work for a new college. He had gotten from Chancellor
Durwood Varner of Michigan State University - Oakland, comparative figures
on costs to the student for his education if he lives at home and if he lives on
campus. He had gotten these figures as early as mid-1958. Seidman cited
an 800 dollar difference in cost to the student.

Edward Frey then pointed out that the Michigan economy was linked to the
fortunes of the automotive industry and that small institutions with small
classes could provide the kind of quality education needed for research and
expansion in industry. He said the most efficient spending of the tax dollar
would be spent in this way.

Stan Davis, Grand Rapids mayor, stated that he could not afford to go to
college and that his children would not get four years of college because he
could not afford to send them away. Seidman pointed out that no place could
the legislators get more for their tax dollar than right in Grand Rapids by

investing it in a new college.

' .
‘.|'

I? ""“ Y‘;' .. _ _-
-h. u-‘: “t‘: c".:..‘ :1

22.22. tannin, agj ;

:i;.l-3. ‘ ". PI-k‘

.L :
“ rMth..t-.J

“ I

.7 _‘

‘._. ) F"‘~'.". - . .
.hj L- t=\H.{:_='

A“. 'q§v-,

w*'

A I ‘
“u
. ’v—o
' '5! ”-3-..‘n ‘
. I
4m.-.
"n. :-~
\r-“‘
- ~“""~d :41!
~ I
"q
.l-
‘~~~ w... 3“” -
J. n V“
n...
3‘». I,.
. ‘_
‘I‘.“*.5 o, .h; ‘- ‘
' ' ‘
- . ‘ .1

n-Y‘I“. -‘

L|.-u S: as 1.“.- ‘

‘3’: 3"0, 1‘
k “‘14:?

'3". v. ..
* JAt"‘ v
A u
3*; t.
.J, .
'J :
.‘ é . 1‘,
“(5‘1“
3.15 “I" _ _
J‘ll’l V.
‘\_ "‘
4:. 3""
* 7‘
“and 3
‘Oh'fi :
\_ ‘45
I“ .
\‘i ’I’
”M.“ ‘r‘.
~ .J ‘l-
. ‘15 T!" "
|\ .

53

‘ When the legislators were invited to the meeting, they had all been invited
upon the same basis in the same way. Correspondence files indicate this.
But Senator Clyde Geerlings, Chairman of the Senate Taxation Committee, was
sent a personal letter by Seidman. Geerlings had long been known for his con-
servative views concerning spending and taxation. Seidman was an expert in
finance, taxation, and investments, as was his firm, nationally known.
Seidman had published several articles in national magazines that dealt with
taxation, investments, and financial matters. (Table XVI)

Thus, anticipating Geerlings' thoughts, Seidman had sent Geerlings a
letter in December with a courteous inquiry on whether he would attend the
January 7 meeting. He carefully explained why the meeting was called.
Geerlings assented to come.

When Stan Davis made his plea for a new college, Geerlings spoke up,

according to the Grand RaLids Press reports of January 8, 1959, and minutes

 

of the meeting.
Geerlings: I don't see how we can get any money for any new
college as long as we have this 100 million dollar deficit in
the State treasury.

Davis: What's the difference, Senator, between 100 million
and 102 million?

Benjamin Buikema, ’ Superintendent of Schools of Grand Rapids, stated that
there had been too much negative thinking in the area. He stated that the Board
of Education favored a new school. If there were a college, he said, more
students would go. He cited age-cohort population figures, and that 10, 000
area students would be seeking a college education by 1970. Dr. John Visser,
Dean of Grand Rapids Junior College, said that 10, 000 was too low an esti-
mate; 20, 000 was more realistic; that Junior College enrollment had doubled

Since those figures had been published; that one out of three college-age

.--. - - . ‘-
522:-'.: 3CD; L:- L.

n. . v o ’0' 1
-~---O-‘ a
t .- '3 l

a
o I ~
oafi‘uucd. o no."

. - . .
V"? 1:“
v\.-Louua ¢~ o~

* yo o

”'ZH.’ , "'flhv— w

" “"5. t ‘-~HAL~: - ._

luv-'92.... D~‘!1
~‘~.-‘LD '

cg...“

-

.5 . - '

“...-"7 W‘W‘ 0.-
' “a“. ..

I--', , .

-12; f r hm;

m
‘H ‘ hr
“-1 l ; ‘ho
....
U
'\
1‘ "13‘ D"
“‘G V‘ a.
1 .. L‘\ "I
§
‘1‘ v.._ C .
’u. I 1"" .,
tn 3“": ’.
I ~l
'
'2'.“
‘H '
" ...-‘3’ f“ '
. nL‘tx 5"

.'j. N.
... bWh‘N.
“‘\I u

_ rfi-‘L

I
3;"; ‘
“s 3‘. ,.
‘N . ‘r
96...]; .
. ‘\. .
‘I
§;~ -
41:1) .
v - .
fIi:\.
“JF mini
kg ' ‘,
L
1'; ,,
<5 .
‘l \' h.
. guru.
. ‘\~
'.\

54

students were in college according to the President's Commission on Higher
Education, but that one out of two was a desirable figure.

Seidman insisted that there was one thing people would pay for: education.
Senator Hutchinson optimistically stated that a name for the new college was
needed. Edward Frey pointed to a North Carolina effort to bufld a new college
in which 1. 5 million dollars was raised through private effort.

The final point made by Seidman was that the CEFYC sought a small amount
of money from the legislature to carry on a further study of the eight-county

needs for higher education.

Other activities preceding the J amrich Report. On December 8, 1959,

 

Seidman had sent a letter to the CEFYC members stating that Dr. John X.

J amrich, Director of the Michigan State University Center for Higher Educa—
tion, would speak at a dinner meeting on January 15, 1960. He was to address
the East Kiwanis Club at Trinity Methodist Church. Buschman was a partici-
pant in this group. Seidman requested that he, Seidman, be allowed to bring
about twenty people to the meeting. Seidman wanted Dr. J amrich to ”go into
the problems of starting a new college here and the types of studies that

should be made. ” Buschman complied with Seidman's request to bring
several people to the meeting to hear the speech.

J amrich, according to the Grand Rapids Press, stated that there was no
question that the Grand Rapids area needed a new college. The question was
how a study factually establishing the need could be made. Either the legis-
lature could establish a commission to study the needs or the legislature

could authorize the CEFYC to do it. 4
' During the weeks following the January 7 meeting the CEFYC received a

great deal of encouragement from newspaper editorials lauding their efforts.

:Js:
*LL...

'v-

9‘0
‘ ‘
0..
a
..
C

‘3

n
0
a

Kiwi,

.Y
A

0.
.,’5'
“.‘u

~55... i.)

. 9

‘ ‘ ~P"
Hi 3x

II .
.1
35754.,

.“‘4. .

s.

N“:

..x
.
L...
\-
—.

v. 4 ‘
M.“

\-

rat-u:
Niki)

1.-
«I 1":

55

Editorials and columns urging support for a new college in the eight—county

area appeared in the Grand Rays Press, the Grand Rapids Herald, The

 

 

Fremont Times — Indicator, The Grand Haven Daily Tribune, The Wayland

 

 

 

Globe. Editors of these papers were present at the January 7 meeting, except

Mr. Almon McCall of the Grand Haven Tribune, who, nevertheless, was to

 

become a firm supporter of the new college movement.

In fact, on January 19, 1959, McCall write Seidman that he wanted the
Grand Haven and Holland areas included in whatever plans Seidman and his
group had. Seidman answered that he was in favor of this, and asked whether
McCall Would chair any committee in Ottawa County. McCall could not, letters
reveal, but would find someone energetic and capable. His efforts and the
efforts of his co—workers resulted in Mrs. Grace Kistler assuming the chair.
Her work, later events prove, was valuable, and the North Ottawa 2%
especially became a strong bulwark in favor of the college when times of
stress came on.

An indication of Seidman's enthusiasm following the response of the news-
papers and others after the January 7 meeting is found in .a letter dated January
13, 1960, from Seidman to the CEFYC. He thanked them each for getting
the legislators to the meeting. "They don't stand on the table to show their
interest, but they were interested, " he stated, and offered to provide free
cocktails at their next meeting, January 23, in the Peach Nook at the
Pantlind.

Preceding the January 7 meeting, the CEFYC had been trying to determine
which people in the eight-county area could be called upon to organize work
committees to work for the establishment of the new college. Early lists
include AFL—CIO labor leaders, service club leaders, farm bureau leaders,

PTA leaders, and other area-wide volunteer group leaders. There was

71.22%! 3 311; “E It. ‘

 

__‘_ ::116 he ml; it 1.3.5“ .

11:3 )r m: CJiun .15.?) r

<~¢ I

fix; . ‘ 3L._...~ct‘.lcd :1 H

wag”. - .

_..._._....,:cc.;1e as he; \i a r:

.I'TSLIF at Michigan or ‘

. :N
s: ~ B” " ‘ ' .
fit. uh mt Ur'r' h

r.» J51“ -

36.11 - "4 '
4.1. Mb be seer. '1 -'
thb

"r-iw’fl dict min”. "

i-

‘ 35.513513 E

31"“

“aw-'4"

_ .-..nmistsftim "
I. *

El... ._
“4““ ‘
a: n‘ “'
r‘m‘lbit for at n.

 

:-. .
4h: new 1959 1...: ‘

a.
..., . G _ . |
" E414 ltgfill"
3.7..“ '
I' ‘ M ‘F-" ‘
.‘L‘fc.
“we: a .
ECJC‘RIUI‘. t0 .

WE 4 Edi". .r
B‘i?
... B
Jhgman av“ ‘2']
x ‘J ‘V‘
K“. FIL‘ '
a...“ res»! .
’ H
as I
s accorql'fi’)
I"? “ I"; Y
:= v.Er
E u ‘ .
.. Baa-1M .
fiat-r» ‘

56

needed, it was felt, not only citizens who had prestige and influence by
virtue of their occupation but also by virtue of their community service and
volunteer work. Thus, though a man might not rank high on an occupational
index scale he might rank high in the community because of his work at the
YMCA or his Community Fund Drive efforts. The lists of citizens were
revised and augmented several times. Each was appointed-on the basis of
his community prestige, his willingness to lend his name and support to

the effort - and always with his permission. Obviously, the names of several
prominent people who were unequivocally in favor of a branch of either the
University of Michigan or Michigan State University may not have been on

the list. But the opposition to the CEFYC's efforts did not come from these
people, as will be seen later. The final firm Citizens' Committee (Table VIII)
was compiled after many trials and revisions. Not everyone worked equally
hard; Mrs. Augusta Eppinga, secretary toSeidman, stated that about 10

per cent did most of. the work. But the nominal support of the entire group
was indispensible for what had to be done.

For the new 1959 legislature session had begun, and the CEFYC bent its
efforts to gain legislative sanction for its purpose. Representative Charles
Boyer had sponsored a resolution continuing the Legislative Study Committee
on Higher Education to "keep our facts and figures straight" it was reported

in the February 4 edition of the Grand Rapids Press.

 

Bolt, Borgman and Whinery, Grand Rapids legislators, were working on
getting another resolution introduced to study the needs in the eight-county

area, but, according to the January 23, 19 59, edition of the Grand Rapids

 

Press, were undeciw whether to seek a study committee or seek a direct

appropriation.

I- I .. ~v'." r. 1
.... u. uh sv ." &
liganlu C~“:I ‘.

2;: iii ’5'. of $356 beg-gt:

3'?" , _Apx- ' “ .
nickname of 3.1. ”

;;—~ -0‘ «-
.unqub, C

1310 Imus.

...,

5...... .L.'.1~¥. ,- ' t. ..
"Nu: fla%.ah ADC tutu?"
:‘VI‘O-

--:==

71-..- -
3:an of January 1

.1 '3‘
ire if it: ne'er f ~r h.
I} h'augh Febr‘ir:
~ ZitCEFYC eff wr‘
353»: b5 Harald 1. mg}
533% €\‘EI‘\' 2!) f ....

ar.
flick
ktf’ta
r after F'.‘L
\‘)1“
3. .. "‘
4 4:11!“

57

The CEFYC's efforts did bear some early fruit. Benjamin Buikema spoke
before the Kent County Superintendents of Schools at a meeting January 30,
1959, at which he supported the idea of a new college. Also. Seidman announced
that the list of those backing the resolution supporting the new college was
swelling. Paul Phillips, candidate for election to the Board of Education of
Grand Rapids, and active NAACP member, stated at a meeting of the
Ambassadress Club on January 26, 19 59, that the Board should take an option
on land for a four-year college. He advocated that the Board should call an
action conference of all the representatives from city and county governments,
educators, civic leaders, PTA leaders, state representatives, and others to

solidify thought and future action on the college according to a Grand Rapids

 

Press report of January 27, 1959. Although his remarks seem to show some
lack of knowledge of whatlnd happened with Board initiative after the activity for
the new college had been assumed by the CEFYC and of the meeting on January
7, his remarks do show that different community leaders were becomingmore
aware of the needs for higher education in the area.

Up through February, the Walker Township efiorts had not been coordinated

with the CEFYC efforts. A letter to the PublicPulse in the Grand Rapids Press

 

written by Harold Loucks objected to Walker Township's funds being spent for
something everyone favored anyway. He stated that the effort to get a college
didn't need promotion in Walker Township since everyone was for it anyway.

I

This appeared in the February 13, 19 59, edition of the Grand Rapids Press.

All correspondence and Grand Rapids Press articles on the Walker agitation

 

disappear after February, 19 59. Seidman stated that the Walker movement
did not hinder the CEFYC efforts, and it is confirmed here that since both

were working for the same end, their efforts merged, especially in view of

.a 322.: of :hc' legsllttrz

|fil,'P';‘-lw
3.5;..13. K1 )1,- " 7' " I.
. .S. Emmi.

 

58

the action of the legislature that occurred shortly after this. Martin Buth,
according to Mrs. Eppinga, finally delivered the copies of the Walker

resolutions to Seidman.

D';'.’¢F‘471- ‘R: {‘3' n. 00 . ..
4..»-‘.... “ J. ““
“__—

q-w- --'

......423'. the vans-us r:
inf-L: 3f bait coax-.3211: l
Maury T Inertia; C

F's-4v inr- ~ - ‘ '
H- lt". uquhtCJ'Ju h.

at as editars at the aw» .~

;--... “... '

'f“"\;=g 3541.21. PL (5;: :-

43? - Gran-i Haw C
M I

3' ‘h-J‘ .
"T- 41:

.\‘ ;‘-.. -
.1... “03- F: ._'

 

 

Siam G .

rant; Ivnia C I
r‘bs...‘ ‘
‘ts'lie. ‘

\l'aylmd. A’s'.

..fl- :3
ms".—
run; to I! .
‘. I 3‘ (‘IF‘
5} ‘

CHAPTER IV

LEGISLATIVE SANCTION, THE JAMRICH REPORT,
FURTHER CEFYC ACTIVITIES - 1959

Preparations for getting legislative sanction. In their appeal to the
community, the various members of the CEFYC had aroused interest and
support of both community leaders, the press, and the area legislators at
the January 7 meeting. Correspondence files show that series of letters
were being interchanged between the CEFYC (through Chairman Seidman) .
and the editors of the newspapers of these cities: Kent County - Cedar
Springs, Sparta, Rockford, Grandville, Lowell, Grand Rapids; Ottawa
County - Grand Haven, Coopersville, Zeeland, Holland; Montcalm County —
Greenville; Muskegon County - Muskegon; Newaygo County - Fremont,
Newaygo, Grant; Ionia County - Ionia; Allegan County - Hamilton, Saugatuck,
Fennville, Wayland, Allegan; and Barry County - Freeport, Middleville,
Hastings. Correspondence also continued with Almon McCall of the 931.129.
Haven Tribune and was begun with Ralph Van Volkinburg, superintendent of
schools of Grand Haven. Lieutenant Governor Swainson had written VanderVeen
of the CEFYC on February 11 that a study of the eight-county area in more
depth than the Russell Report had been suggested to him by Superintendent
of Public Instruction, Lynn Bartlett, and that Van Volkinburg, of Grand
Haven, was doing some area studies of North Ottawa education needs.

Previous to this, on January 20, 1959, Seidman had written Representatives
Bolt, Borgman and Whinery that the first steps necessary now were to get the

legislature to recognize the need for the college and to provide some money

59

 

:23? 15. mi “35 5'1?"
:Tzfiefl'een.

Matting 16. 19 33-

   
   

3.223: ii. the area. '1": t

i u
......
. 5‘» o".

...is are to be us...

sr;:--‘w‘ . ' ‘
.a...rcccn-ti 5122(- 1'.

Fw‘n 9 ‘
.-.; it, “3'th estate.

\

5‘“! ‘
hast. Tm: F'fiifpiall *“ '
.'.I

'.““l‘ '
.t“,.~~::r M'VL- ‘ '
“Ht! Eu ‘h n‘ . ‘ .-
v M\\A\. .

u
‘‘‘‘

:v\ "
Uh: 'J“ n'Y'h
. th"] . '.
“Lu“: Hi if
:8

F9 , .
a want:
HE :éz' w-
s 7‘
\ak‘dtlt‘n “f
as
9* .
“F‘sbh
« Lin. -
. ‘
.‘\ N ‘

60

for further study of the needs of the Grand Rapids area. This letter follows
the recommendations that J amrich had made before the Kiwanis meeting on
January 15, and was supported by Lieutenant Governor Swainson's suggestions
to VanderVeen.

On February 16, 1959, the CEFYC through Seidman applied to the Grand
Rapids Foundation for funds to finance a further study of the needs for higher
education in the area. The Grand Rapids Foundation is a non—profit institution
whose funds are to be used for activities of community benefit, and had been
expanded recently since it had received a five million dollar gift from the late
Curtis M. Wylie estate. Seidman's request for funds to carry on a study was
granted. The Foundation gave 7, 500 dollars for a study of the eight-county
needs for higher education. The conditions of the grant were these: that the
study would be under control of the legislature and that it wouldbe completed
by the end of 1959. This letter of approval is dated February 27, 1959.

These conditions could have been viewed with elation or dismay- dismay
because of the time restriction and because of the necessity of legislative
sanction; elation because should legislative sanction be secured, the neces-
sity of completion of the study in 19 59 would probably hasten the actual and
desired, a new college.

There seems to have been some confidence that since the study would
cost the legislature nothing, a resolution providing for such a study would
have no trouble passing. If the ease of passing was assumed in February,
the assumption was premature.

On February 18, 1959, Seidman sent letters to each area legislator urging
his support for the area study. (Appendix IV) He assured them that they
would receive due publicity for what support they would give. They each

replied that they were favorably disposed toward the efforts, except Senator

9

I ‘ .
«.5. "We an: oral-.2.

 

T's: Grind Rigid; fie-r1]

    
  
 

FELT-{336011312 15:23.5 L.
3:11;): :if‘ as glad iii:
21:: einrnl to all Lina .

Enter 323W“; :5 pm:-

@2125“; Ind aces-9'- '- .. ~

I‘Li\ .\

;‘"\‘\;-‘-‘F'. 3 .
.: .... ”stratum;- -‘f i: '

J: 5.1:: Hi's'eu ROE;

“0 a
‘ 3 ‘JL

u;. .
_\kv’u “birth 34:11 J 1‘
:+-. ‘; L
‘32 EVEP _
“ mwkgh R
:1»

\ ‘:
grtSe‘ "
”“6 T
‘-
if“
L:- DC“

61

Geerlings. ”We are broke, ” is the implication of his letter.

The mmmm in an editorial on March 1, 1959, devoted
twenty-two column inches lauding the CE FYC efforts and the Grand Rapids
Foundation gift as good faith in the community effort. Seidman sent copies
of this editorial to all area legislators and to all area newspapers.

Other activities preliminary to actual legislative contact included the
appointment and acceptance by Mrs. John Kistler, of Grand Haven, to
the Vice-chairmanship of the Ottawa County group working for the new
college around March 14. On March 10, Seidman met with Buth (recently
elected to the legislature), Boyer, Hutchinson, and J amrich on how the
grant would fit into the plans. (Dr. John X. J amrich had worked with
Russell in his report.) Seidman also made an appointment to speak before
the Grand Haven Rotary on April 20. Much of the Grand Haven correspondence
was carried on with Van Volkinburg, whose letters show continuous interest
in and concern for the new college.

Plans were made for members of the CEFYC to meet with legislators
in Lansing on Tuesday, March 17, 1959. The legislature had passed Boyer's
resolution which authorized continuance of the state-wide study of higher
education even though Russell had completed his report. The CE FYC were
aware of this continued interest by the legislature. On March 17, Seidman
and members of the CEFYC met with Kent County legislators, with Boyer,
and with Hutchinson in Lansing at the Olds Hotel coffee shop to discuss further
steps to gain a college in the area. The March 18, 1959, edition of the
Grand RapidsgPress reviewed the outcome of the meeting.

Representative Thomas Whinery stated that he would introduce a resolu-

tion to establish a study committee consisting of three senators and three

3:2“:5623'3 {‘5 They a

it": i:;bfi iiaL-Cg mt c ”1.. ‘ ‘-

   
  

:21; have to b: 6323'.th - '-

23:. So ".3ch if): '.

m;
" ‘v.
~"-!-'JH ~ -.
s \q‘
‘0'] Q 1‘
. .1
'Mu-
& '55
~§ ‘* .
'JmM‘W
“g‘ .‘r
i'~'~
fi.‘ t

representatives. They would in turn appoint a representative group of
interested citizens from the eight-county area. This representative

group would hire a professional to help document the need and set up a plan
for establishing the college. At this meeting, it was thought that a site

would have to be donated - about two hundred acres worth around 200 thousand
dollars. No money from the bankrupt state was to be spent for this purpose,
but the state must be officially involved in the project. This study, then,
would be in conformity with the Russell survey. The justification for such

a study was based upon several years' activity to establish a college in

the Grand Rapids area. It was also backed by facts from the Russell Report

 

submitted to. the 19 58 legislature, and by the fact that such a detailed study
never had been made.

The Grand Rapids Herald stated that Whinery would introduce a resolu-

 

tion making a study of the eight-county area possible on Thursday or Friday,
March 19, or 20, 1959. He did so on Thursday, and stated that he antici-

pated no delay in legislative approval. In a Grand Rapids Press report

 

dated March 24, 1959, Whinery stated that since the Grand Rapids Foundation
had given 7, 500 dollars for the study no state moneys would be needed.

This committee was authorized to appoint a citizens' advisory committee
which could accept donations, contributions and grants or gifts from private
individuals, trusts, and foundations of any nature to expedite the committee's
functions. It was authorized to engage technical and clerical assistants;
it would receive no money from any state source, but was allowed to spend
private moneys. The members of the committee would serve without compensa-
tion; their expenses were to be paid from private moneys. The study would

determine the need for an establishment not connected with any existing

lszz’tpnl E‘IE m.) ‘ 'i: gt

:a S’=" 353:1 it Agricuitt

 

:;“1:'. .~ ‘

.... - 312.25.? 31058;: ;

'L'I"‘-.— v‘w' ‘
...-...)... ClLLtn and tort...

22:: "(prot- ‘7'

"db-shat, 1959‘ if. ‘6‘...

'lil'k' 361' chli-ge a * 3;

 

_\.. .... :3th Cami-J1 of

 

.1. it". .~.-- - ‘
......trul of charm” <

vd.‘
‘:M.P:3P " flrr‘.: '

‘. art c 'y.tt‘c’ It, 11
“‘In.
~‘-..=t ‘ '

W1 50! 5c ' m a-
‘41-“9.

~.’..iC|

“‘33. b 2'.
\f '
O‘tt' -
.1. h lmlsm ‘J’
5 SF ME 1'] I
K. 'W‘ A
tin . it hr
.\ L‘.‘ .. Q l

63

institution, even though the Michigan State alumni had gotten approval from
the State Board of Agriculture for the use of state-owned land west of Grand
Rapids if sizable moneys for buildings could be found. A March 25 editorial
in the @3393 mm lauded Whinery's and the Committee's work.

But there was opposition in the eight-county area. Donald Seyferth, a
Muskegon citizen and former Mayor of Muskegon, wrote a letter to Seidman
dated March 27, 1959, in which he objected generally to the philosophy up 0 n
which the new college was proposed. In this letter he stated that labor was
gaining too much control of all legal and extra-legal affairs of the state; that
labor had control of charity drives and government; and that if Seidman's
methods were applied, it, labor, would also control education. He stated
that he would not support any project that would result in the state's spending
more money. He stated that he was against spending tax moneys for minority
groups. Seidman's reply pointed out that one might as well give up any effort
for education from kindergarten on up if he objected to assisting minority
groups. Seyferth, in a letter dated April 8, wrote a stinging statement object-
ing to any state-wide distribution of local money. He objected to Seidman's
approach in the efforts for a new college, to Seidman's father's tax proposals
for the state, and wished Seidman an ironic "good-luck" on his work. He
advocated local benefits for local distribution. Not stated, but implied, was
an advocation that local paverty remain where it resides also. ( areview of
a report prepared by Seyferth which presents arguments against the establish-
ment of a new college is made in Chapter 1%)

Whinery's optimism over the passage of the resolution was not realistic.
Yet, the somewhat firm citizens' group now formed in the eight-county area
began to work under the assumption that the resolution introduced by Whinery

would pass. J amrich was directing some surveys through county vice-chairmen.

 

 

in Miorkm KC:

azzervacatiin. f0? 3"“

   
  

. _ H! 5‘.
15:33:15. This, m)?-
~.': I 0".- Ju ‘.) mu 3
Mini)! 12m ant
nesisznres had bad; :
p.222: Inez: s:'_.ué'?.t its. .

again. The result of '.

31%.;2210. The res 1:
xi. ' ' o

1554.
L paint t‘J " u
n ‘s]\ '
2'. Ed: the § c. ;_
it}. ‘

64

They began sending information-seeking questionnaires to parents and stu-
dents. This work had to be finished by the time school was outfor the
summer vacation, for much of the information was gotten from the students
in schools. Thus, though the legislature had not passed the resolution (and
would not until June) the county committees worked. By May 17, 1959, the
questionnaires had been sent out to tenth and twelfth graders and their
parents. They sought information on their expected needs for post-secondary

education. The result of this questionnaire appear in the J amrich Report.

 

Back in the legislature, the House Rules and Resolution Committee
reported the resolution out on April 8. The House approved it unanimously
on April 10. The resolution moved to the Senate Business Committee on
April 11. Here it got stuck.

Senator Carlton Morris, of Kalamazoo, was a member of the Senate
Business Committee. He opposed this House Resolution Number 28.
Senator Hutchinson,of Fennville, chairman, had foreseen no opposition.
Morris, with Western Michigan University in his "backyard" and Kalamazoo
College in his "front yard" stated his reasons for opposition in the M
Mg _I_>_r_§_s_s. He stated that the study provided for in the resolution should
not be paid for by private funds. He said a fairer, more unprejudiced study
would result if state moneys were used. He said that this study's being
financed by local funds, if approved, would open the door to all kinds of
local groups' offering local money for such studies. Yet, he said, if a
college were needed, Grand Rapids would be a good place for one.

His final approval of the resolution came about in several ways. It is
difficult to point to any one reason why Morris supported the resolution
finally. But these things happened: (1) Mrs. John Kistler, of Grand Haven,

wrote a long letter to Morris on June 2, 1959, chastising him for his delaying

k
at): Sheena: figures _;

time of Enema that

53:“ pitted out her lack . '

__ Tribne also amt.

 

Greer. of Gmi 83:13:

it... action on a punt

 

 

Y. .2..- .: ‘ UV
that. unit. the res

ftzttis as a member.
has? ten reports this.
1*: fir; Republican nomiz':
$13.31. This fact was
is iJFii'd 01.35st a if:-
12.562131 an ent-2.3m
5193.me preset:
"Jz-J'ne t.1333,t
2:.- 133g been he‘u‘
t ti

..- t
at“ ‘ k-

65

action. She cited figures and facts contained in the Russell Report and the

 

multitude of benefits that would be derived by the community from a college.
She pointed out her lack of selfish interest. Almon McCall, of the gaging
l_lgre_n Tribune also wrote Morris urging his support. (2) Senator Perry
Greene, of Grand Rapids, of, the State Affairs Committee in the Senate,
withheld action on a piece of property that was to go to Western Michigan
University until the resolution was reported out of the committee of which
Morris was a member. A letter from Lieutenant Governor Swainson to
VanderVeen reports this. (3) Morris seems to have been thinking of running
for the Republican nomination for governor. He would need Grand Rapids'
support. This fact was reported by a Michigan State University alumnus who
had worked closely with the CEFYC at this time. (4) David Dutcher stated
that he had an extended telephone conversation with Morris in which he
emphatically presented the facts of the need.

On June 4, 1959, the House Resolution Number 28 passed the Senate floor
after having been held up in committee since April 11, 19 59. It is interesting
to note that the resolution left the Senate Committee only hours before deadline.
Had the resolution been killed in committee, it would have had to be reintroduced
at a later time. Who knows what this setback would have done to events that
were occurring at the time. For a memo in the Seidman correspondence files
indicates that in early May objectives already had been established for the
legislative study. The memo lists these objectives: 1, establish the need
for the school statistically and determine its expected size; 2, determine the
type of education needed; 3, estimate the costs for capital expenditures over
the first tWo years; 4, determine the area to be served for maximum use;

5, determine the relationship to the junior colleges and other community

colleges; and 6, set up a time schedule.

/\

knee: Jamrich and Scii;
taxi): and liaison bi:— -.

o _ -1, n“ .
a: -Cé..‘u'$:l E Cilimliiu .

 

{.9

:"‘7'""él. this were 2‘:

2:11:33 grant to fines:

m2: at the pr-‘vzress of

U
\—

Hit-1E. Further SLl-C‘L" a -

 

‘fi': 9,-1'
M- _k

‘

3:1" 3:1: success u.
an: of the lIkII'viit

M»- in'JrI-z dune in l?-

0;-
u
fig.

’3'“? ~_ .
s brain-nan c; 43
~\
~ :::_
g .14“. -.

k.
ennJJr'z " ‘ h
‘ “bk «A:
;,“\;."
”Raft“ ..

‘Q..

5.; “I: ‘
3-1 .
k. the L Eli v\.‘

a: {‘1‘ ' a
‘smi i1:
(237-11
‘n a 5hr

66

On July 8, the CEFYC resolved to hire J amrich. The correspondence
between Jamrich and Seidman reveals that there was extremely close co-
operation and liaison between J amrich and the CEFYC. Whinery had appointed
the Legislative Committee, the Citizens' Advisory Committee was firmly
established, funds were regularly being allocated from the Grand Rapids
Foundation grant to finance the study, and the newspapers kept a regular
account of the progress of the J amrich study. All of what could be done had
been done. Further success now depended upon more of the same ingredients
that had brought success up to this point.

And part of the ingredients, according to Seidman, was the tremendous
amount of work done by interested citizens in assisting J amrich in preparing
his report. Seidman said that the task of sending out all the questionnaires
to different schools, the task of getting the responses from all the parents
who were asked to participate in the survey of expectations for their children's
attending college, and the collection and sorting of all this information was
done in the area. It took tremendous work on the part of the area citizens,
said Seidman, and this support was one of the early heartening factors.

Further encouragement came through the reports of the newspapers.

‘ Attention was called to a newspaper article in The Lansing State Journal, in
which John Hannah stated that Michigan State University was not carrying the
torch for the establishment of a lot of branches throughout the state. In the
article Hannah noted the rivalry between the two alumni groups for the establish-
ment of branches -—-the Michigan State and the University of Michigan groups - —
and stated that the University, itself, did not have great ambitions to

support a netWork of branches in Michigan. By the lack of newspaper reports
and correspondence, the Michigan State University and the University of
Michigan alumni groups in Grand Rapids seem to have been comparatively

silent during most of 1959 while the CEFYC was active.

TL. foggy-\f- DE." 1"
3;: :‘.......-- n -~u
_————.—- 4.-

1353:2113: Legislati-

 

2»; :mt' far a four-ye it.
:grrriic‘ plans hr its c-
12553:. mi to repart 2’.
‘82!" (Jamrich 1-‘.~.

was, and three p. pr.

233:6 3i fifty-ta o cizi

'5‘. n v
5. I1: v' . __'_ . ..~
ram R‘r’i-le arc:

g” t
8:: ”1;!" .

u...t‘ Berg Cort-122,...
5.23:7.-.

"" Amt citin-
K‘m; “3165 that t
.J_

4.. ..
NEH .
L... mtreidl‘e .

E ‘xyfi‘ml: .1:
at‘énd r “and:

67

The J amrich Report. "House Concurrent Resolution Number 28 of the

 

1959 Michigan Legislature created a Legislative Committee 'to further study
the need for a four-year, state-supported college in the Grand Rapids area,
to provide plans for its establishment, to create a citizens' advisory committee
to assist, and to report its findings and recommendations to the 1960 Legis-
lature. "' (Jamrich, 14-ii) The Legislative Committee consisted of three

'- senators, and three representatives. (Table VIII) The Citizens' Committee
consisted of fifty-two citizens from Kent County, eleven from Ottawa County,
seven from Muskegon‘County, five from Allegan County, three from Barry
County, four from Newaygo County, and one from Montcalm County. (Table VIII)

The. Legislative Committees appointed John X. J amrich to direct the study
of the Grand Rapids area and determine exactly what the needs and capabili-
ties there were concerning the establishment of a state institution of higher
education. After citing population and enrollment projections for Michigan,
J amrich states that education "brings with it generalized sociaL values, and
should, therefore, be supported to the largest possible degree by all of
society." (J amrich, 14-3) Jamrich states that opportunity for post-high
education should not be restricted by either economic or social levels of
individuals seeking such education.

The broad questions the study of the Grand Rapids area sought to answer
were these: (Jamrich, 14-7, 8)

1. Do currently available data on population and school

enrollments, and such projections as can be made regarding

future population trends and the desires of college-age youth

to attend college give indication of the need for the establishment

of a four-year degree-granting institution in this area?

, 2. If the need for such an institution can be established,

what should be the nature of the curriculum and instructional

program to most adequately meet the needs of youth from this .
portion of the state?

 

ya

Table VIII. Legislative and Citizens' Committees to Study the Need for
A Four-Year State-Supported College

Senators

Perry W. Greene
Charles R. Feenstra
Garland B. Lane

Kent _Coupty

Stanley Davis

‘ Robert Richardson
Robert Blandford
Carol E. Kuhlman
Mrs. Siege] W. Judd
M. S. Keeler II
Charles M. Kindel
Ralph B. Baldwin
Walter D. Idema
David D. Hunting
Waldo Stoddard
Kenneth W. Robinson
Charles Moore

David Hoyle

Dr. Duncan Littlefair
Rabbi Harry Essrig
Dr. Joseph Q. Mayne
Dr. Marion De Velder
Benjamin Buikema
Dr. John Visser
Mrs. Melvin L. Baumann
Robert S. Tubbs:-
James Ver Meulen
Harry D. Marshall
Edward J. Frey
Robert H. Bennett, Jr.
Harry L. Lawford

L. V. Eberhard
Harry Kelley

Paul G. Goebel

Hollis M. Baker
Robert K. Stolz
Herbert G. Daverman

Michigan Legislative Committee

Representatives

Thomas J. Whinery
Charles A. Boyer
Walter H. Nill

Citizens' Committee

Ronald Porter

H. B. Shaine

George Busch, Jr.-

H. Samuel Greenawalt, Jr.
LouisVan Esé"

Richard 'Gllett

Clair M. Donovan

Dr. Donald Waterman

David E. Dutcher, vice chairman
James Idema, publicity chairman
Robert P. Van Ess; treasurer

L. William Seidman, chairman

 

 

 

Ottawa County

 

Wendell A. Miles, vice chairman
Walter Scott

W. A. Butler

Dr. John Kitchell

Ralph Van Volkinburg

Almon McCall

Mrs. Marvin Ver Plank

Dr. Harold Swartz

Donald Zink

Mrs. John Kistler, secretary
Robert De Bruyn

 

Muskegon Co_unty

 

Richard Lindland, vice chairman

 

' Dr. Arnold C. Ott

Merrill Bailey
Judson M. Perkins

...-“

Table 2m. (C

"fies 3- ptfig: .
37:..1' 3. TI???

El“: 5:523;
:5" :3 A4 7‘" “:1
J3 ‘5 La V4421

1
.43. \thc SQH“

69

Table VIII. (Continued) Legislative and Citizens' Committee to Study
the Need for a Four-Year State-Supported
College

 

Mus kegon C ounty gontinued)

Normand Pfaneuf
Victor Scott
Jan B. Vanderploeg

Allegan Cgfilmtwg

James H. Pettapiece, vice chairman
Harold D. Tripp
Richard Hoffman

Stanley Almnder
Jerome La Valley

 

Barry Coun_ty

Mrs. Richard M. Cook, vice chairman
Richard M. Shupter
Mrs. Marc Squier

 

Newaygo County

 

Ross Shoecraft, vice chairman
Vidian Roe

Stephen Nesbitt

Richard Bell

Montcalm County

Dale Stafford, vice chairman

 

 

5. Fir. Fiji, ‘o’s
12213112; bgyth 1::
A: early shift in z

‘ I
"- "--

;a« a: Gm) Raps:
9i“; Gran] Rails 15

}::§:‘.:, Barr-5" 1.)“: .

I l
t.‘ 8.

23:13.3 regs-ms g;

1"..- ~;‘. ... ... p ‘
u§_“' :1: mfla u. ‘

93.4,“ _ ‘
A»... .1 .CE pml'ctm‘;
Kim H-

 

70

3. Similarly, what should be the nature and extent of the
physical plant for such a college?

4. For maximum service to the youths and adults of the area,
where should such an institution be located?

5. Finally, what are the financial implications of such a plan,
including both immediate and long -term plans ?

An early shift in the exact area studied came about - a shift from study of
just the Grand Rapids area to a study of Kent County (along whose western
edge Grand Rapids is situated) and the seven counties bordering Kent County:
Allegan, Barry, Ionia, Montcalm, Muskegon, Newaygo, and Ottawa (Figure II).
Immediate reasons given in the study are these: students arrive from at least
a 100-mile radius to attend a state college; the percentage of youth from several
of the above counties who attend college is low when compared with state average
attendance percentage; the low-percentage counties had neither public nor
private institutions of higher education in them; and the entire area seems
destined to share in the anticipated economic and population growth.

This study investigated the population and the economic and industrial
characteristics of this eight-county area. It investigated specifically enroll-
ment projections, present education facilities in the eight-county area, the
needs and demands of the citizens of the area, the nature of expressed desires
by students for higher education, and the nature of the business and industry
in the eight-county area~

Based upon the above investigations, the study describes the possible
nature of a new college established in the area, its program, organization,
control, support, cost and location, with an alternative proposal of establish-
ing a junior—senior class college leaving education of freshmen and sophomores

to community colleges in the area.

The final recommendations and conclusions of this study are these:

(Jamrich, 14-133/ )

F536 [1. The E._h
052.0: 5.6% CU;L'E

 

 

71

Figure 11. The EightyGounty Area Studied For the Establishment
of the New College

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

N ewaygo
Muskegon Montc ]
.M‘".
.leehot "9-
I
Muskqu Kent
Ottawa I .
. ...; oma

(3133.. C" ~46" 3 93,“): ‘

5&0) 10.0“.

140' ’th
Allegan I Barry .
Au¢t¢5 “:5th
O

 

 

 

Eff? II}. The CH: C
u the R25: 01' U
[Xi-5113.; 51.114
£3.51:

 

_- ‘1‘] P H‘~-‘~.
f‘ \unt‘tés‘netmf _
:4. I15 L35“ ‘trd

—' ‘0'! .LI
5.?" (7’
' u’) .

(‘t'
"1
£1
ff

H

r
f“
:1

.
{—1

72

Figure III. The Geographical Relationship of the Eight-County Area
to the Rest of the State of Michigan and the Locations of the
‘ Existing State-Supported Four-Year Institutions of Higher
Education and Branches

 

H
o

Q0301?€0N

 

Michigan College of Mining 8. Eastern Michigan University
and Engineering 9. Wayne State University
Northern Michigan University 10. Grand Valley State College
Ferris Institute A. Michigan College of Mining and
Central Michigan University Engineering Branch
Western Michigan University B. Northern Michigan Branch
Michigan State University C. University of Michigan Branch--F1int
University of Michigan D. University of Michigan Branch--
Dearborn
E. Michigan State University-Oakland

‘ 1, Thezeai fcr 3:13.
1 _ 2. Firstpriarit‘; arr.
:‘e: t Wah‘m :2 ‘

3:; area-Jay 12:65. A

 

3. The new (33118439 5’
3'222313253’12‘: state 5;:
use, each with tiara-o.

‘- 15 Edition to 15,,

5",“-v-.
rte-.3“

(It
(I)
n;
.-..
I
(‘J
F:
C).
J
cl!
0
r

33"," ' .
‘ 'J‘& 15 to Writ-mu

"
\-
k “,5.-
,

-a-‘ts! fine 311%

:r‘Z".'1
L a ‘ ‘ . ‘QE aj
{A}.

73

1. The need for an additional facility to provide post-high school exists.

2. First priority among various types of possible facilities should be
given to establishment of a four-year, degree-granting college in the eight-
county area—by 1965. A less desirable alternative is establishment of a
junior-senior year college with expansion of junior college facilities for
freshman and sophomore students.

3. The new college should be organized as an educational unit under state
control and with state support with its own board of trustees, at least nine in
number, each with three-year terms, not elected concurrently.

4. In addition to the board of trustees there should be board of citizen
advisors selected by the board of trustees, each with a six-year term. Its
purpose is to reinfOrce the program of development of the'college.

5. Tuition should compare with tuition at other state colleges.

6. The educational program should emphasize strong undergraduate
liberal arts offerings with "identified majors in science, mathematics,
languages, fine arts, teaching, business administration, engineering, and
international programs. This program should be carried out with the full
advice and support of the leaders of the state's colleges and universities. "

(It was also recommended by J amrich (14-135) that the three large state
universities, Michigan, Michigan State, and Western Michigan, coordinate
their extension services through a cooperative continuing education center to
provide graduate and adult educ ation programs in the area. This center
could be situated on a campus with the new college.)

7. The new college should provide general cultural programs for the
entire area served.

8. These details concerning physical properties were recommended:

a. A 400-acre site.

b. Classroom 3

c, A fibril!) f-e

d, A SID-13:21 c:
strain and athletic 1
e. All builiitz;
ens: 3:31 and archiu
9. The new colic-ti
113. Tue two junior

P "'VUWI-J
await; College, 5

3J'”'T“.

- _ Mic,
a " .
St ””991”
Ft:

74

b. Classroom and administration building completed by 1965.

c. A library facility as early as possible.

d. A student center, an auditorium and fine arts center, and physical
education and athletic facilities by 1968. or 1970.

6. All building plans should be carefully studied in consultation with
educational and architectural planners.

9. The new college would best be located just west of Grand Rapids.

10. The two junior colleges, Grand Rapids Junior College and Muskegon
Community College, should re-align their programs to emphasize more
community-college objectives and purposes; greater opportunities in technical-
terminal education —-but not at the expense of giving up the general education
programs.

11. Grand Rapids Junior College should extend its area of service to in—
clude several additional school districts to provide not only a broader area of
service but also a broader area of financial support.

12. Grand Rapids Junior College should be re-established under a separate
board of control with members elected from its area of financial support.

13. The Legislative and Citizens' Committees should proceed at this
point to develop detailed plans for the new college in the eight-county area.

The conclusions and recommendations of J amrich seem based partly upon
expressed wants and demands of interviewed youth and parents, partly upon
the ability of the eight—county area to contribute a.fair share toward the support
and development of the new college, and partly upon the philosophy quoted
earlier, that education brings with it "generalized social valuegg and should,
therefore, be supported. . . . " This opportunity to be educated should not

be restricted for economic or social reasns.

   
  
  
  

There was no Ct'éaal.
szinee were prepiriz
9:2;ie, the Michim: D
abnnge summary t;

:c' guhhcatm, Snub-.-

    
  

6

32:51:: elven In it“ '-'
awe 3f the new mile—g2.
inked 1: any parent 1'
"“533195 and we-ui
mantle continwd. s
33119“. that Harold I
tad ruled that since the.
“Jim afier of funds ti:

Mei?“

 

75

There was no cessation of activities while J amrich and the Citizens'
Committee were preparing the report of the eight-county survey. For
example, the Michigan Daily, the University of Michigan newspaper, carried
a front page summary history of the events that had occurred up to the point
of publication, November 13, 1959. The Michigan Daily had telegramed
Seidman for information on November 3, 1959. This information was
promptly given. In the article it stateda-to dispel all doubts concerning the
nature of the new college—- that the new college would be 1, independent, not
attached to any parent institution nor conducive to causing dissension between
alumni groups; and would, therefore, 2, be treated less as a step—child.

The article continued, stating that, 3, it might be established as a temporary
branch; 4, that Harold Dorr, Dean of Statewide Education of the University,
had stated that since the University of Michigan had received no invitation

and no offer of funds the University would not consider it as a branch unless

it received a responsible invitation. Further, Dorr stated that the University
would make assistance to a fledgling school if it were asked. (This happened.)
Point 5 was this: The University of Michigan would continue to offer extension

services in Grand Rapids. The report in the Michigan Daily further reviewed

 

new college efforts in other areas --Traverse City and Saginaw --and anticipating
legislative action, stated that any forthcoming bill in the legislature would not
be related to any omnibus proposal: that the legislature would lend an ear to

any Grand Rapids request but that Grand Rapids had no preeminent position.

The article concluded that the time for legislative action seemed ripe but the
article would offer no prediction. One ventures to state that the students who
wrote the article showed unusual perception. For later events proved their
assertions that an omnibus attempt was doomed to fail. The article stated

that no real hearings in the legislature had been held nor would be held until

-.. fl ILL-v.1
"‘ ' ' r 3v
-.(..:T 433.030:

. s I _ , , a .L '-
;:'.‘2 13m: prCSL‘ta Ho~
Jul: residents (.
£33.35 us no report at
iere is no pumic cob-egg

.31: the esL1blish It; ...-7..

"1.31 classroc ms, 1}.

"335a ‘0 be held a: :13.
“2&5 Of the legisla-

zinc-)1

‘i! .\ ‘F

. that fans had b-
k‘r .
WEE-5

76

after a November 30 meeting with legislators and area citizens at which
J amrich would present the results of his study. In an open letter to the
, Grand Rapids residents (the article said), Seidman had previewed that
J amrich was to report at the November meeting--the college is needed,
there is no public college in the area, percentages in incoming freshmen
warrant the establishment, second grade census is alarming in view of
available classrooms, the economy of the area can both support and benefit
from a new college, and there would be no conflict with existing colleges or
junior colleges.

Looking back to the success of the January 7 meeting, the CEFYC planned
a year-end meeting similar to the January 7 meeting. This meeting was
planned to be held at the Peninsular Club on November 30, 1959, and all
members of the legislatively sanctioned Citizens' Advisory Committee were
to attend.

The November 30, 1959, meeting was called primarily to give J amrich
a chance to present to both the Citizens' Advisory Committee and to legis-
lators what facts had been garnered inthe study of the eight-county area.
After a meeting with J amrich, Seidman sent a letter dated October 15 to
scores of area citizens and to the area legislators. J amrich had sent Seidman
a review of what he had been doing and sought advice on what to revise or
emend. Also, J amrich and Seidman agreed to meet either November 23 or
November 27 to plan the meeting strateg. These events, the letters to
area citizens and legislators, and the letters between Seidman and J amrich were
happening concurrently. It seems that as events progressed, Seidman assumed
more and more leadership as he grew more confident of the outcome.

For the letter to the Citizens' Advisory Committee and letters to the

, . , .4» . -. 3‘
v.55 £33111: 7““ '-
12: i:z€:5' 33" "1°"
:izaze ...at it I 35 1"4

lit: “f".b. ej sclgrfi's “J.

._-e Xavember 3

'7,» ~. “ ‘

...;CadJudtflCt ‘3‘

32‘ *‘v -' . ‘
_- ue mice of lei;
«'9:

.h'.‘

Cg):
E:
\
My Jr’L
“’19 or Ether
.- \ 5‘

77

legislators hear an unmistakeable air of the confidence that grows from
one's knowing where he is going and how he is going to get there. The letter
to the Citizens' Advisory Committee (Appendix V) is by Seidman, and he
assumes full responsibility for what will happen. Correspondence files
indicate that it was revised at least three times in writing - perhaps it

was revised scores of times mentally.

The November 30, 1959, meeting was the second real test of how far the
efforts of the CE FYC had reached. And if the January 7 meeting was to have
been successful, the November 30 meeting was even more successful. In
correspondence between J amrich and Seidman it becomes evident that Seidman‘s
was the voice of leadership of the community, and .Jamrich's was the voice of
‘ statistical fact. Either was nearly ineffective without the other. From this
meeting was to spring further legislative and community effort. All this
time there was a constant activity of correspondence and oral presentation
going on - correspondence between Seidman and county groups and oral pre-
sentation of what was going on before community, social, fraternal, business,
and education organizations and groups. Also, it is probable that various
area individuals or factors were anticipating where the college, if it were
authorized, would be located.

In Seidman's correspondence files it is apparent that he had the deepest
regard for others. Every letter he received, whether weighty or flippant,
favorable or adverse, received a courteous and sincere reply-not form, not
formal, not vapid. The recipients of the latter could but feel that they and
their ideas had been thoughtfully and respectfufly received.

There is also no evidence in any of the correspondence or news reports

that any procedure, either undemocratic or quasi—legal, was ever used in

78

gaining the ends sought.

This courtesy in replying to everyone brought trouble in 1961 when various
groups were offering sites for the college. Had tentative offerings been re-
jected when they were obviously unsuitable, the controversy with Muskegon
may never have developed. But other considerations (notably raising a
million dollars) at the time seemed to make it more propitious to receive
all proposals then. Close analysis of all conditions may have called for a
rejection of some proposals, however. A detailed account of the controversy
here suggested will be made in Chapter VII on sites.

There were inevitable slips. One rather interesting slip was the oversight
of not having any representative of Lear, Incorporated, on the Citizens'
Advisory Committee. Whenthe Citizens' Advisory Committee had been formed,
it seems from rough notes saved and filed that categories had been filled with
names. For example, there was a "city—county" category of municipal
officials. There was a "women" category, a "capital" (or money) category
including known phflanthropic ally-minded wealthy people, a "labor" cate-
gory, a ”news" category, a ”service club" category, a "religion" category,
an "educational" category. Then, too, there were "area" categories that
cut across the "type" categories. Inadvertently, a representative from Lear,
Incorporated, one of Grand Rapids largest firms, seems to have been omitted.

Mr. Manley Brown, training director of Lear, sent a letter to Michigan
State University stating that Lear was not represented on the committee.

This letter went to Howard Neville, then Director of Continuing Education
at Michigan State University. Neville referred the letter to Paul Miller,
Provost at Michigan State University. Miller referred the letter to Jack

Breslin, Assistant to the President. Breslin referred the letter to Martin

Sci. rezresezmz'
‘

' '- ,. .1 . __
frag his 1...». .o.
’\. . _, . 7‘ .
umber 1111‘; or

Sterner 13 in;

:7

Th ‘ .\" 9“£:_.Ly
‘ \

his“? C 91:1:

"1"- ‘_- Y._ -
hie! \ an pm.

79

Buth, representative. Buth referred the letter to Seidman, and Seidman,
offering his apologies, wrote to Brown, who thereby was invited to be on the
committee. This whole chain of correspondence and reference began on
October 1 with Brown's letter to Michigan State University. It ended on

November 25 with Seidman's letter to Brown. Brown was at the November 30

' meeting.

The November 30, 1959, meeting. Seventy-five members of the Citizens'
Advisory Committee were present plus the legislators and other invited guests.
VanderVeen presented a history of the events which led to the formation of the
Citizens' Advisory Committees. Seidman outlined the responsibilities of
the Citizens' Advisory Committee: 1, the reviewing of the J amrich Mt
and the submission of letters giving individual comments and recommenda-
tions pertaining to the report; 2, volunteering to serve on one of several com-
mittees: location, building, finance, and education.

(These requests by Seidman were sincere and well-meant, but they brought
few positive results. The large Citizens' Sub-Committees became too unwieldy
and communication and coordination, of course, became nearly impossible.
Thus, real progress was placed in the hands of Seidman and individuals from
the CEFYC and a new group of "experts" loaned by other state institutions of
higher education. Seidman stated that ensuing events occurred too fast to
allow for effective Citizens' Committee work.)

After Seidman's remarks, Martin Buth introduced J amrich and the legislators
present.

J amrich, holding the report aloft, (December 1, 1959, Grand Rapids Press

 

photo) stated that he could have continued the study and produced reams of

figures but that he had no time. (The Grand Rapids Foundation Grant had a

- _1' ;-. '
mannini

sew-3:30 ten '3: 2.1
stated aha: any n
nits: it at;
miiff a CS:
acres. and I'm:

.. _V _ ‘
mfnl...‘ ”6:37., '4 "

('14). BE 1‘. it

80

time limitation, 19,60 ). J amrich presented the heart of his report: he saw
seven to ten thousand students seeking admission to college by 1970. He
stated that any new college should be a separate institution, not a branch,
and that it should be located about ten miles west of Grand Rapids. He suggested
that it be a commuting college, that it have a campus of around four hundred
acres, and that it be built large enough to be able to accommodate the expected
enrollment, which figures are statistically subst antiated in the J amrich Report
(14). He noted that Michigan was a wealthy and strong state able to support
a new college.
One point that was strongly emphasized in J amrich's presentation was

this: that of the college-age students in Michigan, 29. 3 per cent were attend-
ing Michigan colleges in 1955-1956. but that 24. 1 per cent of the college-age
students in the eight-county area were in Michigan colleges. He revealed the
percentages enrolled in state-controlled institutions; state-wide 17. 9 per cent
of the college-age population were enrolled in state-controlled institutions;
in the eight-county area, 12. 8 per cent were enrolled in state-controlled institu-
tions. In the largest population center, Kent County, 13. 7 per cent of the
college-age students were enrolled in four-year state-controlled institutions
of higher education during the 1955-19 56 year. J amrich projected figures
on enrollments and populations and pointed out that enrollment ratios from
the eight-county area would continue to be less if no new state-supported
colleges were established there.

‘ All area newspapers gave favorable comment and plenty of space to the
events of the meeting: The Greenville Daily News (Dale Stafford, editor, vice—
chairman of Montcalm County Citizens' Advisory Committee, and future member

of the Board of Control) gave front page news to the meeting; The Grand Haven

' ‘7 ....-
Tiry: m a eun.,.-....
M
tare 3:111 of L .21:-

7:12: stand that Jar. 1*-

5.3:; rte n‘sian ant dc.
...“. 12'. Grand PM,

i:- :- cat-versation in C»

 

 

 

3 15 the unique actix'i'.

rg»... -
yvnoIJrlll 001e,:tiv.-i ..

O
L:

when}. Chill 3 ' Y‘
‘1'. ‘ 3 I
d: 9H.

81

Tribune ran a complimentary story with a picture of J amrich, Mrs. Kistler
(future Board of Control member), Van Ess, and Seidmm; and an editorial
which stated that J amrich, being a stranger to the state, had no ax to grind.
Also, it stated that Boyer felt that J amrich was extremely able, and Seidman
had rare vision and determination. The Grand Rapids Press ran an editorial
showing that Grand Rapids was the obvious place for a new college. (Seidman ,
in a conversation in October, 1962, stated that at the beginning of his efforts
the Grand Rapids Press' general manager, Lee Woodruff, had needed convinc-
ing that Seidman's efforts were worthwhile. During the CEFYC efforts, a

reporter, Charles Moore, of the Grand Rapids Press, proved to be so wrapped

 

up in the unique activities, he was accused by his colleagues of losing his
reportorial objectivity. Moore's faithful accounting of events, according to
Seidmanwas an important factor in the final success of the effort. The cir-

culation of the Grand Rgids Press is 93,689 in Kent County, and 128, 000

 

in the eight-county area. The Grand Ragds Press did give the new college

 

efforts substantial support after 19 58.)

The temporary officers of the Citizens' Advisory Committee had been
made permanent at the November 30 meeting. Seidman was made chairman,
Van Ess was made treasurer, Kistler was made secretary, Idema was made
publicity chairman, and the following were made vice-chairmen for each of
the eight counties: Dutcher, Kent; Mfles, Allegan; Cook, Barry; Shoecraft,
Newaygo; and Stafiord, Montcalm. (Table VIII) The responsibility of the
Citizens' Advisory Council was now two-fold: they had to review the J amrich
m and they had to volunteer for service on one of the subcomtnittees:
location, building, finance, and education. Seidman wrote each a letter asking
for their individual replies by January 22, 1960. One such reply is reviewed

in detail in Chapter X.

Tue year was 115
1953, which reguxnui
hermit-s that 36.17::
begin 1981, that 3
9.5;. that Thing 13‘ 5":
leg-tn 11:15 bill fer
\

FEE, the sessim I

T”;V.~~ .
‘9‘“3‘15 m a 611
km ‘h- Btu," (

82

The year was also well ended by the Grand Rapids Press on December 30,

 

1959, which reported in twenty—column inches on the front page with banner
headlines that Seidman hoped that ground breaking for a new college could
begin in 1961, that a state grant could open the way for work in a year, .

and that Whinery said he would translate the recommendations of the J amrich

Report into bill form. Whinery also stated that since 1960 would be an election

 

year, the session opening January 13, could end as. early as April 30, 1960.,
In a letter to Seidman on January 4, 1960, J amrich suggested that the

details of the Report might be summarized and presented in an attractive

form. This was done, and a nine-page booklet in three colors was prepared

which contained the essential facts of the J amrich Report and also gave a

 

resume of what had happened concerning the new college up to the point of
publication of the" booklet. (Appendix VI) This material was used subse—
quently in a drive to raise a million dollars and in other actions connected

with the new college effort.

13.

Tie a: "dues of the
meant; of when: t0
1:-..e sanction Jf 1.
393:1: the area citi;
CIL-iuce a bill in the C

.“Iiziz'es 3f the CE‘
:iz'xrs of the CE FYC

‘V-"Lon . - -
ug-Lanatunb mt" €0le

 

:53 n- ,V ..
«...: “"Hcse beta-Ch

- Si);
H...
\E ijtr H4311}

. 1:.
K},
.‘!t \{n‘ '
*A
' \OmEH’S 3.
c a
“-6355,,

CHAPTER V
H. B. 477 - LEGISLATIVE ACTION

The activities of the CEFYC were out of the planning stages and the
uncertainty of where to go and how to get there had been dissipated in the
legislative sanction of the study, in the favorable reception of the J amrich
Report by the area citizens and legislators, and in Whinery's promise to
introduce a bill in the coming session of the legislature to establish the
college. i '

Activities of the CEFYC during the first quarter of 1960 were varied. The
members 'of the CEFYC continued their communications with all the area
organizations they could. For example, on January 30, the Grand Rapids
Junior College Speech Department presented a half-hour television program
in which the principal facts concerning the new college were telecast. J amrich
spoke before the Belding, Michigan, Rotary Club in February and emphasized
how the college would benefit the Greenville-Belding area. A complete schedule
of club and meeting speeches is noted in the Seidman correspondence files;
fig, , Alexander Hamilton PTA to be addressed by Dutcher, Shawmut Hills
PTA by Buth, Central Councfl of PTA's Of Kent County by Seidman, the
Altrusa Club by Van Ess, and the Rotary Club by Jamrich. Also, there are
memos on speeches to be given to the Grandville Business and Professional
Club in March, an Allendale School address of no date, the Michigan State
University Women's Auxiliary on April 11, a Godfrey Elementary School
meeting on April 11. The'found of addresses and meetings continued. Wherever

possible, the CEFYC made its case and presented its facts.

83

T1361? was lire-iii.

Desezoer 21, 1Q. 33‘

“-‘Jdd acre p1,: ..;_..4

“E‘I Stan DE‘J‘tS ‘

31‘. 38‘ Ceiling.
“linemen 1;:1

r... .

“a" 13163 at a (

x“. .“'—‘
dub
‘5...
ME Bu:
N!

84

There was already in December, 1959, interest shown in the site should
the new college become a reality. Z. Z. Lydens, a member of the Grand

Rapids Planning Commission, is reported in the Grand Rapids Press of

 

December 21, 1959, as having proposed as a college site Aman Park,a
300-odd acre plot of ground owned by the city just about ten miles west of
Grand Rapids. A December 23 Grand Rapids M report stated that
Mayor Stan Davis liked the possibilities of Aman Park being the site of

the new college. Lydens in this article said that the site met most of the
requirements listed by J amrich in his report. Grand Haven's mayor had
also hinted at a Grand Haven City Commission meeting in December, 1959,
that land was available in Grand Haven.

Another type of activity was being carried on. J amrich wrote to Seidman
in his January 4, 1960, letter that it might be wise for Seidman to acquaint
Presidents Hatcher, Hannah, Hillberry and Sangren of the four large state
universities ’of the plans for the new college to get their "blessings. "

J amrich suggested that a meeting of representatives from the large universi-
ties and area legislators might be brought about. Such a meeting did materialize
in June. (See Chapter VI.)

Seeking the approbation of Governor Williams, Seidman, through Representa- ‘
tive Buth, arranged a meeting to brief Williams on what had been going on.
This meeting was held at 2:30 p. m. on Tuesday, February 23, 1960, a day
after Whinery had introduced H. B. 477. Attending the meeting besides
Williams and Seidman were VanderVeen, Dutcher, Idema, Watkins, Bath, and
McKee of the CEFYC; Whinery, Greene, and Feenstra, area legislators;
Senator Garland Lane of the Legislative Committee; and Representative
Carroll Newton of the House Ways and Means Committee, also assistant

Republican Floor Leader. A front page picture in the February 24, 1960,

if}: of the (Er—rt T1.
3551th in the Hit:
mien: who had issis
:e‘iege, were 2115;» p
i): the college e55,“

Williams stated

‘Ck-fi‘. Was an ~43;
J“;
. .7 Q
It “I Wear. y
y.
e' LELEr w.
No’.
r3.

85

edition of the MM Eggs shows that Walt DeVries, Administrative
Assistant in the House, and Bill Seeley, a Grand Rapids Junior College
student who had assisted in the television production publicity for the new
college, were also present. Dutcher said that he felt this was a key meeting
for the college effort.

Williams stated at the meeting, according to the Grand ILapids Pgess

 

article, that the college, to succeed, might need some millionaires. He
stated that he was impressed by the sincerity of the effort, and hoped that

the legislature would provide the money to make it, the college, a reality.

He said that he could recommend the bill but that his recommendation was

no guarantee that the legislature would pass it. Seidman stated that all he
wanted was an official charter, and that there would be no request for funds

the first year. Having official status, the college committee could accept
gifts. Later, funds would be requested in the same way other state institutions
requested them. A

After the February 23 meeting with Williams, on February 25 Seidman
wrote Governor Williams that he was encouraged by Williams' remarks, and
mentioned that he was sorry that the millionaire statement had been so over-
played by the newspapers. Williams replied on February 29 that he would
support legislation and that he, too, was sorry that the millionaire idea had
been over-emphasized. Further movement in 1960 on making the college a
reality depended completdy upon the fate of House Bill 47 7.

The bill was originally mtroduced as House Bill No. 477 in the 70th Legisla-
ture of Michigan, Regular Session, by Representatives Thomas Whinery, Grand
Rapids; Edward Borgman, Grand Rapids; Andrew Bolt, Grand Rapids; Charles
Boyer, Manistee; Walter Nill, Muskegon; ‘Charles‘Raap, Twin Lake; Harry T.

Emmons, Byron Center; Lloyd Gibbs, Portland; Hans Rasmussen, Ludington;

 

$33, Lanna, Hamil“,
Earn Cobb, Elsie; :1?

Ya: Til. of Hfland, an:
Fem; and House purl
liens Committee,“ is ‘.
issarsg: "i think it b
meabig capital onus:

L”? 3'3 present ceilege

 

Here, mention inns
late as relatisnsh‘lP 14'
UT. 1"de3\ 0 F Cb
in: in Eighh' is: s”
an C ammunin‘ C .11
in. Flint "

_ phnzmhri
...aiinsumnm of b

{all z r» .

 

86

Ben H. Lohman, Hamilton; Clyde Cooper, White Cloud; Fred Olsen, Sheridan;
Andrew Cobb, Elsie; and Martin Buth, Comstock Park. Representative Riemer
Van Til, of Holland, was named as co-sponsor on March 16, 1960, on Third
Reading and House passage. Arnell Engstrom, Chairman of the House Ways and
Means Committee,was reported in the Grand Rapids grless on February 23, 1960,
as saying: "I think it has only a very slim chance of passing this year. It would
take a big capital outlay to start a new college and we don't have enough money now
for our present colleges. " (For complete text of the Bill, see Appendix VII.)

Here, mention must be made of events that, as they occurred, seemed to
have no relationship to the Grand Rapids movement to establish a new college.

On Thursday, February 25, 1960, mm Rapids Eggs reported on a
visit that eighty legislators had made to Flint. They visited the campus of the
Flint Community College and the University of Michigan Flint campus. C. S.
Mott, Flint philanthropist, in an address to the visitors, said that the way to
get an institution of higher education is to raise money, get a building, and then
call upon the legislature to do its duty and provide an operating budget. He stated
that he was sure the Grand Rapids was not so different that its people of means
would not help. He said the thing to do was to get started, and start small, if
necessary. His remarks gave the Grand Rapids backers hope that they were on
the right track, but later reference to his remarks by Representative Allison
Green indicated that more local support in the Grand Rapids area might become
necessary. Mott's comments may have suggested the later compromise that
brought about the million dollar stipulation (page . 39)

The bill was up for a brief hearing in the House Committee on Education on

Tuesday, March 8. Whinery in a March 5 Grand Rapids Press story stated he

 

expected no trouble here, since no money was requested in the bill, only a

charter. Bil it:

presided in the
in the Blitz-h 9
tie ma: 314.23- 5.:

g 311:]: lb Ci r {:21

87

charter. But the Grand Rapids Press reported in stories on March 9 that the '3

 

bill had died there by a 4—3 vote.
It was opposed by Allison Green, Vice-Chairman of the committee, who
presided in the absence of Raymond C. Wurzel. Green is stated to have said

"in the March 9 Grand Rapids Press that the bill was not reported out because

 

the majority felt those areas which had already raised their own money and
gotten their own land should not be ignored. He referred specifically to the
Tri-county area of Bay City, Saginaw, and Midland, which area had, through
local taxation, gotten considerable funds and property for a commmity college.
Green stated, too, that the present tax situation in Michigan would prevent the
State from setting up a new college. Seidman upon receiving news that the
bill was M said he was not surprised. But, he stated, there was a foot in
the door, and the CEFYC would continue to search for a suitable site. He said
that although he did not think the bill had had a chance to pass the short 1960
session of the legislature, he still felt "they" had to know "we" were interested.
Seidman pointed out in reference to the Tri—county claims of raising fimds and
property for a community college that Grand Rapids had been supporting the
biggest. outstate Junior College in the state for more than forty years.

Borgman, Buth, and Emmons had spoken in committee hearings in favor
of the bill. Borgman. stated that a charter would enable the Committee to get
Aman Park before someone else got it. Buth pointed to the cost of education
away from home, and Emmons spoke of the high cost of private school educa-
tion.

On Wednesday morning, March 9, 1960, the bill was revived by the inclusion
of several amendments. (For text of House amendments see Appendix VIII.)
The most important of these were the conditions that before the college could

receive any state charter the Board of Control must raise one million dollars

T._J.c IX. T137 ~'

 

 

Interim of qus

Placed on General C

PEEL-.e of bill in ii

Firs: ani Second re

”fin-v- .
”~33 10 Carr-n".

w

.91 “4" '
* *f-fi EdJCltlgj .
f-T—“fl‘c‘tts fife-rm

L,

88

Table IX. Time Chart of House Bill No. 477, State of Michigan, 70th
Legislature, Regular Session of 1960

 

’_.___'_'+—.

Introduction of House Bill 477 February 11, 1960
Placed on General Orders , . March 9, 1960
Adoption of House amendments and placed

on Order of Third Reading in House March 14, 1960
Passage of bill in House March 16, 1960

First and Second readings in Senate,
referred to committee on education March 17, 1960

Bill with education committee
amendments referred to committee of
the whole March 30, 1960

Bill accepted with amendments and

placed on Order of Third Reading in

Senate April 6, 1960

Bill passed in Senate April 7, 1960 - 10:00 a. m.

Received by House and read
(held over under Rule 59) April 7, 1960 - 1:30 p. m.

Concurrence with Senate amendments
by House April 12, 1960

Approved by Governor Williams April 26, 1960

 

 

by nears ather tbs.
amass were
933:5 moms. .‘
sigma, Tusca
area that was seg-
ing {or its mil: _1
for a charter {or
iii-BE 'm C 31:12:.
he “in: C orntr.
‘5 the Flint visi
T5"? till re;
March 15, mi
S‘i‘fij. " GI":
19%} mm Cl;

ACWP'il;

89

by means other than public taxation and must secure a suitable site. These

amendments were added after two hours of debate according to the Grand Rapids

 

Press reports. Allison Green, who had opposed the bill in Committee, is from
Kingston, Tuscola County, and represents a district adjacent to the Tri-County
area that was seeking its own four-year college charter. The amendment call-
ing for the million dollars was really a compromise— Green would drop demands
for a charter for his area college in exchange for the amendment. During the
debate in Committee Green had said that he was tremendously impressed with
the Flint Community and its fund-raising and philanthropic activity. He referred
to the Flint visit made in February.

The bill reported out of Committee and had to pass the House by Wednesday,
March 16, under House rules. Seidman said, "It's just what we needed to get
started. " Green said, "If it passes the House, the State is committed to spend
100 million dollars in the future. ”

According to a Grand Rapids Press article of March 10, 1960, Whinery was
optimistic about passage of the bill in the House, and Williams' eventual
signature. He saw at least a ten to fifteen vote margin of victory. Senator
Perry Greene, of Grand Rapids, thought it might get through the Senate without
trouble but might get many adverse comments. Greene is quoted as saying:

"A lot of them Senators want to climb on the bandwagon and want a similar
college in their own districts, but I think we can talk them out of it because
they haven't done any preliminary work on it as Grand Rapids has.

"The bill's coming out at a bad time right now, when the Senators just got
through looking at appropriations for higher education. I heard some of them
say: 'We're going crazy on new colleges when we can't support the ones we
have now}: Nevertheless, Feenstra and I will do our best to get it through and
I think it will pass all right.

r—w— —.—.._.__ — ——-.-——--.- «—

———

 

90

"When the bill gets to the Senate it will go either to the education or
appropriations committees, and neither of us is on those committees. If we
were, we could give the bill a good push. "

The bill did pass the House but not without opposition on the floor from
Ways and Means Chairman, Arnell Engstrom, and Vice Chairman, Harry
Phillips, of Port Huron, and who was, according to Bud Vestal of the Press

Lansing Bureau vitriolic in his opposition. He is reported in the Grand Rapids

 

Press of March 17, 1960, to have said: "I have a meagre education like
Henry Ford. The bill is politically good for the boys from Grand Rapids and
they should vote for it. But in recent years we have taken over support of
Wayne State University, and branch colleges in Flint, Oakland County, and
Dearborn. Our costs are piling up. How much thinner are we going to spread
the dollars? If this bill passes, I make no promises to support any more
universities or anything else.

"Suppose you get Frank D. McKay to give a million. So what? I want you
to know where I stan " i

It was stated by various people connected with the new college that Phillips'
bitter opposition rallied Democratic support for the bill. For they were eager
to get Republican support for the governor's capital outlay program, according
to Vestal, and were in favor of the idea of taking the colleges to where the
students are rather than making the students go long distances to far-away

colleges. Vestal, in the Grand Rapids Press of March 20, 1960, reported

 

that Representatives Dominic J acobette, of Negaunee, and Lucille McCullough,
Dearborn, each of whom have small colleges in their districts and would like
to see them grow rather than see Michigan State University and the University

of Michigan become more gigantic, gave hearty support to the bill. Vestal

stated in his review that Representative James Warner, of Ypsilanti, opposed

it, hang b. :1
in his 1.5““
there, vote“
815531, So;
were is: it 9;

pins. V -

V
‘~

'1!

I

it, the H)“ Q

of taxing .j
HE thigh:

i‘s ' l
H.311 11:.- “-

91

it, having both the University of Michigan and Eastern Michigan University

in his district. Wilfred Basset, of Jackson, eyeing a future four-year school
there, voted for it. John Morris, Midland; Robert Gilbert, Saginaw; Holly
Hubbell, Saginaw; and Adolph Blanchard, Bay City, of the Tri-County area,
were for it also, seeing possible support in the future for their four-year
plans. Vestal said that the Grand Valley State College passed the House while
it, the House, was on a pork-barrel binge in which it passed seventy-nine bills
of varying degrees of merit which whistled through with an average 98-2 vote.
He thought there was perhaps more conviction in the college bill vote of 84-17
than in the others. This was on March 16, 1960.

If the bill had a rocky road in the House, it was due for even a harder ride
in the Senate. After being referred to the Senate Education Committee, the
battle began. Tri-County district leaders headed by Senator Clarence F.
Graebner, of Saginaw, wanted to amend the bill to include the Tri-Gounty
proposed college. Graebner stated that the Tri—County area had the million
and the site. The Tri-County college, now Delta College, is a two-year
college under law. If it were included in the legislation proposed here it would
become a four-year college. , Two delegations appeared before the Senate
Education Committee to plead their cases: a Tri-County delegation headed by
Maurice Brown, Chairman of the Board of Trustees of the Tri-County Community
College , and a Grand Rapids delegation headed by Seidman, including David
Dutcher, Richard Gillett, and others.

Senator Arthur Dehmel, of the Senate Education Committee, stating that
both sides would be heard, asked what would happen to the three private colleges
in the Grand Rapids area. John B. AMartin, Grand Rapids attorney and long
active in state politics, stated that there were enough youngsters in the area

and that there would be no ill effects on Hope, Calvin or Aquinas.

o
b

no

YT

bur

_U‘

s
Q

m\
Tk

..Nu

hm

 

93;.

The argument centered mainly around the Tri —C ounty attempt to attach on-
to the bill their bill to make their two-year college a four-year college.

Senator Hutchinson asked Lloyd Bartlett, Tri-County attorney, whether or
not he had a bill before the legislature to make Tri-County a four-year college.
Bartlett stated that he was told no such bill would be considered this session,
so wanted to hook onto the Grand Valley bill. He stated that the Tri-County
area had a. square mile of property and eight million dollars raised by local
taxation.

Legislative experts, according to a Grand Rapids Press report of March
23, 1960, on the debate had advised Bartlett that the Grand Valley bill was a
one-purpose bill and could not be amended.

Seidman again referred to the facts of the Jamrich Repor_t; Senator Beadle
stated: "But didn't J amrich say that a superficial survey of the situation indi-
cates the need when he made the recommendation?” (Russell had made this
statement, not J amrich.)

Seidman again presented the enrollment statistics and then made some con-
cessions: the people of the area would hear most of the initial burden, he had
no objection to the temporary board's being appointed rather than being drawn
from county boards of education. Also, he said that a four-year moratorium on
state aid would be acceptable to get the bill through, according to the March 23,
1960, Grand BEE-9E. Press. Senator Perry Greene said to the Saginaw delegation
"Go get your own bill as every college and university does. " (The amendments
added in the Senate Education Committee are recorded in Appendix IX.)

Again, the question of what the governing board ought to be called came up,
and the Senate amended the amendments of the House changing trustees to
governors, to m. And here a striking variance from the J amrich recom-

mendations and the initial wording followed. Where both the J amrich Repoth

 

’ \

I
u
I
. _
...... .. ......
,7 a

_«_WM 4———° *

.—

-<—‘-—- -w I“ _

93

the original bill, and the bill as amended by the House had stated that the
permanent board of control should be elected, the Senate Education Committee
struck all the specifications for election of the board and the House amendments
and changed them to the effect that the board members were to be appointed by
the governor with the advice and consent of the Senate. This removed the
control of the new college fi'om the influences contingent at party conventions.

In an interview with Dr. J amrich, he was asked the particulars concerning
the recommendation that the Board of Control be elected and the subsequent
legislative action that made the Board of Control an appointed body. Dr.

J amrich stated that he had originally recommended an appointed board, and
that he now (at the time of this writing) favors an appointed board. He stated
that at the time of final writing of his report on the new college, it seemed best
to recommend an elected board for the new college considering the practices

in Michigan at that time in the selection of the boards for major institutions

of higher education and other governmental agencies. Dr. J amrich stated

also that the Board of Control of Grand Valley State College is selected from
areas throughout the state since it is a state institution.

While the Senate Education Committee struck all of the House amendment
which created a temporary board of control, it retained the provision for the
appointed board to secure one million dollars and a site before the college
would become a state institution of higher education pursuant to the act under
consideration here. The responsibility of the creation of the new college still
lay with the eight-county area it would serve. For, were the one million
dollars not raised and the site not secured, the act would be nullified.

Further, it seems to have been the intent of the Senate to remove the members
of the Board of Control from party politics by requiring that they be appointed
rather than elected. Also, the elimination of the temporary board selected from

94

the county boards of education and the efficiency of direct appointment rather
than awaiting elections seems to reflectawareness that the college was to be
a state college, not to be controlled by local interests.

The Senate Education Committee amendments to the bill did three things
to the House amended bill: it stated that the board would be called the Board
of Control, it made the board an appointed body, and it restricted purchasing
power of the board for capital outlay by requiring the consent of the legislature.

It is apparent that the Senate, as the House, did not make any provisions
for a Board of Citizen Advisors. Nor, did the final bill state anything about
the character of the institution. The full power to determine this was left up
to the Board of Control, no restrictions for decisions pertaining to administra-
tion, instruction, or other internal affairs being stated in the act; power to
control funds was not specifically included in the bill.

Bills are usually reported out on Wednesdays. Since the legislature
convened on Wednesday, dates for reporting out were set up on a schedule
based upon weeks of Wednesdays. The vote of the Senate Education Committee
on House Bill 477 was due Wednesday, March 23,“ 1960, according to the Grand
Rapids Press of March 23. The vote was _delayed. The March 29, 1960,

Grand Rapids Press stated that the Education Committee was expected to take

 

action Wednesday, March 23, the date of the hearings and the debate, but that it
was delayed because not all five members were available. The (11299. MM
also stated that the Wednesday, March 23, vote had been delayed because of
conflicts with sessions of the appropriations and labor committees, and that

the deadline was now March 30. The members of the Education Committee were,

at that time, ChairmanArthur Dehmel, of Unionville, Frank Beadle, of St. Clair,

Frank Andrews, of Hillman, Edward Hutchinson, of Fennville, and Basil Brown,
Of Detroit.

 

95

L. William Seidman, in a brief conversation in October, 1962, when these
investigations into the Grand Valley history were just beginning, stated that
one of the real crisis points in the work of the CEFYC was just here. He
stated that when the vote for Committee approval was first called, one of the
committee members was unavailable. He was nowhere to be found. Senator
Hutchinson, Seidman said, exercised his prerogative to call the committee.
Getting all the Education Committee members together for the vote required

some astute work on the part of Lieutenant Governor Swainson, according to
A Seidman, and the final vote was 3—2, favorable. Voting favorably for the bill
in the committee were Andrews, Hutchinson, and Brown; against, Dehmel
and Beadle.

The amended bill was referred to the Committee of the Whole, and the
Committee of the Whole reported favorably to the Education Committee and
"the bill was placed on the order of Third Reading of Bills. This was on April
6.

In connection with Senate passage of the bill, there was some work on the
part of the Grand Rapids interests, and continued evidence of good will toward
their friends. In March, senator Hutchinson had written Seidman asking that
he circulate petitions for him in his bid to seek the Republican nomination for
Lieutenant Governor. Seidman, not being a resident of the city of Grand Rapids,
referred this request to Dutcher, who, between March 19 and March 27, had
satisfactorily fulfilled the request. On March 28, Seidman sent Senator Perry
Greene a copy of a letter to the editor from one F. W. Neumann, of Midland,
who had written his paper opposing Brown's, the Tri-County delegation chair-
man, views. Seidman pointed out to Greene that not all the Saginaw Valley
and thumb area residents concurred with the Tri-County delegations' desires.

On March 30, Seidman sent a letter to Senators Hutchinson, Andrews, Brown,

96

McCullough, Montgomery, Green, and Feenstra thanking them for their
efforts in getting the bill moving.

On March 30, Mrs. Kistler sent a long letter to Geerlings urging his
"xsupport and stating reasons why in the best interests of the area it deserved
it. She also stated reasons why she supported it, and that she had no personal
interest at stake. Mrs. Kistler also sent a letter to Seidman on March 30
mentioning that Van Volkinburg had gotten the State Superintendents of Schools
Association to unanimously support the bill and that pressure was being put
on Geerlings. On April 4, 1960, Seidman sent a letter to every Senator
(Appendix X). It was signed by the chairman and vice-chairman of the Citizens'
Advisory Committee.

Perry Greene stated in a. newspaper report that he expected all Democrats
to vote for it and that he could get another six Republicans to vote for it. It
would require eighteen Senate votes in favor to pass. One key member of the
Republican vote was Geerlings. An avalanche of phone calls, telegrams, and
letters from the North Ottawa and Grand Rapids areas descended upon him.

He stated that he wanted to be sure the one million dollar provision was in the
bill—4nd that he had to think about it. His conservatism in spending and worry
about the 100 million dollar state deficit was making the decision difficult.
Hutchinson, his district neighbor, had stated that he opposed spending--but
that here was a way to economize. He was convinced that education would

cost less through a new college than by other means. All these reports were

carried in the March 30 Grand Rapids Press.

 

On April 7, the question on the passage of the bill was raised and passed
27 -1. The lone dissenter was Graebner, of Saginaw. Following Senate
passage of the bill, Seidman sent letters of commendation and thanks to nearly

everyone involved, including Lee Woodruff, of the Grand Rapids Press, who

 

all-
a
5.
....
3 .

«L. . -...

 

 

 

3%

had informed Seidman of the Tri-County plans. Geerlings wrote Seidman
explaining the difficulty, of his decision; Seidman answered expressing his
appreciation of the difficulty of the decision. The House received the bill
from the Senate on April 7. It was informed that the Senate had passed the
bill; the bill was to lie over for one day under Rule 59. The bill, as amended
by the Senate, passed the house 95—5 on April 12, the date to which considera—
tion of the bill was postponed. The bill as signed by Governor Williams on
April 26, 1960, sixty-four days after introduction, read as follows:

STATE OF MICHIGAN

70TH LEGISLATURE

REGULAR SESSION OF 1960

Introduced by Reps. Whinery, Borgman, Bolt, Boyer, Nill, Raap,
Emmons, Gibbs, Rasmussen, Lohman, Cooper, Olsen, Cobb
' and Bath
Rep. Van Till named as co-sponsor

ENROLLED HOUSE BILL NO. 47 7

AN ACT to establish and regulate a state institution of higher learn-
ing to be known as Grand Valley college; to fix the membership and the
powers of its governing board.

The People of the State of Michigan enact:

Sec. 1. There is hereby established a state institution of higher
education to be located in an 8 county area comprising the counties
of Kent, Ottawa, Muskegon, Barry, Ionia, Montcalm, Newaygo, and
Allegan. The institution shall be maintained by the state and its
facilities shall be made equally available and upon the same basis
to all qualified residents of this state. The conduct of its affairs
and control of its property shall be vested in a board of control,
the members of which shall constitute a body corporate known as
the ”board of control of Grand Valley college, " hereinafter re-
ferred to as "the board, ” with the right as such of suing and being
sued, of adopting a seal and altering the same.

Sec. 2. There is hereby established a "board of control, " to
consist of 9 members to be appointed by the governor with the
advice and consent of the senate for terms of 6 years, except of
the members first appointed 3 shall serve for 2 years, 3 for 4
years, and 3 for 6 years.

.1 . 1 .4. I .. .. . t --
{Fm Nutter” u: a)“ .\. york. whlw fie ..-. ad .3 .u.. A. in Ed .5 AG ca 114 .M‘ :5 a e L. 1.1 uh. t at .1 in...

98

Sec. 3. The board shall elect from its membership a chair-
man and a secretary, a treasurer, and such other officers as it
deems necessary. , Officers shall serve terms of 1 year and until
their successors shall have been elected and qualified. Before
permitting the treasurer to enter upon the duties of his office,
the board shall require him to file his bond to the people of this
state with such sureties and in such sum not less than the amount
of money likely to be in his possession as the board may designate,
No officer shall have the power to incur obligations or to dispose of
the board's property or funds, except in pursuance of a vote of the
board.

The board of control shall be responsible for the selection and
acquisition of a suitable site for the location of the Grand Valley
college and shall raise the sum of $1, 000, 000. 00 by a method
other than taxation, which amount shall be deemed the minimum
amount of assets required in addition to the site, to become a
state institution of higher education pursuant to the provisions of
this act.

A majority of the members of the board shall form a quorum
for the transaction of business. The board by majority vote of
its membership may enact rules, bylaws and regulations for the
conduct of its business and for the government of the institution,
and amend same; and by a majority vote of the members present
may fix tuition and other fees and charges, appoint or remove
such personnel as the interests of the institution and the generally
accepted principles of academic tenure permit or require, determine
the compensation to be paid for services and materials, confer such
degrees and grant such diplomas as are usually conferred or granted
by other similar institutions, receive, hold and manage any gift,
grant, bequest, or devise of funds or property, real or personal,
absolutely or in trust, to promote any of the purposes of the college,
enter into any agreements, not inconsistent with this act, as may
be desirable in the conduct of its affairs, and in behalf of the state
lease or dispose of any property which comes into its possession,
provided that in so doing it shall not violate any condition or trust
to which such property may be subject. It is the intention hereof
to vest in the board all powers customarily exercised by the govern-
ing board of a college or university and the enumeration of the powers
herein shall not be deemed to exclude any of such powers not expressly
excluded by law, '

Sec. 4, The board shill not borrow money on its general faith
and credit, nor create any liens upon its property. With the
approval of the legislature the board may borrow money to be used
to acquire land or to acquire or erect buildings, or to alter, equip
or maintain them, to be used as dormitories, student centers,
stadiums, athletic fields, gymnasiums, auditoriums and other re-
lated activities, and it shall obligate itself for the repayment there—
of, together with interest thereon, solely out of the fund derived

99

from rentals or other income from the use and operation of the

property so acquired, or from special fees and charges required

to be paid by the students deemed by it to be benefited thereby;

and may pledge all or any part of the fund as security therefor.

’ April 26, 1960

Following the passage of the bill in the legislature, McCall, of Grand Haven,
wrote Williams and stated that he was pleased with the way things had gone, and
that though he was a Republican and Williams a Democrat, he still found many
points of agreement with Williams. Williams replied, stating that he would
sign the bill and that the press usually did give him a fair shake,

Williams signed it on April 26, 1960. The pen, sent to Seidman by Vestal,
is at the Grand Valley State College in the archives files, Correspondence
files show no self-praise of any ldnd from any quarter. Two things remained
for the immediate present. Getting a site and raising a million.

As an aftermath, not without a touch of humor, Senator Charles Feenstra,

of Grand Rapids, reported to the people in his column in the Rockford Register,

 

April 14, 1960. He stated that he led the fight to get the college bill approved
and that he would continue to guard the interests of the people, He was already
getting ready for the elections of 1962. This article was clipped and sent to
Seidman. Two pencilled comments were attached, each by different indivi duals.
One said: "Bill, tho't you'd like to read modest Charlie's views on the 4 year
college. " The other: " Bill, no need to worry. Charlie will take care of

everything. " He was defeated in the 1962 primary by a young Republican.

CHAPTER VI
EARLY PROBLEMS: THE BOARD OF CONTROL
INTER—INSTITUTIONAL RELATIONSHIPS,
THE EARLY ADMINISTRATIVE BODY

Although the two tasks - raising a million dollars and getting a site took
place concurrently, the tasks were completely opposite in nature and detail.
To get a million dollars, one must ask, solicit, educate, appeal, work.

To get a site for a new institution of higher education one must do the
opposite: sift through offers, and, without alienating the prospective donor
whose offering is rejected, make a choice — and justify the choice,

Although these two tasks had to be done, to take an attitude that they had
to be done first without at the same time assuming they would be done would
delay the acComplishment of other tasks that also had to be done. Governor
Williams would appoint a Board of Control ninety days after signing the bill.
The selection of members of the Board was of extreme importance in several
ways, not the least of which was the raising of the million dollars. This is
not to hint that any member of the Board was "bought. " Certainly, a position
on the board of a new college which began, as Seidman once said, with "no
assets and a million dollar deficit".was no enviable position. Rather, willing-
ness to serve might better be construed as evidence of the quality of the first
board appointed.

In the selection of the Board, as in the events which had taken place up to
the signing of the bill establishing the new college, political considerations,
though real, did not override other considerations. One other extremely

important consideration, in addition to securing the million, and the site,

100

~\
.4

.nl.

no
h

m

X

101

was the securing of the blessings, the cooperation, and the help of the other
institutions of higher education, both public and private.

Four tasks had to be done: the million dollars and the site had to be
secured; and the board had to be appointed, and favorable relations had to be
established with other institutions of higher education in the state. The admin-
istrative details of building, budget, curriculum, faculty, philosophy, and
campus planning also were beginning to loom, but they are not here considered
as essential in this paper. The forming of the Citizens' Advisory Council, as

suggested by the J amrich Reppr_t, will, however, be reviewed.

 

The Board 93M. Apparently, the selection of the members of the
Board of Control went through Democratic Party channels to some degree.
For, although Seidman did make inquiries in different quarters, especially in
the Ottawa and Muskegon county areas, final recommendations to Governor
Williams went through the party organization.

A letter of May 12, 1960, from A. Robert Kleiner, a Grand Rapids attorney
active in the Kent County Democratic Party organization, to Neil Staebler,
Democratic State Control Committee Chairman, urges the appointment of
Seidman to the Board of Control. He cites Seidman's qualifications; his
education, his past work on the college, the necessity of Seidman's continuing
to work for the college, the fact that Seidman's own children in all probability
would not go to Grand Valley State College, (thereby precluding personal
interests), and the need to raise the million dollars.

In an undated letter to Kleiner, Seidman listshis preferences for appoint-

ment to the Board of Control. Along with the names he lists their party

preferences, their record of community work, and their occupations. Seidman's

letter must have been written between May 12 and May 24, for on May 24,

102

Kleiner wrote Staebler recommending to him Seidman's recommendations
in the order Seidman had furnished. In Kleiner's letter to Staebler he again
mentioned the necessity of raising a million dollars.

What other correspondence took place or what other conversations and
agreements were made concerning the appointments of the Board of Control
members are not available. When Governor Williams, in October, 1960,
announced his appointments of the nine appointees, five: Seidman, Frey,
Kistler, Ott, and Stafford were on Seidman's recommended list, and are from
the eight-c ounty area. Kleiner had not mentioned Stafford to Staebler, but
his name was probably added later. One other, Kenneth Robinson, a labor
leader, is also from the Grand Rapids area. Three are from outside the
eight-county area, Kirkpatrick, Hoobler, and Copeland. (Table X)

Governor Williams made his appointments public on October 5, 1960. The
act establishing the new college became effective August 17, 1960. At that
time, Williams was busy .with state and national political conventions, but
the governor's office indicated that he was then considering the eligible
appointees and was aware of the desirability of having Seidman on the Board.

With the appointment of the Board of Control there was now an official
organ to accept gifts and flmds, to appoint a president, to secure a site, and
to perform what duties needed to be done to make the new college more of a
reality than it was. Seidman had already been engaging in correspondence

with other institutional officials. The Board continued this activity.

Inter-Institutipn relationships and early administration. Dr. John X.
J amrich had written to Seidman that it might be wise for Seidman to get the

blessing of the large university presidents. He had also suggested that it
was a good idea to get the ideas on what the university attitudes were toward

the new college. He suggested that Seidman make up a compact brochure on

103

T able X. Grand Valley State College's First Board of Control

 

 

Six-year Terms

L. William Seidman, Grand Rapids, CPA, Chairman, Citizens'
Study Committee

William Kirkpatrick, Kalamazoo, President, Kalamazoo Paper
Box Company

Mrs. John Kistler, Grand Haven, Chairman, Adult Education Com-
mittee of the National Federation of Women's Clubs, former
president of Michigan Federation of Women's Clubs

Four-year Terms

Kenneth Robinson, Grand Rapids, Director, Region 1—D, UAW,
Member of International Executive Board.

Arnold C. Ott, North Muskegon, President, Ott Chemical Company,
industrial chemist since 1943, formerly with Dow Chemical,
Upjohn, and Hercules Powder Co. , member of Citizens'
Committee

James O. Copeland, President, Security National Bank of Manistee,
President, Wyoming State Bank (Kent County)

Two-year Terms

Edward Frey, Grand Rapids, President, Union Bank of Michigan,
President, Grand Rapids Chamber of Commerce, Director,
United States Chamber of Commerce, Director, Kent County
United Fund.

Dale Stafford, Greenville, Editor and publisher, Greenville Daily
News, Past President, Michigan Press Association.

 

Mrs. Icie Macie Hoobler, Ann Arbor, nationally recognized biochemist.

 

 

 

o
n
...f .....a.._\

,o ‘ .__

rt-

104

the new college and get sub-committees formed from the Citizens' Advisory
Committee (page 79 and Appendix VI). In this same letter, dated January
4, 1960, J amrich suggested that it might be a good idea to get the legislators
at a meeting to let them know how the other universities felt.

Seidman had sent the J amrich Report to Dr. Harold M. Dorr, dean ofs-tate-

 

Wide education at the University of Michigan. Following this, there was
some correspondence between Seidman and Dorr concerning plans for the
college should it materialize. In February, Seidman visited Durwood Varner,
chancellor at Michigan State University—Oakland. In a letter dated February
19, 1960, there are indications that Seidman was already trying to determine
the type of institution desired. And in March, 1960, there is some corres-
pondence with President Hillberry of Wayne State University.

Seidman had been extending invitations to various higher education repre-
sentatives to meet at his home on June 2, 1960. This meeting would include not
only representatives from various state institutions of higher education but
also area citizens who worked on the establishment of the new college.

The June 2, 1960, meeting at Seidman's home in Ada, Michigan, did clear
the air. Attending the‘meeting were Dorr; Everett Soop, director of extension
services for the University of Michigan; Paul Miller, provost at Michigan
State; Howard Neville, director of continuing education at Michigan State
University; Otto Yntema, director of field services at Western Michigan Uni-
versity; George Kohrman, dean of Western Michigan University School of
Applied Arts and Sciences; John Visser, dean of Grand Rapids Junior College;
Benjamin Buikema, superintendent of schools of Grand Rapids; William Beaman,
of the Grand Rapids Board of Education, and some members of the Citizens'
Advisory Council. In a letter to Seidman dated April 19, 1960, Dorr acknowl-

edged the invitation to come to Seidman's home and stated further that he was .

105

happy that Seidman could expedite the meeting of all the minds that were
apparently going to attend. He further stated that Seidman would not find his
efforts wasted, and that the three institutions (University of Michigan, Michigan
State University, and Western Michigan University) had an obligation to provide
stronger and more unified programs of study in the Grand Rapids area. A memo
in the Seidman correspondence directs his secretary to extend invitations to all
those previously listed and to Van Ess, Dutcher, and Watkins. Each received
a personal invitation on May 9, Dorr's invitation included a little banter.
Relations were fine, at least with the University of Michigannand seemingly
with Michigan State University-Oaldande-for .the correspondence between Seidman
and Varner is cordial and informal, including Varner's pleasure at trading a
dollar-fifty lunch for a two hlmdred fifty-five dollar scholarship. Also invited
were Representatives Martin Buth and Charles Boyer, of Manistee, Boyersaid
he would try to get there in a letter dated May 14. Dorr, on May 13, 're-
affirmed his pleasure at the possibility of the meeting. Neville, also, expressed
his‘pleasure. Yntema replied on May 17 ; Soop and Miller on the 16th. .

‘(The invitations to this meeting were sent while the legislature battled to
get the bill establishing the college passed and while the correspondence con-
cerning the board of control was carried on. Also, as early as February,
some thought had been given to a site, for there was 3. Citizens' site committee
meeting on the 29th of February. In addition, the steady round of speeches
did not let up. Dutcher, Buth, Seidman, and Van Ess and also J amrich all
had speaking engagements throughout the early part of the year, according

to memos in the Seidman correspondence files.)

The June 2 meeting was well documented by both the Grand Rapids Press

 

and by letters between Seidman and Dorr. Dr. Dorr said the purpose of the

meeting was "to see how we should plan our extension programs to avoid

,...-0

fun

a h
-\u

4

.‘Y!

106

putting any roadblocks in the way of the Grand Valley State College, and to
.find what this community plans to do for itself, and to clear the way for you.
For example, we're thinking of starting a business administration program
here. Will the new college have one? We don't want to announce a joint,
souped-up business administration program and have the Grand Valley people
say 'You're putting a roadblock in our way. ' " Dorr, in replying to questions,
said that instead cf fearing the new colleges, present institutions had a great
pressure from growing numbers of applicants. "Our only fear is that you
won't have a good college. "

Others said there would be no competition in enrollment or for funds from
the new college. Dorr said that he felt that the other institutions should share
some part of the state appropriations for higher education with the new college.
Dr. Paul Miller, then provost at Michigan State University, stated that the
goal should be one of utmost cooperation between the extension services of the
three universities, University of Michigan, Michigan State University, and
Western Michigan University. He, Miller, saw four paths possible for exten-
sion services: 1, a continuation of separate services; 2, a combiningof the
programs; 3, combining the programs in one building, each presenting the
strongest offering of each university; or 4, joining in one structure on the
new campus to reinforce the new college offerings, and, in turn, the college's
reinforcing the extension offerings of each university. Miller indicated that
he preferred the latter. He said that Michigan State University didn't want a
branch. "We feel it's wise for institutions to emerge from the community to
which they're responsible and out of the cirmmstanc'es arising from their
location. " This was in reply to a question of William Beaman of the Grand

Rapids Board of Education, who pressed the point of whether or not the three

universities were interested in establishing a branch. His question, according

I

Mtg
::

An.- ,, .1
“fr ’C

‘1 40
mil '

p

I

I...

107

to the M M 23213.. reports on the meeting, was this: "Do you favor our
going ahead as an independent institution ? If so, will you help us and how will
you do it? " I

Otto Yntema of Western Michigan gave an affirmative reply, and Beaman
said he was 90 per cent satisfied. Buikema said, "I feel there's a measure of
apprehension that this is a threat to the University of Michigan, Michigan
State University, and Western Michigan University. I think this is unfortimate
and it's not our intent. We need your guidance in our problem. " He further said
that the local school board (Grand Rapids) was enthusiastically committed to a
four-year college in the area, and that the Board had no intention of closing the
Grand Rapids Junior College. He said rather that they expected the Junior College
to grow. f

The “university educators anticipated a gradual emphasis in the extension
services to primarily graduate education. But Buikema said he thought they
could do things Grand Valley could not. Dorr said the extensions could offer
the second, third, and fourth years if Grand Valley started out with a freshman
year. He saw no need to end graduate programs for some time; in fact, he
saw the Grand Valley staff doing some of the extension service graduate instruc-
tion. He said further: "You'll have a building problem and two of our institutions
have experts on that; we can help plan the curriculum, and as for the stafi, we
can be helpful there. The University of Michigan will help you as best as it
can. I see no reason those planning the new college need fear us. "

Buikema reiterated the J agrigh Report recommendations, that the new college
would first offer liberal arts programs, and then move into teacher education
and business administration.

That there was still dissatisfaction in the minds of some is evident from

a long letter Dorr wrote to Beaman. Dorr, in this letter, dated June 22, 1960,

E

m".
..J’Irl
rat:

:0

108

emphatically made these points:

1.

6.

The University of Michigan welcomed a new four-year school and did
not fear it. .
The University of Michigan would assist the new college in planning
programs. It would not oppose the new school nor impede its progress.
This, said Dorr, was confirmed by President Hatcher.
The new school should not expect nor should it seek prior public endorse-
ment by the University of Michigan or any other established educational
institution. Rather, it should get the support and assistance the University
of Michigan offered in preliminary planning and development of the cur-
riculum and the staff.
The University of Michigan had stated its willingness to create broader
educational opportunities in Grand Rapids, in Flint, and in Dearborn
based upon these things: 1, educational need; 2, the ability of the
University of Michigan to provide a curriculum and a staff; 3, continuing
legislative support; 4, a firm invitation from responsible groups in the
community; and 5, financial support from the community.
The invitation to establish a branch in Grand Rapids had never been with-
drawn by the Grand Rapids group and the University of Michigan had
never rejected it. But the proposition was never pursued vigorously,
although the proposal had been discussed widely.
When Grand Rapids made its bid for a state-supported school, the University
of Michigan considered the matter closed. Then the policy position out-
lined above ceased to exist: the invitation was considered withdrawn,

local finance would go to the new college, legislative support would go

to the new college.

 

109

7. The University of Michigan would establish no senior or branch college
in Grand Rapids, nor would it expand its continuing education program
to impede the progress of the new school. Therefore, there was no
question of constructing any continuing education center in Grand Rapids.

8. There is a need for a central consolidated center for all programs of

higher education in the Grand Rapids area.

9. If the current plans to establish the new college were not to succeed,

the University of Michigan would be pleased to consider the Grand Rapids
area again with respect to a branch.

Copies of this letter were sent to Buikema and Seidman. Dorr asked Seidman's
reaction to the letter. Seidman had none. He replied on August 10 that the points
Dorr made were all right with him. On August 30, Dorr wrote Seidman that
Beaman had visited him in Ann Arbor when he, Dorr, was in the hospital, and
that relations were satisfactory and that there were no misunderstandings and no
imperfect relations. In the letter Dorr also congratulated Seidman on the pos-
sibilities of Seidman's becoming chairman of the Board of Control that Governor
Williams was nearly ready to appoint.

The June 2 meeting was to have far reaching efiects upon the early success
of the college. For here the way was cleared for the new college in its initial
administrative procedures. The Board of Control sought and secured assistance
from the University of Michigan, Michigan State University, Western Michigan
University, and Wayne State, and also Grand Rapids Junior College in early
1961. The consultants loaned by these institutions did much of the early plan-
ning and set up guides and procedures that proved valuable while the college
was in its fledgling state before the Board of Control could hire its own
administrators.

110

Seidman had been corresponding with potential administrators for Grand
Valley State College; namely, Dr. Whitehouse of Albion, and Dr. Anspach,
president emeritus of Central Michigan University. Seidman had been in
some correspondence with Dr. Varner of Michigan State University—Oakland
also, and had visited him on the Oakland campus in February. These relations
did not develop into anything concrete, but the relations between the new college

and other institutions were being made and strengthened with each meeting.

The planning consultants. After the appointment of the Board of Control,
the minutes of their meetings shed light on inter-institutional relationships
and early administration problems. The first meeting took place on October
17, 1960, in Lansing, Michigan, in the State Capital. All appointees, except
Edward Frey and Dale Stafford, were present to be sworn in by Governor
Williams. ‘

The motion to appoint Seidman as chairman of the Board of Control was,
according to the minutes and newspaper reports, "unanimous and enthusiastic. "
Robinson and Kistler were unanimously appointed secretary and treasurer,
respectively. -

Among other points discussed at this historic meeting was the fact of the
necessity of gaining the advice and help of professional educators in Michigan.
Seidman was asked by Dr. Ott to discuss his philosophy regarding the new
college. Seidman made these points clear:

1. The new school had to provide the best possible education it eculd.

2. The new school had a responsibility to serve the youth, the citizens,

and the industry of the area.

3. The board, not being tied to any precedent, faculty, alumni, or institu-

tion, had the opportunity to make independent decisions.

111

4. The need, however, for professional help was obvious, and the

board should "be thinking about how we should go about getting
ourselves a 'pro. ' "

Specific action to obtain the services of a professional educator or a team
of them was made in the ensuing months, and before any firm administrative
group was available, several alternatives were begun and rejected.

At the second meeting of the Board of Control held November 1, 1960, at
Seidman's home, it was agreed that a business manager would be needed to
handle details in organizing the new school. Seidman, Robinson, and Frey
were appointed as a committee to screen applicants for the full—time position.
Here the idea in the minutes comes up that perhaps the new college could
borrow someone from some organization. (Also, at this meeting, Frey made
lmown that the Union Bank and Trust Company of Grand Rapids had donated
office space at the corner of Pearl and Ottawa in Grand Rapids. This is
in the heart of Grand Rapids. Frey is president of the Union Bank and Trust
Company.)

The decisions to get professional help was more fully discussed at the
November 22, 1960, Board meeting held at theUnion Bank Board Room.

Here reference was made to correspondence and conversations Seidman had
had with Dr. William Whitehouse (at Dr. Hoobler's suggestions) and with

. Dr. Charles Anspach. (Anspach had been in Grand Rapids to address the
Ottawa Hills High School graduating class in June. Seidman had written him
in April requesting an appointment to talk with him.) Both Whitehouse and
Anspach had feltthat they preferred not to assume full responsibility for
building a new college from scratch, it was reported in theNovember 22,
1960, minutes, and their letters to Seidman indicate their reasons: both

were too involved with the details of their present tasks and interests.

112

Seidman suggested here that Michigan State University, University of

Michigan, and Wayne State University be approached concerning their sugges-

- tions on people who might be loaned to get the college started. Dr. Hoobler

and Mr. Kirkpatrickstated that they had spent several hours with Algo Henderson,
of the University of Michigan Center for Higher Education, and that he had had some
positive suggestions. The Board here arrived at a major decision: that though
there was urgent need for an administrator, because the right appointment was
vital to the success of the college, it would be a mistake to make the decision
hastily. Thus, the motion was made and carried that a committee of the

Board be empowered to approach any of the state institutions for the loan of

an administrator on a temporary basis to help with some of the initial planning

of the college: site, plant planning, curriculum, coordination with other

schools in the area, etc. Dr. Hoobler and Mr. Kirkpatrick were appointed to

do this. And the selection of a business manger was delayed until an adminis-
trator could be found.

About this time, a Dr. Chris De Young, dean emeritus of Illinois State
Normal University, was retained by the Board. According to a_(_}_1_~_a_ng_ Rapids
liege report of December 8, 1960, Dr. De Young offered his services to pull

together the details necessary to get the new college under way. De Young, it
stated in the article, was from Illinois State Normal University and had been
active in educational projects in India, Pakistan, Germany, and Cambodia.
He was in Grand Rapids to get married, and, according to Mrs. Eppinga,
Seidman's secretary, came up and offered his services. Dr. John Tirrell,
former dean of Grand Rapids Junior College, then in alumni relations at the
University of Michigan, referred to De Young's presence as "dropping out of

the blue" in a letter to Seidman, and considered it a stroke of luck. De Young

its compensated {I
April. 1961. He 4
coiege through it:
Before the (if.
universities v. as
members and Lb».
President Butch
Planning, and $4
Emit-.3311 State
mfhié’an Slate
Nomama k e r,

10 Paul Miller

113

was compensated for his services in later Board action. He remained through
April, 1961. He was the first of the board of consultants that helped steer the
college through its early days.

Before the full board of consultants who were loaned by several state
universities was complete, several letters were exchanged by various Board
members and the universities. Dr. Hoobler, on November 29, 1960, wrote
President Hatcher asking for University of Michigan assistance in new college
planning, and Seidman, on November 23, had written President Hannah of
Michigan State University asking for help. On December 1, a letter from
Michigan State offered the possible help of Drs. Cole Brembeck, Eldon '
Nonnama k e r, and John Ivey. On December 12, and 13, 1960, Seidman wrote
to Paul Miller, Michigan State provost, Dr. Raymond Hatch, an assistant dean
in the College of Education at Michigan State University, Dorr (invitation to
Algo Henderson included), and Dr. Harlan Hagman, dean of administration at
Wayne State University inviting them all to dinner.

There was further correspondence and personal relations between the Board
and the University, for the minutes of the December 8, 1960, meeting disclose
that Dr. Hoobler had been met with enthusiastic reception from Wayne State,
and though President Hatcher was out of town, it was recommended to Dr.
Hoobler when she was at the University of Michigan that she speak to him per-
sonally since he, Hatcher, might wish to make a personal selection for any
consultant provided by the University of Michigan. Seidman reported that
in his "contacts" with President Hannah and Provost Miller he had met
with similar cooperative attitudes, and that he had requested that Michigan
State University loan a full—time man for six months. Miller had indicated
that there would be "no strings attached" to whatever arrangement was made

by Michigan State University, and that the Board could use the man as it desired.

i...

114

Also, the Grand Rapids Board of Education released Dean John Visser, of

Grand Rapids Junior College, and Seidman expressed the hope that he could

be with the planning consultants on a half-time basis. This hope was realized.
The invitations Seidman had made were apparently for dinner at Seidman's

home, for a December 14, 1960, Grand Rapids Press reports that on December

 

13, Hatcher, De Young, Miller, Dorr, Hagman, and Seidman met to discuss the
newfcollege. Seidman had presented a memorandum to the Board on December
8, stating what needed discussing. (Table XI) The Board had urged that there
be an effort to get the planning consultants group organized as quickly as possible.
The meeting at Seidman's home was the preliminary one, and the details of .
what was needed being spelled out here, the universities could now better
release the right man.

There seems to have been some premature publicity given the loosing of
assistance from the University of Michigan. Two articles in the Michigan
_D§i_ly_, one dated November 29, and one dated December 9, 1960, report on
the Board's efforts to get the University of Michigan's assistance and a letter
from President Hannah to Seidman discloses apprehension on his part that the
University of Michigan was taking too prominent a part in the affairs of the
new college.

The Michigan D_a1fl_, a University of Michigan newspaper, reported that
when Dr. Hoobler had discussed the possibility of the University of Michigan's
offering help, the question of releasing a full-time man had not been dis-
cussed. Vice president, Marvin Niehuss, dean of faculty, said he could not
recall that the University had ever released a full-time man to work in another
school, but wouldn't object if someone wanted to do it. The December 9 _Mighk

ga_n_ Daily reported that the University of Michigan officials were surprised to learn

115

Table XI. Grand Valley State College Projects for the Planning
Administration

 

 

It is suggested that the college begin functioning through a planning adminis-
tration group composed of representatives on loan from the University of
Michigan, Michigan State, Grand Rapids Junior College, Wayne State, and
other personnel available.

The following are suggested as the major projects which should be under-
taken by the college's new planning administration.

(1) Faculty and curriculum. This project involves the heart of the school
covering the type of education which will be given and the plans for recruitment
of faculty. It will also cover cultural programs, athletic programs, and other
extra-curricular activities for the school.

(2) Private flmd raisi_ng_. This project includes carrying to a successful
conclusion the general fund campaign now under way. It involves solicitation
of business, individuals, labor, and a general mail-in-your-money campaign.
It should also involve the approaching of substantial foundations to finance
major projects for the school.

(3) Appropriations from t3; state. This project involves setting up both
a short and a long-range budget for operations and capital improvements.
A budget must then be presented in proper form and reviewed with various
state officials and legislators. '

 

(4) Site and buildin s. A study must be made recommending an appropriate
site for the SEED-OI, including a review of proposed sites and an independent
investigation of other areas not now proposed which might be suitable.

Choosing of the siteshould be followed by setting up a general campus plan.

(5) integration Mother enlistees. This project would be set up to pro-
vide communications between colleges in the area (Calvin, Hope, Aquinas,
Muskegon Junior College, and Grand Rapids Junior College) so that duplica-
tion of facilities will not be provided and so that the community can receive
the best over-all educational opportunities. The committee should undoubtedly
have representatives of the other major state schools.

The foregoing indicates that all projects are inter-related. The planning
administration will have to correlate each project with the others. For this
purpose, it is suggested that the planning administrators will have a chairman
to coordinate activities designated by the board of control.

 

 

116
that the Grand Valley Board had decided to borrow a consultant from the

University, and that although the possibility had been discussed informally,
no positive assent had been given. Though Seidman, at the December 8 board
meeting, had stated that he would secure the loan of consultants from the
universities, Niehuss said the University of Michigan hadn't been asked.
Dorr was reported as saying that there was some confusion over whether

the university had committed itself to loaning someone. The article reported
Algo HenderSon as saying that there had been informal discussion but no
decision; President Hatcher as wishing success but not having committeed
the University to loaning anyone; and Hannah, of Michigan State University,
as having agreed to loan a person but not full-time. The article also
expressed that there was surprise that Wayne State had also been invited to ‘
participate.

On December 27, Hatcher wrote Seidman that the University of Michigan
would assist in any way with its total resources. All Seidman need do was
ask Dorr, and that Henderson and Lewis would also serve. Hannah's letter
to Seidman was dated December 8, 1960. He. asked Seidman whether there
was any merit in the rumor that the University of Michigan was attempting
to make Grand Valley State College a permanent branch of the University of
Michigan. He stated that he had heard that the University of Michigan
Regents were preparing a concrete proposal, and wanted to avoid a tug-of-
war between the University of Michigan and Michigan State University which
would adversely affect the college. Seidman replied on the 10th that the rumor
was completely false.

The results of all the correspondence and conferring were favorable to the
fortunes of the new college. As early as December 20, the mm

Press reported that a group of planning consultants would hold a session in

117

January and have their first recommendations prepared for the college. The
educational consultants were these:
University of Michigan:
Dr. Hamid M. Dorr, Dean of State-Wide Education, (chairman for
University of Michigan group)
Dr. James Lewis, Vice-president of Student Affairs

Dr. Algo Henderson, Director of the Center for the Study of
Higher Education

Michigan State University:
Dr. Raymond Hatch, Assistant Dean, College of Education

Wayne State University:
Dr. Harlan Hagman, Dean of Administration

Western Michigan University:
Dr. Clayton Maus, Registrar and Director of Admissions

Grand Rapids Junior College:
Dr. John Visser, Dean

Grand” Valley State College:
Dr. Chris De Young, Dean emeritus, Illinois State Normal
University (coordinator for the Board of Control)
(Others were loaned by all universities as they were needed for various speci-
alized taiks, g. g, , site selection.)

The recommendations produced by the planning consultants were concrete.
First, a letter from Hagman to Seidman on December 28 outlined some pre-
liminary observations, which, as the new college grew, seems to have been
generally followed. The salient points of his letter are these:

1. Wayne State would cooperate fully with assisting the new college. There
were many able people on the Wayne staff whose assistants would be secured
as needed. ‘

2. The new college should not seek or appoint an interim president. Nor
should it appoint a retired college president. A young and vigorous man who

would see his future in Grand Valley State College should be gotten - possibly

118

an assistant dean or other doctor with administrative experience in higher
education. (of. page‘ 110 )

3. The new college should be a four-year institution of general education.
A departure from traditional departmental lines seemed appropriate with an
interdisciplinary approach that is flexible in which one subject supports
another. It should begin with a freshman year to assist in the development
of a new kind of college. New teaching devices and methods should be used
widely. A large Citizens' Advisory Committee should be formed which is
closely identified with the college, meets infrequently, and is not a pressure
group to form policy.

A letter from Tirrell to Seidman on January 5, 1961, closely resembled
Hagman's. He urged Seidman to avoid letting the professionals talk him into
making the new college too conservative and traditional.

When the consultants met in a three-day planning session, their eventual
recommendations were neither conservative nor startlingly different. They
outlined recommendations on the character of the college, its relationships
with other institutions, site selection and planning, and considerations to be
noted in selecting a president. (Appendix XI). Their guidelines, as did Hagman'S.
follow Seidman's memo of December 8 to some degree.

At this period between October, 1960, and February, 1961, the rounds of
speeches, addresses, and communications with other community and govern-
mental groups and individuals did not cease. These speaking engagements
are on record in the Seidman correspondence file: Dutcher, November 30,
Grand Rapids Township and Civic Club; Buth, December 1, Schweitzer Club
of Fountain Church; Seidman and Dutcher, Downtown Republicans Luncheon
Club; January 6, 1961, Grand Rapids Architects League; January 11, potluck

at Park Partners Group at Park Congregational Church; Seidman, Rockford

119

School ("at least 250 will attend"); January 19, Business Women's Co—
ordinating Committee; Seidman, Holland Junior Chamber of Commerce;
March 6, Seidman, Kiwanis Club; and others vaguely identified.

Also‘, there was correspondence being carried on with the State Department
of Administration concerning a proposed budget being prepared by Mrs.
Kistler to be submitted to the next legislative session; and with Dr. Alvin
Eurich of the Ford Foundation for a grant. Also, J amrich offered suggestions
on fund raising and methods for approaching industry (page 177 ). Various
groups throughout the area were also beginning to offer sites for the college.
The Citizens' Council was also jelling. (Chapter VIII). The Board minutes
were continuously sent to Lynn Bartlett, Superintendent of Public Instruction.

He is 95 officio a member of the Board.

The J anuaryji, 1_2_,_1_3_plannit_1g session. The session planned for the
January 11 weekend was held concurrently with the semi-annual meeting of
the Michigan Association of School Administrators of the Michigan Education
Association. The Grand Valley Board invited the superintendents of the large
districts of the eight-county area to a free breakfast on Friday, January 13,
at 7:30 a. m. at the Pantlind Hotel. The idea of the breakfast was to let the
superintendents know What was going on. Previous to the superintendents'
breakfast the planning consultants had conferred according to a planned agenda.
According to notes in the Seidman correspondence files, Wednesday, January
11, was spent reviewing the history of the new school up to that point, the
present status, and what the role of the new college would be. A memo spells
out the questions of the role: would it be a liberal arts college? What was its
relation to the other institutions: the independent, those under the department

of public instruction, the junior colleges? What areas of specialization might

120

the new college safely go into? What basic new techniques and approaches in
education would it attempt? Whatsfaculty recruitment problems would have to
be met? What about the site? What about athletics?

TheWednesday session was followed by dinner at Kent Country Club for
the Grand Valley planners. Thursday, January 12, 1960, was spent determin-
ing the next steps to be taken in site and building and how future organization
and planning might be done. Dinner Thursday was at Seidman's home. Follow-
ing the Superintendents' breakfast and the drawing up of tentative plans and
conclusions, the Board of Control met at. 2:00 p. m. in Greenville, twenty miles
northeast. After a 5:30 p. m. social hour at the Greenville Country Club, dinner
was served at 6:30 p. In. there. The invitations to the social hour and dinner
were sent to at least forty-five persons of any eminence in the eastern eight-
comty area besides the Board of Control. Invited were business, industrial,
and professional leaders of Ionia, Greenville, Belding, Lake Odessa, Edmore,
Sheridan, Portland; and representatives from radio, television, the I_lpi_t_e_d

Press, the Tourist Bureau, the Detroit Free Press, the Grand Rapids Press;

 

and to the wives of these persons. Stafford and Copeland were hosts here.

One important outcome of the Board meeting in Greenville which specifically
pertains to inter-institutional relationships was the resolution that James
Ver Meulen, a high official at the American Seating Company and an alumnus
of Hope College in Holland, would serve as coordinator with the private colleges
in the area. His appointment led to a meeting with offibials of Calvin and
Aquinas of Grand Rapids, and Hope of Holland. This meeting brought forth
some positive statements from President Irwin Lubbers of Hope, Msgr.
Arthur Bukowski of Aquinas, and Dean Henry Ryskamp of Calvin. They met
February 9, 1961, at the Pantlind Hotel with the planning consultants. Accord-

ing to a news release dated February 9, the three institution representatives

121

indicated that they were fully aware of the needs of the eight-county students
and expressed their goOd will toward the new institution. Stating that the
determination of site was not of primary concern and that they would willingly
cooperate with the new college efforts and planning, they expressed three
points of concern: 1, that the new college would be an institution of quality;
2, that it adhere to ethical practices of faculty and student recruitment; and
3, that its programs of study not only administer to the needs of the area

and state but also supplement the programs of the established colleges.

By the time of the February, 1961, meeting of the Board, the new college
was fairly well organized administratively in spite of the fact that it had no
official administrative officer of its own. The regular meetings of the Board
produced evidence of progress in raising its million, selecting its site, secur-
ing its legislative appropriation, forming its Citizens' Council, forming
various committees of citizens for various functions, firming relations with
other institutions, and in changing its name.

Concluding the review on this area of the Board's affairs, the area of
administration and inter-institutional relationships at the February 10, 1961,
meeting of the Board, held at Spring Lake, Philip W. Bichen was appointed
legal advisor to the Board to act without compensation. At the June 9 meeting
Buchen was formally approved as Vice-President for Business Affairs. His
appointment is the stopping place for this study, the new college, in effect,

. now being officially a state institution, complete with Board, budget, site,
administrator--and a host of problems the resolution of which is properly
part of a different study.

Preceding the Board meeting at Spring Lake Country Club, B. P. Sherwood,

of The First Security National Bank and chairman of the North Ottawa fund

122

drive, was host to the North Ottawa County business, professional, industrial,
educational, and community leaders at a luncheon at Spring Lake Country
Club. This meeting concerned itself mainly with reports on the fund drive

and on site business. Reviews of details will be withheld here for later dis-

cussion of the site and fund affairs.

CHAPTER VII
THE SELECTION OF THE SITE

This account will be limited to Board of Control action in site selection.
It will not weigh the relative merits of any site nor make judgments on the
final decision of the Board. The intent here is not to second-guess or to
cast any group in a false light. Since over twenty sites were offered by .
different groups, t6 fully describe each would be burdensome for both writer
and reader. Therefore, only those which were considered seriously by the
Board of Control and the Site Committee and those around which there centered
controversy will be discussed here.

Furthermore, the action of the Board concerning site selection evolved into
a real test of strength for the Board: there came a strong challenge of the

Board's integrity, its wisdom; of the facts of the Russell Report and the

 

J amrich Mt; and of the entire three years' work which had been done by

Seidman and his group before the site was selected. The details of site

selection will be reported here chronologically, and the sources will be reported

with the facts? The sources are these: newspaper accounts; minutes of the

Board; Sei 'dman's files which contain letters, memos, reports, telegrams,

maps, diagrams, charts; and other materials received from John Achterhoff.
The Board recognized that it had to act speedily in attaining a site to ful-

fill that requirement before the legislative deadline for budget considerations.

In the minutes of the first meeting held in Lansing on October 17, 1960, it

states that Kirkpatrick and Hoobler were suggested as best choices to work

123

124

with a site committee, since they each were not from the eight-county area and
would be more objective. Jordan Popkin, secretary to Governor Williams,
stated that at some point there had to be set up criteria for evaluating the

site. The total Board agreed that all precautions had to be made to preclude

any real estate profiteering and speculation.

Early site proposals and activities. Even before the appointment of the
Board in October, there had been several sites offered. As early as February,
1960, the sub-committee on sites of the Citizens' Advisory Committee approached
the Grand Rapids City Commission to see what weight there was in statements
made concerning the City's donating to the college Aman Park, a three hundred

odd acre plot ten miles west of the city on Highway M-50. Also, the Grand Haven

 

Tribune reported even earlier, on December 16, 1959, that the Grand Haven
Mayor wanted to know whether the new college was interested in locating in
Grand Haven, and if so, the city might make available a site along Lake Michi-
gan north of Grand Haven near the Ottawa-Muskegon County line. At a
February 29, 1960, meeting of the Citizens' Advisory Committee and Site
Committee they expressed a preference for the Aman Park site. It met loca—

. tion requirements as suggested in the J amrich Report. The Grand Haven site

. was spoken of as a second, or summer campus. And, though it later reversed

this attitude, the Muskegon Chronicle in a March 12, 1960, fifteen-inch

 

editorial supported the college site west of Grand Rapids.

All this occurred before the bill establishing the college had even passed
the legislature. The site committee was operating under confident assumptions.
This was a seventeen-member committee of area citizens who had volunteered
after the J amrich presentation on November 30, 1959, not the same as the

site committee formed in 1961.

125

The Aman Park site raised some controversy. Mayor Stanley Davis
of Grand Rapids announced on Wednesday, April 13, 1960, that he would ask
the City Commission to donate the Aman Park site willed to the city by the late
Jacob Aman who had requested that it be retained for park purposes. Davis
said he expected no difficulty, and that the action would give the college effort
a real start. , The same week, a day or two later, Thomas Stafford, a Grand
Rapids businessman and previously unsuccessful candidate for Mayor, stated
that although he favored the new college, Aman Park was too valuable to be
given over completely to college purposes. It was, he said, needed for a
reservoir for Grand'Rapids water supply. He stated that a lake on the campus
would not be distracting. He stated that should the City Commission decide to
give away the park he would initiate a referendum to get the voters' decision.
Davis, according to a Detroit Free Press article of April 16, said he had no
objections to a referendum and that he would present the proposal to the City
Commission on Tuesday, April 19, 1960. Stafford stated that the park Was
worth more than 375, 000 dollars, and that a suitable college site could be
gotten for less than that.

Seidman's comment according to the Detroit Free Press was, ”No one
has decided yet where the college will be. "

Davis made the suggestion before the City Commission. It was received
and filed. Commissioner Robert Blandford stated that if the Commission
approved, he would "deliver the title to Aman Park on a silk pillow. "
Commissioner Bernard Barto stated that Kent County had lots of land; Com-
missioner John Vanden Berg cautioned against haste; the Commission decided
to wait until after May 2, 1960, when new commissioruswould take office.

There may have been political implications in the Aman Park contro-

versy. oma Rapids mayor contests had had as a confused issue water

In

126

supplies and pipeline projects ever since the rejection of George Welsh as
mayor in the late 1940's. There was some cloudiness in the statistics

and figures concerning pipelines, filter plants, well drilling, reservoirs,

and related problems. Prominent in one set of plans was Aman Park as a
reservoir. Welsh had favored this. The facts are so obscure that no implica-
tions are made here, but Stafford did appear, in his election campaigning, to
favor the Welsh programs of water supply. Conceivably, placing the college

on Aman Park might interfere with long-range plans of difierent figures in I

the political picture in Grand Rapids. Z. Z. Lydens, however, an early backer
of Aman Park as a site for the college, in a conversation in March, 1963, stated
that since the City of Grand Rapids had begun building a filtration plant at Lake
Michigan, there would never be need of such a reservoir again.

The Grand Rapids Press of May 16, 1960, reported that the Allendale

 

Improvement Association and the East Allendale Improvement Association
represented by Marinus De Young, chairman of the association and a citizen

of Allendale, a small community about ten miles west of Grand Rapids and just
two or three miles west of the Aman Park site, had taken options on four hundred
acres of land on M-50 at the Grand River. The land sloped up sharply from the
west side of the river and had three hundred buildable acres on it. The Gran_d
Rapids Press also reported that Kenneth Welch, a Grand Rapis architect had
made detailed plans which proposed that the new college be located in downtown
Grand Rapids in an area to be reconstructed under urban renewal. He had
detailed'sketches, and plans. His plans were for a thirteen-story tower of
learning which could have five more stories added. The tower would have
triple parking levels which would conceal the cars. Three above ground-level

decks would include a swimming pool, gardens, and recreational facilities.

127

The initial capacity would be 4, 000 students with room to expand to facilitate

12, 000 in the future. Welch cited the advantages: it would eliminate long
journeys between buildings, and it was near the public library, civic auditorium,
stores, transportation, and hospitals. Keith Honey, city planner, objected on
these grounds: he said placing the college there would boost the cost of the
downtown renewal program, and would leave no land for tax bearing buildings.
Arlen Ley, a city commissioner, who is also a realtor, said that the proposal
was too late; the voters had approved the renewal project on a basis different
from that which would result should a college he built in the area. Twenty-
three acres were committed for tax bearing purposes.

A Grand Haven Tribune editorial on August 16, 1960, also opposed the down-

 

town Grand Rapids site and made a plea for a site near the Kent-Ottawa County
line that had breathing room and would correspond with previous planning of
the backers of the college.

In the August 12, 1960, Grand Rapids Press Seidman announced that a group
of Marne residents had begun taking options on land there. Marne is a small
community about fifteen miles west of Grand Rapids on old U. S. 16 or the new

Interstate 196. The September 19, 1960, Grand Rapids Press gave details on

 

the Marne offer of 364 acres made by the College Development Company headed
by Pat Blink and Philip Despres. Also, a plot of land at the corner of East
Leonard Street and the East Beltline at the northeast of corner of Grand Rapids
was offered by Jason Hoenigman.

The November 10, 1960, Grand Rapids Press stated that it was disclosed

 

at a Grand Haven Chamber of Commerce meeting by Secretary Claude Ver Duin
that through an agreement made between the Spring Lake Township Board and
Holiday Hills Incorporated, a real estate development organization headed by

Charles Rycenga, a lumber dealer, four hundred acres could be donated to the

128

college with no strings attached. This land was that which the Grand Haven
Mayor had referred to earlier.

On Tuesday, November 15, 1960, the Grand Rapids Press reported that

 

Mayor Joseph Kolderman and City Manager John Kennaugh of Wyoming City

were authorized to submit a proposal for the college to be located in a plot

of one hundred acres known as the Picric Acid Plant property and that they

would seek a release from the Kent County Road Commission for adjacent

land in Linus Palmer Park to be added to the Picric Acid property. This
acreage lay just south and west of Grand Rapids. This proposal was eventually
negated by Kent County Road Commission action later in November. The Road
Commission and the Kent County Board of Supervisors stated that the Commission
would net part with any part of Palmer Park since they had invested a consider-

able amount of money developing it. This was reported in the Grand Rapids

 

_Ples__§ December 14, 1960.

The Board of Control had had opportunity to meet three times by November
30, 1960. In addition to the discussion at the first meeting, the November 1
and 22 meetings brought forth little action concerning the site. Seidman reported
on November 1 that a Citizens' Council was being formed with David Dutcher
as chairman. (cf. Chapter VIII ) In addition to advising the Board of Control
on the community desires and public relations capacity, the Council would
assist in planning and action in site, building and name, administration, cur-
riculum and other fields as needs arose. On November 22 Dutcher was asked
to send letters to Citizens' Council members requesting them to indicate how
they Would like to serve and was asked to come to the next Board meeting with
a site committee. The next meeting was to be held in Muskegon on December

8, 1960, preceded by a luncheon with the Muskegon County-Grand Haven members

129

of the Citizens' Council. This luncheon was as important as would be a social
hour and dinner in Greenvflle on January 13 and a luncheon in Spring Lake on
. February '10.. But it did not elicit as hearty a response in Muskegon as was
given in Greenville and Spring Lake.

Present at the luncheon were Muskegon Superintendent of Schools, Richard
B. Warren, and President of the Muskegon School Board, Cyrus M. Poppen.
The upshot of the luncheon meeting was this: that whatever college funds were
' raised in Muskegon should go to the building of Muskegon Community College.
“The Muskegon educators pointed out that it cost the state 205 dollars per pupil
in state aid funds for each junior college pupil, but 1, 000 dollars per pupil for
four-year state institution students. The attitude of the Muskegon educators
was not one that gave the Board much hope for help from Muskegon in the fund
drive. .2

This reception was not totally unexpected. Arnold C. Ott had written
Seidman on December 6 that the Muskegon educators were wondering what
effect the new four-year school would have on their junior college, and that
Seidman should bring several J amrich Reports along to help forestall objections.
He stated that he thought the new college would have to be sold to the group,
and that the Board would have to "play it by ear. "

At the Board meeting following the luncheon, the Board approved the site
committee membership and authorized the chairman to add whatever names
he saw fit to add. A

'Meanwhfle, on November 18, 1960, the Aman Park site had been increased
to 400 acres. Z. Z. Lydens of the City Planning Commission of Grand Rapids,
an ardent backer of the Aman Park site, had obtained commitments on the addi-

tional acreage. This was reported November 18 in the Grand Rapids Press.

 

130

Several other sites were offered in December and January: acreage on
Cannonsburg Road near U. S. 131 north of Grand Rapids; two Sites near Lowell,
Michigan, one of them 477 acres freed by the Conservatinn Department; 461
acres in Byron Township offered by Paul Strecker, a real estate broker; two
sites in Walker Township, one at Gracewil Golf Course and one out Leonard
Street at the west edge of the city; and the sites at Marne, Allendale, Aman
Park, and Grand Haven of 900, 770, 659, and over 600 acres respectively.

All this occurred by the end of January. By February 8, 1961, four new sites
were offered: one on O'Brien Road just west of Grand Rapids; one at Greenridge
Country Club, two miles north of Grand Rapids on M—37; one at Ravenna, a
small community twenty miles east of Muskegon; and a site in Muskegon near
the Marquette Urban Renewal area. By February 22, 1961, sites in Whitehall,
Rockford (900 acres) and Jenison had also been offered. Thus, by the end of
February, 1961, twenty sites had been offered. (See Table XII)

The Board of Control had not been idle in the time between the Muskegon
meeting and the middle of February, and their action and the annomcements
of the planning consultants at the January 11-13 meeting (Appendix XII)
were chiefly responsible for the increase in acreage of several of. the sites

and the emergence of all the new site offerings.

Board of Control planm‘_ng_gn_ ages. Between the December 8 meeting in
Muskegon (at which time Dutcher had announced the site committee) and the
Greenville meeting of January 13, (at which time the Board announced that
all people and communities which offered sites would be given ample opportunity
to present their proposals), the site committee had become firm. Circuit
Judge Fred N. Searl of Grand Rapids and Richard M. Gillett, executive vice-

president of the trust division of the Old Kent Bank and Trust Company, were

131

Table XII. College Sites Offered Up to February 22, 1961

 

 

Allendale

Aman Park

Byron - Wyoming
Cannonsburg Road
Downtown Grand Rapids
East Beltline - Leonard, Grand Rapids
Grand Haven
Greenridge

J enison

Lowell (2)

Marne

Muskegon

O'Brien Road

Ravenna

Rockford

Walker - Kenowa

Walker - Four-mile Road
Whitehall

Wyoming - Picric Acid - Palmer Park

 

132

named co-chairmen of the thirty-six member sites and building committee.
An executive site committee was composed of, besides Searl and Gillett,
M.. R. Bissell III of Grand Rapids, firesident of Bissell, Inc. ; Robert P.
Van Ess, accountant, of Grand Rapids, member of the CEFYC; Almon McCall,
of Grand Haven, editor and co-publisher of the Grand Haven TribunefMayor
Robert T. Visscher of Holland; and T. A. Saunders, president of the General
Telephone Company of Muskegon. This committee was announced in the
December 29, 1960, Grand Rapids Press. The full committee met Wednesday,
January 25, 1961, and heard the report and recommendations for procedures
in selecting a site which had been formulated by the executive committee.
The guidelines for site proposals (Appendix XII) covered general conditions
such as acreage, buildable land, access, beauty, proximity, etc. , and also
what information the proposals submitted for review should contain by way of
description and definition.

Adrian N. Langius, Director of the Building Division of the Department of
Ad ministration of the State of Michigan, sent to Chris De Young a set of
materials which outlined specific requirements for a college site on January
25, 1961. (Appendix XIIIa, b , ) He included a statement of essential
features such as water supply, sewage disposal, topography, soil characteristics;
and desirable features such as highway access, area, community, and land cost.
Included also was a preliminary rating chart which established a point rating
system. At the February 19 Board meeting consultant Raymond Hatch of
Michigan State University presented to the Board this report:

1. A list of all the members of the full site committee.

2. The committee's guidelines and evaluation process (Appendix XII).

3. The Building Division materials (Appendix Xflla, b).

4. A list of the sites proposed up to this time.

133

5. Plans for site reviews and hearings.
The site reviews had been made February 8 and 9, and hearings took place

on February 11. (Appendix XIV)

Muskegon activities. Previous to these ooourences as reported in the

Grand Haven Tribune, at a Muskegon city-county joint Board of Education

 

meeting on December 28, 1960, it was resolved that the Muskegon Community
College would go on a county-wide basis, that the Muskegon Community College
growth did not lessen the importance of the need of Grand Valley State College,
nor did the fact of Grand Valley State College lessen the importance of the need
for Muskegon Community College. With this resolution passed, the way had
been cleared for Muskegon to bid for the location of Grand Valley State College
there. And in a special session of the Muskegon City Commission on February
6, 1961, Commissioner Henry Klevering urged that Muskegon reserve some
land for the new college; and Merrill Bailey, member of the site selection
committee, said that a Greater Muskegon delegation should offer a 400-acre
parcel in the Marquette area in Muskegon to the College Board of Control as a
proposed site in then-3x1: week, according to the Grand Rapids Press. The
February 8, 1961, _M_u__slge_gt_)_n_Chronicle stated that the Greater Muskegon
Chamber of Commerce in two special sessions threw its weight behind the
proposal to lu_r_e_ the Grand Valley State College to Muskegon. It further stated
that in both a morning executive session and an afternoon session on February
8 a resolution was drafted which would supply".640 acres of land in Muskegon
Township north of Marquette Avenue and east of Harvey Street for the college
site. (See Appendix XIX.) A

_ Chris De Young had already announced the review schedule. The Muskegon

review had been deferred under provisions of a time extension granted the

134

Muskegon Committee which proposed the site. This same time extension
was granted other late entires, notably Rockford.

The Grand Rapids Press in an editorial on February 9, 1961, stated

 

that Grand Rapids, not Muskegon, was the proper place for thenew college.
The total investment in the college which would be made through the years,
at least twenty million dollars, was worth fighting for, the Grand Rflids Press

reported Merrill Bailey as saying. The Grand Rapids Press editorial stated

 

that the college was worth fighting for, but not, however, because it brought
a twenty million dollar asset to the community. .» Rather, Muskegon was too far
fromfithe 70 per cent of the students who would attend. Location should be
determined by who would best be served, stated the editorial. ‘
There had been a;frank statement made in the February 11, 1961, Muskegon
Chronicle. It stated that leadership was lacking in Muskegon, that there had
been' too much casual interest in community affairs there. Only when a crisis arose
did anyone come forth to fight for the community. Oblique reference was made to
the Norge Plant's evacuation of Muskegon and pointed reference was made to the
sudden surge of interest in Grand Valley State College. Where had Muskegon
interest been previous to the near certainty that a new college would be

established, was the tone'of the Chronicle statement.

Further Boagd activities. Chris De Young clarified the process of site
selection in a Grand Rapids Press article: the casual reviews would take place
February 9 and 10, the hearings would be held on February 11, the reduction
of site proposals would be made Monday, February 13, and the orientation for
the university consultants would occur on February 14. There would be more
detailed site investigations February 15 through 17, a consultants report on
February 18 and then other possible reviews before the March 10 deadline.

(Appendix XIV)

 

135

Before the Board's March 10 decision on which sites were to be carefully
reviewed in detail, there was a flurry of activity in various quarters.

John X. J amridi lad stated concerning the Board's hearing on the sites
that the site should not be located on the basis of economy, but on what was
best for the students fifty or one hundred years from now.

On February 15, 1961, it was announced by Gillett in the Grand Rapids

 

Press and in the Grand Haven Tribune that the executive committee, in con-
sultation with experts (Table XIII) had narrowed the considered sites to five:
Aman Park, Allendale, Downtown Grand Rapids, Grand Haven, and Marne.

Gillett stated that these sites offered a cross section of what was wanted.

Muskegon and Rockford actions. The February 14 Grand Rapids Press

 

reported Donald Seyferth of Muskegon, who had opposed Seidman in the early
days of the college movement‘, (pagesqgi and 225 ) as stating that the
Muskegon citizens. should not contribute anything to the new college unless
they were certain it would be located in Muskegon. He said that Muskegon was
g9; the logical place for the college, and that those who had contributed to the
fund drive should request that their money be refunded. At the same meeting
addressed by Seyferth, Mayor Alfred Meyers urged that Muskegon look upon
the new college as a new industry, and that a "blurb" should be prepared to
attract it to Muskegon.

On February 16 it was reported in the Muskegon Chronicle that the Muskegon
Board of Education was unanimous in its resolution _t_o_wi_1_1_ Grand Valley State
College for Muskegon, Also, Frank Lockage, Muskegon Heights councilman,
urged that Muskegon and Muskegon Heights citizens vigorously support efforts
to locate Grand Valley State College in Muskegon.

A Rockford group offered 900 acres for the college on February 17 , and on
February 22, a Muskegon group headed by John R. Achterhoff, president of the

 

136

Table XIII. Site Consultants

 

William J. Johnson, associate professor of landscape architecture,
University of Michigan.

Donald J. Leu, associate professor of administration and educational services,
Michigan State University.

Walter T. McVickers, sites chief for State Building Division.
Ralph K. Seeley, chief, services section, State Building Division.
Douglas Sherman, assistant to the provost, Wayne State University.

T. C.Wi]1iams of Williams 8; Works, engineers and surveyors.

 

 

137

Muskegon Board of Realtors, presented its bid to the Board at a public hearing,
using aerial photos, color slides, and fact sheets, it was reported in the
Muskegon Chronicle. It also stated that Muskegon Township Supervisor Floyd
M. Parslow lamented the fact that there was a mercenary attitude on behalf
of several land owners in the township near the site being offered. When
questioned whether Muskegon was attempting to fill the vacancy caused by the
Norge plant's moving out of Muskegon, Harold Kammerer, secretary of the
Muskegon Chamber of Commerce, replied "no" but that it probably had an
effect upon the area interest in the college. Achterhoff stated that the site
was worth more than two million dollars, that all public utilities were there,
that the City of Muskegon would provide sewer, water, gutters, sidewalks,
streets, and curbs in 160 acres of the area. Kammerer stated that he could
not disclose who specifically would pay, but that it could safely be said the
people of Muskegon would pay to get the college there.

Concerning the Rockford site, the Rockford Register in an editorial boost-
ing its site, stated that, among other benefits, the "neighborhoods would be
sprinkled with intellectuals. "

Achterhoff, in his proposal, suggested that the eight-comty area (which
already included N‘ewaygo County) should be expanded into twelve counties and
include Oceana, Manistee, Lake, and N ewaygo counties. He emphasized the
point that all site improvements would be made at no charge to the school and
that the new college would be getting a twenty-five million dollar site.

Seidman's comment according to the Chronicle of February 23 was that the
Muskegon offer was worth waiting for. Gillett stated that all site proposals were
now in, and that they would be evaluated by his committee and by engineering
consultants. They would consider seven sites: Allendale, Marne, Aman Park,

Downtown Grand Rapids; Grand Haven, and the two late entries, Muskegon and

138

Rockford. Their recommendations would be an important determining factor.
On March 10 the executive committee would make finalmcommendations to the
Board of Control. 1

Consequently, Muskegon and Rockford sites were inspected by a site team
early in the 'week of February 27. They also re-inspected the sitesin the
immediate Kent County area again to see whether any others warranted detailed
study.

On Wednesday, March 10, the thirty-five member site committee met in
closed session to form recommendations for the Board.

(Co-incidentally members of the Board of Control appeared before the
Senate Business Committee for interviews connected with Senate Advice and
Consent on the Governor's appointments. The new governor, John B. SWainson,
had approved former Governor Williams' appointments. One observer, it
was reported in the Grand Rapids Press of March 7, 1961, had noted that
of the nine Board members five were from the Grand Rapids area, and that
both the site committee and the executive site committee had Kent County
majorities. (See Appendix XVIIIc for the justification of the site committee
selection prepared by Dutcher.)

On March 4, areaa‘c hitects had submitted a proposed supplement to the
guidelines for site proposals. (Appendix XV) Whether or not its recommendations
were important factors in site determination is not evident from any references

to it in other papers.

Board site decisions--and reactions. The executive site committee made
its recommendations to the Board of Control after its March 19 meeting.
In its report it reviewed all the work it had done, how it arrived at its decision,

and what its decisions were. (Appendix XVI) Allendale and Marne sites were

given first pre
were given 5'35
Two telegr‘md

iterating the
ot the Mom:
that timber 5
another telcg
"A" for fur-ti
Letters from
the Kent C on
the Muskego-

site. Letter

139

given first preference or "A" category; Grand Haven, Muskegon, and Rockford
were given second preference or "B" category. Then the reactions came.

Two telegrams were sent to Seidman on March 11, 1961, one from Achterhoff
reiterating the facts of the Muskegon site and one from Paul Strecker, sponsor
of the Wyoming-Byron site south of Grand Rapids. Each expressed the feeling
that further study of each site should be made. On March 13 Achterhoff sent
another telegram petitioning that the Muskegon site be included in category
"A" for further inspection by experts. Rockford, too, was heard from.
Letters from the Rockford “city manager, the Rockford Chamber of Commerce,
the Kent County Farm Bureau, and others were less strident in the tone than
the Muskegon correspondence, but did urge consideration again of the Rockford
site. Letters supporting the Board's. decision were also sent by various area
persons and Council members.

What the correspondence did not contain the newspapers did. The Muskegon
Chronicle on Saturday, March 11, summed up the Muskegon point of view:
There was fiscal irresponsibility on the Board's part with the tax dollar, and
there would be a petition to have the Muskegon site included in the "A"
category. Merrill Bailey said that the executive site committee had recom—
mended and the Board had just accepted the recommendations on two parcels
of land which had few of the criteria that were listed as essential, and in their
acceptance had ignored the 2. 5 million dollar gift offered by Muskegon. Muskegon
members of the site selection committee were outspoken in their comments
according to the article. Paul R. Wilkinson, president of the National Lumber-
man's Bank, stated that the procedures adopted by the group in preparing its
report for the Board were arbitrary, capricious, and whimsical, that many
important factors had not been given adequate consideration, and that he protested

the methods following in the consideration of sites. A. E. Nichols of the Daniels ‘

140

Company of Muskegon stated that the entire process was cut and dried,

and that there was only hope that the Board would weigh factors the site
committee obviously failed to consider, and that the recommended sites had
little or nothing to start with and had to be developed from the ground up.

He tooksharpest issue with the failure to take cost factors into considera-'-
tion. He called the procedure a complete departure from the rating instruc-
tions.

Achterhoff was most explicit in his protest. He stated that the college
was a 20, 000, 000 dollar investment which would derive tax support from the
entire state, not Grand Rapids alone, and in ignoring the 2. 5 million dollar
site offer, the Board was being irresponsible. The memo prepared for
evaluating sites had listed as essential adequate water supply, sewage
facilities, drainage of surface water, easy access to surface transportation
arteries, and proximity to a community of at least several hundred thousand
to offer housing and labor and social and recreational facilities.

The Marne site was criticized because it had no water, sewer, zoning,
community facilities, civic services, libraries, was near a fairground, and
several streets needed closing in order to develop it. The Allendale site was
criticized for having no sewers, poor access to any place except Grand Rapids,
no water except the Grand River or wells, and no community services.

T. Austin Saunders explained why the point system was discarded. He
said it was used onlyto cull out the undesirable sites, and that when the sites had been
reduced to 'seven, the committee had relied upon the recommendations of the ex-
perts and consultants. He said it was up to the Board to consider cost factors.
Harris Botruff, vice-president of Sealed Power Corporation, said he was irri-
tated. "Yesterday's meet was a wasted day . . . What's the purpose of going

through motions when the entire process is deliberately planned? We were given

141

a perfunctory review of each of the sites under consideration and asked to
ballot our preferences. But with the ballots came a mimeographed report of
the executive committee which had already recommended Marne and Allendale.
(Appendix XVI) James O. McNamee, vice-president of Brunswick Manufactur-
ing, said: "Reports of the professional consultants were closely guarded and
listed as confidential. Consequently, it was not practical for any member of
the site committee to make a qualified, objective judgment. I believe all
members were forced to vote on the same basis I am ashamed to say I used--
select the site nearest home town. Obviously on this basis, Grand Rapids
wins, since the site committee is dominated by Grand Rapids residents.
(Appendix XVIIIc )

Charles Rogers, Muskegon labor officer, said he was unhappy but would
continue to work for the college since it would be a boon to all of western
Michigan.

Kammerer said Muskegon would continue to press its case with the Board
- of Control, State- legislature, or anywhere else in an effort to get the site.

An example of such activity is clear from a copy of a letter sent to Mr.
Carlton A. Woodruff, Sr. of Muskegon Heights from Boyd K. Benedict,
administrative assistant to Governor Swainson, in which he replies to Mr.
Woodruff's letter of March 14. Benedict stated that the Board would make its
decisions exclusive of any intervention from the Executive office, and that
the Board was acting as fairly and objectively as possible with the best pos-'
sible expert help.

An editorial in the Grand Haven Tribune had a different tone from the
Muskegon paper. Here there was a review of what had happened, and advised
that in spite of the fact that Grand Haven was an excellent spot for the campus,

one must keep an eye on the big picture and look at all sides. It lauded the

142

Tri-Cities--Grand Haven, Ferrysburg, and Spring Lake--citizens for having
- :done mgre than their share in financial support and proportionately more
than all other areas. (pages 153 and 170 It cautioned against hasty action
and advised a look-and-see attitude.

The budget request for the new college was coming up for legislative
approval. Fourteen legislators including members of the Senate Appropri-
ations Committee and the House Ways and Means Committee had dinner at
Seidman's home on March 14. At this meeting Seidman reviewed the plans
for the college and explained what had gone on up to that point. Discussion
centered around pledges for the raising of the million dollars and plans for
building the college. The legislators cautioned against going out and drumming
up a lOt of students and then asking the legislature for money to build dormi—
tories. Seidman replied that although the college was being planned as a

commuter college, no one could say how long it would remain that. The
Muskgon Chronicle of the next day saw hopes for the college's being located
in Muskegon dimmed. It quoted one legislator as saying: "When we are
considering a long-range multi-million dollar college, the development of
the initial site cost is not the determining factor. We must think of the long-
range desirability of the building site. "

Following the petitions for reconsideration of several sites, Seidman stated
that he was happy that there was such an expression of interest in the college.
This appeared in the March 16 Gradd Rapids Press. He said that only if site
cost were a controlling factor would Grand Haven, Rockford, or Muskegon be
strongly considered. ‘

There was further activity on Achterhoff's part. He stated in a Chronicle

article of March 18 that he was irked at a television report that he had made

arrangements with Arnell Engstrom, the House Ways and Means Chairman,

143

to have a hearing on the Muskegon site. He said he had made no such arrange-
ment. Engstrom, in the same article, stated that neither the Ways and Means
Committee nor the legislature would try to control the Board of Control's site
selection, but that he would be willing to hear any objections to the manner in
which the site was selected. Achterhofi stated that he had tried to work through
normal channels but had been unable to get anywhere. He listed these points:

1. The Muskegon site was visited by only four of the six consultants.

2. A public hearing March 19 before the ent1re site committee ended
abruptly when the executive committee handed out mimeographed reports
(See Appendix XVI) before the entire committee could vote. This mimeographed
report recommended Marne and Allendale. These recommendations were
accepted by the Board later the same day.

3. Telegrams to each of the members of the Board of Control spelling out
the Muskegon offer of a 2. 5 million dollar site were not considered at the
March 10 meeting.

4. A petition to have the Muskegon site considered as a finalist forwarded
last Monday, March 13, was unanswered until a letter acknowledging receipt
was received here, Friday, March 17. No date had been set when the Board
would act on the petition. (Seidman's letter was dated March 15.)

On March 18, Hendrik Stafseth, engineer. .manager of the Ottawa County
Road Commission, wrote Seidman that he was preparing a resolution which
would state that the Road Commission would cooperate with the new college
in providing sewer and water; and on March 21 the City of Grand Rapids was
approached on supplying filtered water to either site in the "A" category.

A letter dated March 15 from Seidman to the State Building Division
requested assistance in determining the ground water supply from wells and

soil bearing properties in the two "A" category sites. This letter indicates

144

that the Board seriously considered either Marne or Allendale as the best
site and wanted this information.

On March 22, 1961, Harold Van Alsburg, president of UAW Muskegon
Local 113, stated that the union would make a strong fight to gain the site
I at Muskegon, according to the Muskegon Chronicle. The article stated that
the union move was not a pressure move but that it acted because it felt that
the hearings were not fair; and that letters and telegrams would be sent to
the Governor and the legislature urging support of the Muskegon site.
Van Alsburg's local consisted of 3, 500 members. Achterhoff in a March 23

Chroniele article stated that since the rules had not been followed, the

 

Muskegon interests would not abide by rules, but would now attempt to block
budget appropriations to stop what he called the Grand Rapids steamroller.

He stated that he was not attacking the Board of Control or other sites, but was
carrying on a positive campaign to get a fairer hearing on the Muskegon site.
Letters and wires were addressed to Swainson, Elmer Porter of the Senate
Appropriations Committee, Engstrom, and other members of the legislative
finance groups. Kammerer and the Chamber of Commerce and the Muskegon

Board of Education joined in the effort and sent resolutions to that effect.
Keith Baker of Allendale was reported in the Grand Rapids Press on

March 24 as stating that some Muskegon Heights group was trying to buy land
around the Allendale site, and pointed out that their activity was distorting
perspective on the worth of the land there.

In addition to the request from the Muskegon backers for a re-study,
Rockford, Byron-Wyoming, and Greenridge sites backers had indicated that
they wanted reconsideration. A letter from Seidman to the backers of each
of these sites was sent on March 25. The letter was also sent to all Board

members, to Dutcher, and to Boyd Benedict. (Appendix XVII) On the Board's

145

copies it was noted that a site-deciding Board meeting might be called April

6 (forinspection) and 7. (This meeting did occur April 7 and 8.) In the letter
Seidman rather blandly reviewed what action concerning site decision had been
taken and equally as blandly invited the petitioners to re-submit their site
proposals with any new materials added to the original proposal--plus financial
merits of the site.

. From the early days of the CEFYC through the present time, a series of
letters are on file between Seidman and Charles Boyer, Representative from
Manistee, Some of them are business, some are personal. Boyer had maintained
closely friendly relationships with the Grand Valley State College group. The
Senate Appropriations Committee and the House Ways and Means Committee had
invited both the Muskegon group and Board of Control representatives to appear .
for a hearing at 3:00 p. 111. Wednesday, March 29, with Engstrom and other
legislators. Engstrom said the meeting was requested by Muskegon delegates.
He stated that he was told Seidman wanted everyone to get a fair shake. He

reiterated that the legislature did not want to pick the site but did want to get

 

the best for the money. Boyer was quoted in the Grand Rapids Press article
which reported all this information on March 28:

I am appalled at newspaper stories relative to the attitudes of
some of my friends in Muskegon in connection with the new Grand
Valley State College. Apparently the location has now become a
chamber of commerce 'grab' rather than a matter of sound logic for
the future of higher education. . . .' Originally, as reported by
Russell, within a 50 mile radius of Grand Rapids there will be 10, 000
students. ' So Grand Rapids is the center of population. Not until re—
cently a real estate dealer and others began to push for the college to
be located in Muskegon. I live on the edge of Lake Michigan and have
yet to see a student come out of Lake Michigan. . . . I also take with
a grain of salt the 2. 5 million dollar figure. "

Boyer stated that the fact of a million dollars worth of improvements on the site

at Muskegon should be a minor factor in the decision.
On the 29th of March, 1961, three important details are supplied by the

press, by material prepared by both Seidman and Achterhoff, and by a long letter

mitten w P
copies of W:
Butcher's 1:
water to the

The C it
water to th
Towns“; ]
urged that

bid. and it

146

written to Phil Buchen, Board attorney, and to Edward Frey by David Dutcher,
copies of whichwere sent to Seidman and Gillett. (p. 317) The details in
Butcher's letter and the press are relative to the hearings and to providing
water to the "A" category sites. The details of the water situation are these.

The City of Grand Rapids had delayed replying to the request for filtered
water to the site. Blandford had moved to refer the request by the Allendale
Township Improvement Association to the City Service Committee. Blandford
urged that they proceed with haste since Muskegon was making such a strong
bid, and that Grand Rapids should consider offering free services.

Mayor Davis said that fiction should be separated from fact: that be doubted
that Grand Rapids could provide free water. He said the college would service
the entire eight-county area, not just Grand Rapids, and that the Muskegon
effort should not be taken too seriously, since it was a private, not a public move.
At the meeting where these actions took place, a Building Trades Council repre—
sentative asked why the college, worth millions in labor contracts, should be
located way out in Allendale or Marne and not in Grand Rapids. But no decision
was made on supplying the college with water should it be located in either "A"
category site.

At this meeting, the Detreit Free Press of March 29 reports, Davis said
that Muskegon had dropped out of the running, that only Allendale, Marne, and
Rockford were being considered, and that he, Davis, .favored Marne. He was
also critical of land speculation around Aman Park. Seidman corrected Davis
in the Muskegon Chronicle of March 29, stating that Rockford was not a prime _
contender.

City elections would soon be held in Grand Rapids. Blandford's opposition
in the second ward was Mrs. Evangeline Lamberts. She, in the March 30

Grand Rapids Press, is reported to have blasted Blandford's suggestion that

147

the city provide free services to Allendale or Marne. On March 30 the Grand

Rapids Press reported that the Ottawa County Road Commission would act as

 

county agent to provide water and sewer by a bond issue for the college if it
were located in Ottawa County. Also, the OCEG would widen one of the narrow
bridges across the Grand River at Eastmanville--which would serve the north-
west county commuters--and later, at Lamont, said Stafseth, the spokesman
for the m. These pledges were made before the hearings in Lansing.

The March 29 hearings in Lansing were attended by Wilkinson, Achterhoff,
and Van Alsburg of Muskegon; and by Frey, Gillett, Stafford, Kistler, Dutcher,
and several consultants representing Grand Valley State College. Seidman was
home, ill, with virus pneumonia.

The arguments of both sides are presented in full in Appendices XVIIIa, b, c,

and XIX. These details of the hearing appeared in the March 30 Grand Rapids

 

ness:

Adrian Langius was directed by the hearing committee to prepare reports
showing improvement costs on the three sites: Muskegon, Marne, and Allendale.
It was also pointed out that the legislature had no authority to determine the site,
but could approve or reject the budget requests of the college. Or, the legislature
could change Public Act 120 and state that the decision made had to be correct
since it involved eventual outlay of 50 to 60 million dollars by the state. Some
of the reactions of the legislators were also reported:

Wilfred Bassett: The Muskegon ofier helps the tax payers of the
state.

Carroll Newton: Muskegon's offer of 2. 5 million must not be
passed over lightly. (He moved that Langius prepare the cost reports.)

Harry Phillips and John Sobieski: We won't vote for the budget
request unless Muskegon is awarded the site. Here is one place
where the taxpayer gets something for free.

148

Langius stated that according to the preliminary point system Allendale
and Marne were highly favored. Frey and Gillett stated that many of the pledges
for the million dollars raised were made upon the expectation that the college
would be located near Grand Rapids. Philip Buchen verified this, that around
200, 000 dollars were so pledged. Achterhoff stated that Muskegon would make
up whatever was lost if the site were awarded to Muskegon. Bassett asked
whether Muskegon would raise a million dollars if it got the site. (Grand Rapids
had raised over 900, 000 dollars of the million raised.) Achterhoff said he would
like'the chance tortry. He also stated that Muskegon would not boycott the
college if the site were not awarded Muskegon. He then presented slides, photos,
maps, costs, topography and services available at the Muskegon site. Muskegon,
he stated, was the most college-starved town in the state, that neither Marne
nor Allendale had anything to offer a college, and that Calvin and Hope services
would be overlapped by the college if it were placed near Grand Rapids. Frey
stated the college bothered neither Calvin nor Hope no matter where it was
located. (See pages 31’ 4ind12° .)

Following the hearings, Dutcher wrote his letter in which he thoroughly,
albeit passionately, lays bare the complete picture. (Appendix XX, p. 317 )

Achterhoff stated according to the Muskegon Chronicle of March 30 that
he was satisfied, that now Muskegon would get a fair hearing, that this was all
he wanted, that the taxpayers would save money with the Muskegon site.

In the Seidman correspondence there is another letter that was not sent.
It was to be sent to the legislators present at the hearing- The arguments in
it are a milder and less comprehensive duplication of those in Dutcher's letter.

Seidman, in seeking factual support in addition to the facts of the Russell
Repegt for proximity as a weighty factor in determining the site, received

figures from Mauss concerning Western Muskegon students. He also received

149

figures from J amrich, who cited Martorana's study for the State of Washington
plans of junior college district reorganization. Martorana had also received
figures from Dr. Ernest V. Hollis, Chief, Higher Education Section of the United
States Office of Education.

Mauss' figures showed that thirty per cent, or 2, 696, of the total number of
students at Western Michigan University commuted. Of the 2, 696, sixty-two
per cent lived in Kalamazoo County (1, 673); twenty-four per cent lived in acjacent
counties (637); and fourteen per cent lived in more distant counties (386). Many
of these, however, attended Saturday classes. Of the 2, 696 commuting students,
1, 600, or sixty per cent, were evening and graduate students.

J amrich's quoting of Martorana's figures in a letter dated April 1 stated
that over ninty per cent of the students attending all the junior colleges in the
country live within a fifteen-mile radius of the college. Hollis gave figures
stating that over seventy-five per cent of college commuting students come from
a distance of less than thirty miles, and that a little over fifty per cent come
from within fifteen mfles.

J amrich also quoted Staff Study Number A ( 9) and cited Martorana's recommended
figures of twenty-five mile commuting radii for colleges in the southern part of the
start and thirty-five mile radii for north-state colleges.

There is no mention in either the correspondence or in the newspapers that
Seidman used these figures in any debates.

The point did arise that Muskegon had a disproportionately unfair share of
members on both the executive site committee and the site committee. The
explanation for the numbers of representatives from each area are stated in
Appendix NO.

The Detroit Free Press announced that final site selection would be made

152

April 6 or 7 (see page ), and announced that there was still a possibility

150

that downtown Grand Rapids would be considered. Senator Frank Beadle stated
that no appropriations would be made until the report by Langius was made.

Achterhoff was not silent. ' The March 31 edition of the Grand Rapids Press

 

reports him as replying to the Ottawa County Road Commission's offer to act
as agent for water and sewer services to the college. He stated that there was
no such thing as free services, and that a bond payoff would eventually come.
Further, he stated that Muskegon water and sewer was already paid for, and
that in the case of the Marne and Allendale sites the college would still have to
pay for laterals and other improvements whereas in Muskegon these million

dollar improvements would be provided.

 

At a Knights of the Round Table luncheon in Grand Rapids the Grand Rapids
PM of April 1, 1971, states that Blandford "threw his weight" behind a
site west of Grand Rapids and that his opposition's, candidate Lamberts' stand,
for a downtown Grand Rapids site just confused the issue. He said a proposed
new filteration plant (nearing completion now, January, 1963) at M-50 and Lake
Michigan could supply the college with water. (The Allendale site is directly
adjacent to the Grand Rapids pipeline from Lake Michigan and the Marne site
no more than eight miles distant from the pipeline.) He also stated that a
figure given by Lamberts of one million dollars cost for services to the college

was a figment of her imagination. Another April 1 article in the Grand Rapids

 

greee speculated that the delay of the approval of the Board of Control in the
Senate Business Committee was somehow dependent upon the selection of the
site. Morris of Kalamazoo was reported here to have said that he was in no
rush, that some affairs were in committee for years. Beadle stated that he
thought they would be confirmed.

.On April 3 Achterhoff sent a letter to Seidman in which he replied to

Seidman's letter of March 25 (page 195; Appendix XVII), and herein he

151

reiterated the details of the Muskegon offer (Appendix XIX) and arguments why
Muskegon had had an unfair appraisal and why Marne and Allendale had been
over-rated. Also, a long letter by T. A. Saunders requested Seidman to

clarify the statements concerning cost factors and Seidman's reply were published
in the newspapers. (Appendix XXIa and b)

The final action of site investigation on the part of the Board was made on
April 7 and 8. On April 6 the Senate had unanimously advised. and consented
to the appointments of the Board of Control; on April 5 the Grand Rapids City
Commission had pledged full cooperation in providing utilities for the college.

The Muskegon Chronicle reported this on April 5. It quoted a statement
made at the Grand Rapids City Commission meeting: "If Muskegon can throw
million dollar figures around, we can too.' "

The Board of Control took a tour of the Marne, the Allendale, and the
Muskegon sites. They tentatively planned to visit Rockford, Byron-Walker,
and the Walker-Four Mile Road sites. With the Board was a team of con-
sultants: Dorr, Hagman, and Maus, and a three—member site-qualification
team. They insisted on no outside company since they wanted to be able to
"let their hair down. "

Concerning final decision on the sites, the Muskegon Chronicle printed
an article April 7, 1961, in which there was a series of questions and answers.
Seidman had stated that the factor of proximity was extremely important in site
selection. When asked why the communities outside the center location area
were invited to sites, he replied that they had not been invin. Rather, when
they had submitted their proposals, they had just been treated courteously.
When asked about other factors, he stated that there were nine individuals on

the Board, each of whom made his own decision. If there were any important

152

facts, he was sure the individual member of the Board would assert his idea.
Wilkinson was here quoted as saying that he thought the rules had been re-
written to Muskegon's disadvantage. Proximity once was worth twelve points.
Now no one knew how many it was worth.

After having traveled to the Marne, Allendale, and Muskegon sites, the
Board met Friday, April 7, 1961, until 12:30 a. m. Saturday, April 8, at
a public meeting at the Grand Rapids Junior College it was announced that
the Allendale site was selected. (Appendix XXII)

The reaction from Muskegon was immediate. The Grand Rapids Press of

 

April 8 announced that Muskegon pointed out that that decisicn was made a full
week before the projected completion of the report by the Building Division.

The Muskegon site backers would call for a review by the legislature and

the Governor. Ott, Board member of Muskegon, stated that he and Seidman

and Stafford had favored Marne, but after a preponderance of testimony by the
consultants that Allendale was the only place the college could be located .with
dignity, they had switched their votes. Also, he said, he flew over the Allendale
site and the beauty of it could not be bought for a million dollars. "It was
harder than choosing a wife, " said Ott.

But the Muskegon interests were vociferous in their dissatisfaction in spite
of Ott's statements that the Allendale site was the best suited to meet the needs
of most people. Seidman stated in the April 9 Grand Rapids Press that all the
Muskegon group could now do "is slow us down." Louis Berman, publisher

of the Whitehall Forum and a member of the Citizens' Council, said:

 

"Apparently the Muskegon residents are all set to block what they consider
a railroad. " Kammerer: "It doesn't seem to me to be definitely more than
politics when they pick Allendale over Muskegon or Marne. I'm disgusted

with the Board of Control. " Frank A. De Voe, President of the Muskegon Board

.158

of Education: "But Grand Rapids has two and-a-half colleges as it is--you
sort of wonder. If it had been in Muskegon, it would have been integrated
with the proposed comty-wide community college. We will probably go ahead
with the county-wide college now as fast as we can. " Berman: "The legisla-
ture has to vote flmds for the college and you can bet there will be pretty
sizable appropriations, and the Legislature is up against financial troubles,

as you know, and protests might block appropriations. " Mayor Alfred A.
Meyers: "I will be happy to aid in any last ditch fight for Muskegon. I

think Grand Rapids is trying to set it in the heart of Grand Rapids but have
pulled off temporarily. I think the proposed Muskegon site is terrific with

the full view of the Muskegon River." Seidman's final comment in this article
was: "Everyone I talk to says it's wonderful. And the Marne people were very
fine in their attitude. "

But an article in the Muskegon Chronicle was not so wonderful in tone. It
stated that Muskegon interests would carry the fight before the Governor and
the Legislature, that the decision was just a "railroad" by the Grand Rapids
interests, that the proximity argument was all poppycock, that Muskegon stu-
dents would object to paying three dollars a day to drive over poor roads, and
that they, the Muskegon backers, would press for a review. This article also
pointed out that the Board's decision came a week before the Langius report
of the State Building Division was due to be completed.

A clear statement of how the Board felt was expressed by Stafford in a
long editorial in his Greenville Daily News on April 10, 1961. He stated that since
he did not live in a proposed site area, he could be fairly impartial. He further
stated that the Grand Haven area citizens were gracious, but that the Muskegon
interests were not. He stated that the Grand Haven area had contributed over

100, 000 dollars to the college, but that Muskegon, the second largest population

13511}

area in the eight-county area, had contributed less than Greenville had. He
said that he had favored the Marne site, the highest spot in Ottawa County,
five miles closer to Greenville, on a freeway, beautiful in a massive way,
with two small lakes on it. But, he said, Allendale, not being directly on a
freeway, was preferred for that reason by the experts, and it cost less than
Marne, which area had one landowner who refused even double what his land
was appraised to be worth. Stafiord further made an important point: i f

the Board had wanted to move on the periphery of the eight-county area, he
stated that there were better places than the Muskegon site. Furthermore, he
stated that the principal promoter of the Muskegon site had 150 acres adjacent
to the Muskegon site and had announced that fact to the Board--but not before
the legislative hearings. He was, said Stafford, a hard seller, a doer. He
did not object to this fact, but thought it poor policy to try to gain his ends so
obviously in a matter that ultimately concerned the best interests of the public.

On April 8 a Grand Rapids Press story reported that the Legislature could

 

amend its appropriations bill to include the Grand Valley budget requests if

the Board could prove it had fulfilled the requirements in Public Act 120--

the securing of the site and a million dollars. The Board did so. And on

Aprfl 13 in a message from the Governor it stated that since these requirements
had been met, appropriations for the new college would be included in legisla-
tive action.

The State Building Division report was completed by April 24, 1961. The
report favored the Allendale site. (Appendix XXIII) When asked on January 8,
1963, in a telephone conversation, Ralph Seeley of the Building Division stated
that the report was impartial, unbiased, and that the Division had arrived at

its conclusions as fairly as it knew how.

155

On April 28 a 150, 000 dollar appropriation was reported out of the House
Ways and Means Committee and was expected to be fully approved. It was.
The options on the site were exercised in May. The City of Grand Rapids con-
firmed its pledge to cooperateii providing utilities also in May, and. with the
appointment of Buchen on June 1 as Vice-President in charge of Business
Affairs, this stage of establishment of Grand Valley State College was success-
fully completed.

The Muskegon interests apparently were not able to fulfill their threats,
for the ground breaking ceremonies at the Allendale site August, 1962, pre-

dicted that the college might open its doors there in 1963.

CHAPTER VIII

THE CITIZENS' ADVISORY COUNCIL

Point four of the summary of the recommendations of the J amrich Report

 

(page 73 ) was that in addition to the Board of Control there should be a board
of citizen advisors selected by the Board of Control, each with a six-year term,
whose purpose was to reinforce the program of development of the college.

At the first Board of Control meeting in October, 1961, Mr. Copeland
brought up the matter of the Citizens' Advisory Council. It was felt that
there was a need to preserve the interest and cooperation of all the members
of the Citizens' Committee (page 20 ) from the eight-county area who had
worked so hard prior to passage of the enabling act. Here the question was
raised whether or not the Citizens' Council should be divided into sub-committees
for the various areas of operation. At this first meeting Seidman was empowered
to prepare recommendations for such a committee. At the second Board meeting,
November 1, 1960, Seidman reported that the Council was being formed, David
Dutcher having been appointed chairman. The November 1 minutes define the
purposes of the Council: 1, To advise the Board of Control with respect to the
desires of the community in regard to the college; 2, to aid the Board of Control
with planning and action in the following fields: site; building and name; adminis-
tration; curriculum, finance; other needs as they develop; 3, to become informed
on the activities of the college so that they can serve as a source of information
for the people of the community. The Board members were requested to sub-
mit names to Seidman within the next week. The Board adopted the above

statements regarding the Citizens' Cormcil at this meeting.

156

157

At the November 22, 1960, meeting of the Board the names of the members
of the Council were submitted by Dutcher. The members and the method
organizing the Council were approved by the Board, and Dutcher was made
chairman by Board action. Many of the members of this council had been members
of the Citizens' Advisory Committee which had appointed J amrich to carry out his
study in 1959, and although most of them were from Kent County, there was
adequate representation from the full eight-county area. One hundred nine were
appointed with their permission and they expressed interest to serve. (The
complete first Council is listed in Table XIV.)

At the November 22 meeting, Dutcher was requested to inquire from the
cormcil which committee each would like to serve on. In accordance with the
purposes of the Council, it was decided to break up the large council into
smaller committee groups.

This same procedure had been followed after J amrich had presented his
report in November, 1959. Then, too, letters had been sent to the Committee
members asking their desires. There is no evidence in correspondence or the
newspapers that indicates that the committees were either firm, or effective.
Seidman said that events in 19 59 moved too fast for the sub-committees then to
be effective.

The site committee of the Citizens' Council was formed by the next meeting,
for the selection of a site was immediately necessary. In the period between
November 22 and February 10 there were modifications, resignations, and
appointments to the Citizens' Council.

On February 8 and 9 the Board of Consultants met to discuss the role of
the Citizens' Council. Apparently there was some lack of real understanding
on the part of both the Board and the Council of what the role of the Council

should be. The recommendations made by the consultants were adopted

158

Table XIV. The Citizens' Council of Grand Valley State College

Chairman - David E. Dutcher

 

 

Name

 

 

City

 

Almerigi, David
Annulis, John J.

Baas, Edward M.
Babcock, Nina E.
Bailey, Merrill S.
Baldwin, Ralph B.
Bauman, Beatrice (Mrs. Melvin L.)
Bennett, Robert ,
Berman, Louis J.
Berry, Hammond A.
Bissell, M. R. 111
Blandford, Bob
Botruff, Harris W.
Brown, Arthur E.
Brown, Manley E.
Bryant, Mrs. Stephen
Buikema, Benjamin
Busch, George A. , Jr.
Clark, Lynn H.

Cook, Mrs. Richard M.
Davis, A. F.

Davis, Stanley J.

De Bruyn, Robert S.

de Velder, Rev. Marion
Donovan, C. M.

Dutcher, David E.
Eberhard, L. V..
Essrig, Dr. Harry
Formsma, Jay W.
Franklin, Jerome D.
Gillett, Richard M.
Goebel, Paul G.
Grant, George W.
Greenawalt, Jr. , H. Samuel
Hager, Titus J.
Hammerslag, Hugh D.
Hekman, John H.
Hoffman, Richard
Holcomb, Mack A.

Grand Rapids, Michigan
Grand Rapids, Michigan
Grand Haven, Michigan
Cedar Springs, Michigan
Muskegon, Michigan
Grand Rapids, Michigan
Grand Rapids, Michigan
Grand Rapids, Michigan
Whitehall, Michigan
Grand Rapids, Michigan
Grand Rapids, Michigan
Grand Rapids, Michigan
Muskegon, Michigan
Ionia, Michigan

Grand Rapids, Michigan
Grand Rapids, Michigan
Grand Rapids, Michigan
Grand Rapids, Michigan
Rockford, Michigan
Hastings, Michigan
Grand Rapids, Michigan
Grand Rapids, Michigan
Zeeland, Michigan
Grand Rapids, Michigan
Grand Rapids, Michigan
Grand Rapids, Michigan
Grand Rapids, Michigan
Grand Rapids, Michigan
Holland, Michigan
Grand Rapids, Michigan
Grand Rapids, Michigan
Grand Rapids, Michigan
Greenville, Michigan
Grand Rapids, Michigan
Grand Rapids, Michigan
Grand Rapids, Michigan
Grand Rapids, Michigan
Saugatuck, Michigan
Manistee, Michigan

r'V

159

Table XIV. (Continued) The Citizens' Council of Grand Valley State College

Chairman - David E. Dutcher

 

 

Name

City

 

 

Howlett, Robert G.
Hoyle, David W.
Hunting, David D.
Idema, Jane H. (Mrs. Henry H)
Johnson, Paul A.
Keeler, M. S. I
Kelley, Harry J.
Kindel, C. E. Ted
Kirkwood, John V.
LaValley, Jerome H.
Lawford, H. L.
Littlefair, Duncan E.
Mackey, Patrick E.
Marshall, Harry D.
Martin, Mrs. John B.
Mayne, Joseph Q.
McCall, Almon W.
McKee, F. William
McNamee, J. O.
Nichols, Edon A.
Nisbet, Stephen S.
Pew, Robert C.
Pierce, W. B.
Preston, A1

Quinn, Joe
Richardson, Robert W.
Robertson, W. C.
Roe, Vidian L.
Rogers, Charles A.
Rutherford, John
Salter, Albert G.
Saimders, T. A.
Schwartz, H. H.
Scott, Victor

Searl, Judge Fred N.
Sebright, Howard N.
Shaw, Frances Wallin (Mrs. Robert J.)
Shetii, Robert W. ‘ p .
Shepherd, Russell L.
Sherwood, B. P. , ‘Jr.
Shoecraft, Ross W.

Grand Rapids, Michigan
Grand Rapids, Michigan
Grand Rapids, Michigan
Grand Rapids, Michigan
Grand Haven, Michigan
Grand Rapids, Michigan
Grand Rapids, Michigan
Grand Rapids, Michigan
Gratid Rapids, Michigan
Wayland, Michigan
Grand Rapids, Michigan
Grand Rapids, Michigan
Grand Rapids, Michigan
Grand Rapids, Michigan
Grand Rapids, Michigan
Grand Rapids, Michigan
Grand Haven, Michigan
Grand Rapids, Michigan
Muskegon, Michigan
Muskegon, Michigan
Fremont, Michigan
Grand Rapids, Michigan
Grand Rapids, Michigan
Grand Rapids, Michigan
Grand Rapids, Michigan
Grand Rapids, Michigan
Greenville, Michigan
Fremont, Michigan
Muskegon, Michigan
Montague, Michigan
Grand Rapids, Michigan
Muskegon, Michigan
Coopersville, Michigan
Nunica, Michigan
Grand Rapids, Michigan
Wayland, Michigan
Grandville , Michigan
Grand Rapids, Michigan
Newaygo, Michigan
Grand Haven, Michigan
Fremont, Michigan

Table XIV. (Continued) The Citizens' Cormcil of Grand Valley State College

160

Chairman - David E. Dutcher

 

 

 

Name

City

 

 

Shuster, Richard M.
Skiera, Gerald J.
Spencer, H. Wendell
Squier, Mrs. Marc
Strohpaul, Aurey D.
TenBrink, James
Thorington, Raymond
Tubbs, Robert S.

Van Alsburg, Harold
Vannatter, Carroll H.
Van Dellen, John
Vander Veen, Richard
Van Ess, Robert

Van Peursem, George M.
Van Volkinburg, R. M.
Verplank, Mrs. Marvin
VerMeulen, James M.
Visscher, Robert

. Warren, Richard B.
Waterman, Donald F.
Watkins, Robert G.
Webber, Mrs. Jerome
Weller, Kenneth J.
Wichers, Willard C.
Wilcox, Robert J.
Wilkinson, Paul R.
Williams, Mrs. S. B.
Williams, Gordon
Williams, W. B.

Additional information - -

Grand Valley State College
Dr. Chris DeYoung - Coordinator

Board of Control

L. William Seidman, Chairman
James M. Copeland

Edward J. Frey

William A. Kirkpatrick

Hastings, Michigan
Manistee, Michigan
Grand Rapids, Michigan
Middleville, Michigan
Grand Rapids, Michigan
Muskegon, Michigan
Greenvflle, Michigan
Grand Rapids, Michigan
Muskegon, Michigan
Grand Rapids, Michigan
Grand Rapids, Michigan
Grand Rapids, Michigan
Grand Rapids, Michigan
Holland, Michigan
Grand Haven, Michigan
Zeeland, Michigan
Grand Rapids, Michigan
Holland, Michigan
Muskegon, Michigan
Grand Rapids, Michigan
Grand Rapids, Michigan
Grand Rapids, Michigan
Holland, Michigan
Holland, Michigan
Hastings, Michigan
Muskegon, Michigan
Grand Rapids, Michigan
Grand Rapids, Michigan
Grand Rapids, Michigan

Grand Rapids, Michigan

Grand Rapids, Michigan
Manistee, Michigan
Grand Rapids, Michigan
Kalamazoo, Michigan

161

Table XIV. (Continued) The Citizens' Cormcil of Grand Valley State College

Chairman - David E. Dutcher

 

 

Name City

 

 

Board of Control (Continued)

Dr; Icie G. Macy. Hoobler Ann Arbor, Michigan
Grace Olsen Kistler Grand Haven, Michigan
Dr. Arnold C. Ott Muskegon, Michigan
Kenneth W. Robinson Grand Rapids, Michigan
Dale B. Stafford Greenville, Michigan
Lynn M. Bartlett Superintendent

Department of Public Instruction
State of Michigan
Lansing, Michigan

 

162

by the Board at the February 10 meeting and they formally abrogated any
other adoptions concerning the Citizens' Council that were not in keeping

with the consultant's recommendations. The consultants outlined the purposes
of the Citizens' Council and recommended that these committees be organized:
site, inter-institutional relationships, student aid, governmental relationships,
educational needs, area studies, archives, and college interpretation. The
consultants also detailed procedures for the committees to follow and the
terms of office. (Appendix XXIV)

Dutcher had arranged to have the entire Citizens' Council meet in the
Continental Room of the Pantlind Hotel on February 16. (Appendix XXV) One
of the purposes was to inform them of what had evolved in the plans for the new
college; another purpose was to discuss the committee areas that he expected
the consultants would have identified by then (which they did identify February
8 and 9). Preliminary to this, Dutcher met with Seidman, Frey, De Young,
Hatch, Visser, and Watkins for lunch on January 18 to define with these people
the "jurisdiction" of the Council. He described the appointment of duties to
committees as "the point of no return" and earnestly requested that serious
thought be given to the matter in a letter dated January 17 confirming the
luncheon meeting on the 18th.

There was some concern over how important the political affiliation of
the members of the Citizens' Cormcil was, for Dutcher sought advice from
VanderVeen and Robert G. Howlext, Kent County Republican Party Chairman,
in a letter dated January 24. He wondered whether the February 16 meeting
was the time and place to seek information from the Council members regard-
ing their acquaintance with, extent of acquaintance with, and circumstances

surrounding their acquaintance with state officials, senators, or legislators.

163

The question card that requested the information also asked political
preference. There is no indication that the information was or was not sought.

A letter dated March 21, 1961, from Dutcher to Seidman indicates that
the Citizens' Advisory Council had been broken up into its committees and
that he was aware of the Board decision to place one member each of the
Board as an 3 _g_fi_:‘_i_<_3.i_9_ member of each committee. Further, each committee
chairman would let Seidman know what his committee had planned.

By the end of March the organization of the Citizens' Council was well
structured, the duties and responsibilities were fairly well outlined, and the
lines of communication were opened. Whether or not the Cotmcil would be
effective would depend entirely upon what it had to do and how real the assigned
tasks were. Two of the committees did meet early in 1961 and did make recom-
mendations: the Inter-Institutional Relationship Committee on April 27, and
the Educational Needs Committee on June 21. Beyond that point, time goes
beyond the establishment of the college, and goes into administrative problems,
policy decisions, budgets, hiring, building, and other details, not to be treated
in this dissertation. In February, 1963, Dutcher stated that the Council was

still active and was organized to fulfill duties requiring attention.

CHAPTER IX
THE MILLION DOLLAR FUND DRIVE

The newspapers often revealed more on fund drive activities than does
the correspondence or the minutes of the Board. The activities pertaining
to the fund raising that occurred between Board meetings are summarily
recorded in Board minutes, but are more detailed in newspaper accounts.

The tmreliability of many newspaper accounts is common knowledge. This
unreliability is often not the reporters fault. Limitations on space, improper
interpretation of significant events, bias , intentional slanting, second-hand
reports, and application of the "cut-off rule" by the copy-readers and make-
up men are often responsible for distorted news. Ken Mac. Crorie in "The
Process of News Reporting" (19-112) amply demonstrates how a story emerges
as a misrepresentation or a partial recording of essential fact.

, In the case of the recording of the fund drive, however, the various accounts
recorded in different area newspapers agree essentially with each other and
with the summary accounts of the Board minutes. And an inspection of the
ledger at Grand Valley State College and a totaling of selected pledge amounts
reveal almost exact correspondence with newspaper accounts of the fund drive:
amounts pledged, area quotas and responses, labor contributions, capital and
foundation contributions, and other items. '

Mr. Charles Moore, of the Greed Rapids Press, was the reporter cover—
ing the Grand Valley State College activities. Mrs. Augusta Eppinga, Seidman's
secretary, stated that Moore's newspaper accounts were as reliable and often

more complete than hers, and that his knowledge of details of the establishment

164

165

of the new college equalled the knowledge of most of the other participants.

Thus, the facts as recorded here are gathered from a combination of Board
minutes, newspaper accounts, from information supplied by Mr. Edward Frey,
chairman of the ftmd drive, and from ledgers and records at Grand Valley
State College.

The ftmd drive was not an isolated thing. It was inter-related with other
essential activities--especially with the selection of the site. The problem
suggested on page 78 was a real one, and was raised by Mrs. Kistler at the
first meeting.

Preliminary fund-raisigg activities. Following the signing of the College
Bill on April 26, 1960, Seidman's correspondence indicates there was an immediate
concern with the raising of the million and the securing of the site. .

Probably the first amount received towards the essential of raising a million
dollars was a 50 thousand dollar gift from the Grand Rapids Foundation. Of
the 7, 500 dollars that had been advanced to finance the J amrich study, a balance
of 2,000 dollars had been returned on April 8, 1960. Seidman wrote a letter
to the Grand Rapids Foundation in which he stated the usual benefits that would
obtain with the establishment of the college and requested 50, 000 dollars
on behalf of the Citizens' Advisory Committees

On September 13, 1960, the Grend Repids Presge reported that the Grand

 

Rapids Foundation had pledged 50, 000 dollars. This gift was contingent upon
the one million being raised within three years from July 1, 1960. The gm
MM also announced that 200, 000 dollars had been pledged by several
firms whose names would be revealed after the Board was named.

Concerning the 50, 000 dollar gift, on September 15, 1960, Dorr wrote

Seidman a warm letter congratulating him on the 50, 000 dollar gift by the

166

Foundation, and said that since the Board had not yet been appointed Seidman
had better hide it, since there was no one to officially accept it. Seidman
replied to Dorr not to worry, it was locked up safely.

Seidman and other principals had not been idle during the summer. The

August 12 Grand Rapids Frees reports on their activities presenting the news

 

of the college to business and cultural groups. Now the aim was not to establish
legislative sanction; this had been secured. Now the aim was to continue
community awareness so the forthcoming fund drive could be a success. Seidman
stated in this article that the groundwork for the fund drive would be laid as soon
as the Board of Control was appointed.

'At the October 5 Board meeting, the minutes record that there was some
concern over whether the million dollars must be on hand in pledges or in cash
before the stipulation was fulfilled, or whether part of it could be used for
current costs. Mr. Jordan Popkin, Governor Williams' secretary, was re—
quested to obtain a ruling on this before the next meeting. He had previously
volunteered to get advice from the attorney general.

Seidman, at the first meeting, stressed the urgency of the need for pro-
fessional assistance in raising the million dollars. He stated that he had
gotten in touch with about fifteen of the major companies and had suggested
amounts of contributions. Many of the prospective contributors, he said,
wished to earmark funds.

At this meeting, Mrs. Kistler brought up the point that the selection of the
site might have some bearing on the contributions. Her point was prophetic.
(See pages 135 and 148)

On October 7, 1960, Seidman is reported tohave stated that tentative
pledges had reached 250, 000 dollars and that only the surface of the potential

had been scratched. He stated that getting the million dollars was not a serious

 

167

consideration, that PTA's, private citizens, and labor tmions had been
approached only slightly. The October 13, 1960, Grand Rapids Press,
however, carried a report that Seidman stated that haste was essential in
getting both site and the million because the 1961 State «Senate would have
to confirm) the Board. Here he announced that a sub-committee would be
formed to raise the rest of the million beyond the quarter million already
pledged.

"We are the only college to start with no assets and a million dollar
debt," he stated here. He expected the members of the Citizens' Advisory
groups from all eight counties to help.

Mrs. Kistler suggested in a letter dated October 18, 1960, that the PTA's
work to help raise the ftmds. No details were suggested. Obviously, the
PTA's would have to run more than a few phenomenal penny carnivals to
raise a million dollars.

The Board had to have some moneys to operate. At the second meeting,
held November 1, 1960, at Seidman'..s home, he annormced that an anonymous
donor had agreed to contribute 10, 000 dollars so the Board would have operating
funds. At this meeting it was announced that Mr. Edward Frey had been appointed
finance chairman with Stafford and Ott as his aesistants. Frey stated that this
committee would raise as much money as possible locally and allocate to
various communities some part of the total to be raised.

At this Board meeting Robinson outlined his plans for soliciting labor. He
said that he would seek to get contributions on a local-union basis rather than
on an individual basis, and that he would suggest an amount equivalent to one
dollar per member. Robinson stated that UAW International would pledge a
sizable amount if matched by the eight—county area, and that it was the opinion
of the UAW International that the State Council should also make a contribution.

168

The WWW stated. concerning this that Walter Reuther would
give a five figure fund if it were matched locally, and that Robinson hoped to
get one dollar each from 80 t0 100 thousand members of the AFL-CIO.

At this meeting it was decided not to employ a fund raising firm to assist
in raising the million dollars, and it was resolved that the finance committee
proceed with the raising of the million dollars to provide capital funds for
the college and set forth at the next meeting their plan for raising the amount.

The November 4, 1960, Grand Rapid; Press quoted Frey as saying that
in order to get the million dollar fund drive properly started off substantial
assistance from business and industry would be needed. He announced that

the first meeting of the fund drive workers would be held in a few weeks.

The fund oampaigg methods. Between the November 1 and the November

 

22 Board meetings, a meeting kicking off the fimd drive was held at the
University Club on Monday, November 21. Here the benefits that would accrue
to the community were again stressed as were the facts of the Russell and
J amrich studies; and the announcement that the site had been capitalized at
250, 000 dollars was made, thereby raising the amount needed to 1, 250,000
dollars.

Seidman reiterated the statement he had so often made: nowhere could
the community get so much for so little. He also cautioned that if the site
and the million were not gotten, the new college would not be realized.

The November 22 Board minutes reveal further details of how the fund
drive was to be conducted.

Within a week the initial "contacts" would be made, but previous to any
personal calls, information materials would be 'sent to prospective contributors.

(Appendices VI, XXVIa and b) The drive would be run in phases, the initial

169

ph'ase being a solicitation of major corporations in Kent County. Following
this, major corporations in the eight-county area would be solicited. Then,
a general fund drive would be held.

An additional committee was formed for the raising of funds outside Kent
County. Mr. Copeland was asked to establish the fund raising program in the
comfies outsideof Kent County. He recommended that a meeting be arranged
with what he termed "the Flint people" who had done such an outstanding job
on the college there.

’ Seidman stawd that he was in the process of corresponding with various
foundations such as Kellogg and Upjohn. Robinson reported that he was in the
process of assembling an up-to-date‘ list of officers in the AFL-CIO affiliated
locals in the eight-county area. He said that he intended to call a union leader-
ship meeting, (which occurred January 30) with Seidman and as many as possible
of the other Board members present. Here he would outline what had been done,
what was being attempted, educate the leaders with the problem, and get them
to adopt a resolution pledging a sum which amounted to one dollar per union
member in the eight-county area, not donated directly by individuals, but
paid from local union treasuries. Robinson indicated that there was a great
advantage in getting leadership endorsement, since it would then become an
official AFL-CIO program. Robinson foresaw about 100, 000 dollars coming
through this approach according to newspaper accounts.

A separate approach was to be made to the Building Trades and Teamsters
groups.

In response to questions and misunderstandings which had arisen, Frey
announced in the gage 1322193131229. of November 30, 1960, that the new

college was not part of any other institution, but that it was a separate state—
supported institution.

170

The Muskegon reaction. The Board met in Muskegon for the December 8
meeting. This was the first of three meetings outside of Kent County. The
reception here was not as enthusiastic as it would be at Greenville and Spring
Lake. According to the Muskegon Chronicle of December 9, 1960, Muskegon
Superintendent of Schools, Richard B. Warren, and County Superintendent,
Cyrus M. Poppen, were lukewarm towards the new college. They stat ed that
the local commrmity college was less expensive to operate and was needed
there first because of rising enrollments and demands for an expanded our-
riculum. There had been failures in efforts to get greater operating. ftmds
for the Muskegon Community College. Ott, however, stated that the need
for the new college was greater and more far reaching than the local need.
He said it went beyond just Muskegon needs, and said he saw no conflict
between the two. But the Muskegon educators when apprised of the fund
drive and of the appeals that would be made asserted that Muskegon funds
should go to the Community College efforts.

Amounts of contributions made indicate that proportionately little money
came from Muskegon for the college fund drive. Outside of moneys pledged
by labor unions, some mohey pledged by a Muskegon County teachers' group,
and other relatively light contributions, the Muskegon area did not pledge any
more than one'per cent of the total pledged. Muskegon County has about twenty
per cent of the eight-county population. Conversely, the Grand Haven-North
Ottawa County area, with about ten per cent of the eight-county population ,
pledged just about ten per cent of the total pledged. Kent County, with about
half of the total eight-county population, pledged about ninety per cent of the
total pledged. These statements are based. upon the pledge ledger which is
a record of amounts pledged and amounts collected, and upon 1960 census

reports of population.

171

Further board reporte. The opening meeting with the Muskegon County
citizens was followed by Board business. Frey announced that 335, 000 dollars
were in or pledged, and that local banks (Grand Rapids) had pledged over
100, 000 dollars. He said that there were several firms who were awaiting
their board meetings to confirm tentative pledges.

Frey stated that the method of mailing information previous to the actual
personal call, and the careful and deliberate explanation to the contributor
of the tremendous benefits a new college will bring to the community was
bringing results. Copeland agreed that the same plan would be followed in
the out-county area.

Robinson questioned whether the pledges were uncommitted money. Seidman
affirmed that they were, but said no earmarked moneys or contribution in the
form of a building, a library, or a site would be rejected. 6

Further discussion centered on the wisdom of establishing a Founders
Program whereby a limited number of individuals could contribute a specified
minimum amount or more. It was felt that should such a program be begun,
it should be carefully coordinated with the existing fund raising program lest
there be annoyance created in contributors being called upon twice.

Copeland, who had raised the above proposal, wondered about accepting
contributions offered by several individuals. Here, too, it was agreed that
close watch was necessary lest a contributor be solicited twice.

A send-in-yourémoney campaign to reach those who would not be solicited
was postponed. Further, the offers of several service clubs, the Junior
League, and others’to assist in the fund-drive were referred to Chris De Young
to work out. A

In a conversation with Frey in January, 1963, he stated that the success
of the fund drive was the result of a careful and thorough education of the

172

prospective contributor. He said the fund drive in Kent County was con-
ducted by relatively few people, no more than twenty-five, and that care
was taken that the workers were all articulate and of such socio-economic
status that they would be well received by the prospective contributor. The
initial phase, Frey said, was aimed at the top. He said the committee
figure. out what the corporation or formdation might be expected to give and
then in personal, serious, planned interviews solicited that amount.

Frey stated that the social and economic benefits the new college would
bring to the community were discussed with the prospective contributor. How
the new college would be expanding its educational program to fit community
and industry needs was also discussed. The intention was to create the idea
that it would be poor practice not to pledge a fair amount. Frey said that the
Grand Haven, Holland, Zeeland, and other communities that wished to ran
their own campaigns in their own ways, some following the Grand Rapids
pattern, others following United Fund drive patterns.

On December 27, the Grand Haven Tribune announced that a drive headed

 

by B. P. Sherwood, president of the First Security Bank and Trust Company,
was aiming at an 80, 000 dollar goal. It was announced that this drive was to
be set up along the lines of a United Fund campaign. Sub-committees to solicit '
in the North-Ottawa communities of Grand Haven, Coopersville, Ferrysburg,
Spring Lake were set up. Sherwood said the goal was based upon bank-deposits
and area population. The final date for completing this drive was set at
February 1, 1961. I

I Seidman, announced that Zeeland, too, was organizing a drive. He said
also that he would meet with the Muskegon School Superintendents January 9

to again discuss greater Muskegon participation. The rally at Greenville
to take place January 13 was also announced here. (page 120)

173

This drive was occurring at the same time the sites were being offered,
and at the time preliminary and continuing relations were established with the
other universities. A budgetwas being prepared also, and the Citizens'
Advisory Council was being shaped. The offices were now located in space

donated by Union Bank and Trust Company.

The progress 2: _t_h_e_fu__i‘i_g drrre. In a nineteen-column inch story on January
2, 1961, with a four-inch by five-inch picture of Frey and Minor S. Keeler III,
a local industrialist, depositing ftmds, it was announced that 430, 000 dollars
had been pledged or received from twenty-seven firms or foundations, and
that action was still pending in many places called upbn. @1399 R_ep_i_d‘s_l_3_reet_s)

Frey said: "It takes a good deal of time and explanation and understanding
of the unusual program and the tremendous values the college will bring. This
is an opportunity of a lifetime. For the one million invested here will return
millions and millions invested by the state in the future. It is a big bargain
in education. "

He continued: "It was amazing that this college was created under very
chaotic conditions in the last legislative session, including a financial crisis
and a political stalemate. When the legislature did this, it faced up to the
fact that it would be supporting the college financially in years ahead. "

In the same article Seidman stated that he hoped to have the million
raised by March, and that within a year the Board expected to have the site,

a president, first appropriations from the legislature, and plans completed
for going into operation. This was in January, 1961.

The January 7 93393 w free; in an editorial urged the community

to continue to give ftmds. Only 570,000 more was needed, it stated. "Let's

do it," it urged.

_. ...

174

Seidman and Mrs. Kistler. .met with educators in Muskegon at the Black
Angus on January 9, 1961, to discuss the need for the new college. Mrs.
Kistler spoke to the group. A possible single package fund drive which
would include funds for the Muskegon Commumity College was explored at
the meeting.

A The Muskegon City and County Boards of Education had resolved that
both Grand Valley and Muskegon Community College were essential (see page 133)
on December?!” 1960. This, apparently, opened the door for the Board to
present the package proposal. And Dean Visser of Grand Rapids Junior
College, at the January 11 Grand Rapids meeting (see page 119 ) affirmed
that there was no conflict between the junior colleges and the new college.
Buikema confirmed this, but added that a good look at the exact role of the
junior college was necessary.

All the area newspapers reported that success in gaining Muskegon support
was hoped for by the Board since the Community College funds were to be
included. Evidence shows this to be a futile hope. Details on what came of
' this possibility are vague. Considering the total amount of money forthcoming
from _Muskegon and the attitude concerning the site-funds relationship,
apparently nothing evolved. A

At the January 13 meeting in Greenville (see page 120 ), it was reported
that 570, 000 dollars had been pledged by forty-three firms or foundations
and that more than sixty others had been called upon and each had indicated
that a contribution would be made. The Board of Control minutes and news-
papers further report that Robinson announced that the labor drive would
commence on January 30 at a meeting at AFL-CIO headquarters in Grand

Rapids.

175

Further plans for individual collections were held in 'abeyance until the
first stage was completed. McCall had stated that he would run a full-page
appeal in his paper in which a coupon could be clipped. His proposal was
held off until major contributors had been called upon. .

Copeland, calling it a high-level, soft-sell campaign, predicted that the
goal would be met by March 1. By January 20, 1961, it was announced in

the Grand Rapids P1283 that 600, 000 dollars were pledged.

 

Seidman, following through on his report that he would call upon founda-
tions to secure money for a planning session, had written the Ford Foundation
for funds for this purpose. A letter dated J anuary 30, 1961, from Lester
Nelson of the Ford Foundation states that the Ford Foundation did not grant
funds for planning, but as soon as the college had developed further, the
Foundation would entertain further requests. Seidman's reply did not conceal
his disappointment, but indicated that he would probably later have occasion
to call again. In January, 1903, he stated that Ford Foundation funds had

been received and were being used for capital expenditures.

Labor 2139 81380131 gifts fund drives. The last week in January and the
first week in February were important weeks for the success of the fund
drive. For on January 30, Robinson opened the labor contribution drive
and on Wednesday morning at 7:30 a. m. at a breakfast meeting at the Y.W.C.A.
John X. Jamrich spoke and launched a special gifts campaign with a goal of
150, 000 dollars. J amrich had' maintained his interest in Grand Valley State
College, as is evidenced by a letter to Seidman dated January 5, 1961, in which
he had suggested that industry might pledge amounts over an extended period,

rather than for only a year.

The labor meeting was attended by around a hundred leaders of labor locals
from Grand Rapids, Allegan, Holland, Muskegon, Greenville, and Kalamazoo.

176
In addition, David Almerigi, president of the Building Trades organization ,
and Pat Mackey, secretary-treasurer of the Teamsters Union, were there.
The stated aim was to raise 100, 000 dollars for the college.
As a start, UAW-C10 local 113 of Continental Motors, Muskegon, gave
3, 500 dollars. It was affirmed here that Walter Reuther, UAW-C10 Inter-
national President, had promised 25, 000 dollars in funds to match that amount
raised by the UAW-C10 locals. The leaders of the UAW-CIO locals unanimously
endorsed the proposed plans to have an amount equal to the average membership
of the preceding twelve years in the area UAW—C10 locals at one dollar per member
contributed to the college. And Almerigi and Mackey said they, too, would seek
to gain contributions. Almerigi said he would seek at least 1, 000 dollars from
the 2, 500 Building Trades membership. Mackey said that he would report .
results of discussions with the Teamsters members in the near future, and
that he had to secure their approval. These facts were reported in the

January 31, 1961, Gradd Rapids Press.

 

The Board minutes contain Robinson's statement concerning the meeting.
The optimistic estimate of 100, 000 dollars reported earlier was modified here:
he said that he hoped to get 50, 000 dollars from UAW-C10 locals plus 25, 000
dollars in matching funds from UAW-Clo International plus contributions
from the Building Trades members. A representative from the Grand Haven
area unions reported at the February 10 Board meeting that there were plane
there to raise contributions similar to the Grand Rapids area contributions
plus pledges from individual members of two dollars per year for three years.

The meeting on February 3 at the Y.M.C.A. addressed by J amrich
launched a special gifts campaign with a goal of 150, 000 dollars. This began

the seam phase of industry and foundation solicitations. The first phase which

177

was to call upon sixty-five major firms and foundations was nearing comple-
tion with over 600, 000 dollars pledged. This second phase followed the
recommendations in J amrich's January 5 letter. Over one hundred firms
or individuals would be called upon to contribute over a three-year period.
Herbert Boshoven and Oliver Robinson, Grand Rapids bankers, chaired the
three-week drive. -

At the Spring Lake Board meeting on February 19, 1961, it was reported
that the Grand Haven drive had raised 70, 000 to 75, 000 pledge dollars, and
Sherwood said he hoped to hit 100, 000 dollars. And on February 27, it was
announced in the Grand Rapids Press that the Holland-Zeeland area drive was
commencing under Robert Sligh, executive vice-president of the Sligh-Lowry
Furniture Company, ‘and Robert Den Herder, vice-president of the First
Michigan National Bank and Trust Company of Zeeland. Their goals were to
_ raise 45,000 dollars in Holland and 15,000 dollars in Zeeland between March
15 and 29. They stated they were realistic in their expectations since Hope
College is located in Holland. Most of the people in the area are either of
Reformed or Christian Reformed Church membership and these churches
greatly support Hope College and Calvin College respectively.

On February 28 Seidman announced a "Buck-a-Brick" campaign. In
this part of the drive, individuals could go to any bank in the eight—county
area and contribute a dollar. The contributor would receive some symbol
or token designating him an honorary builder. Mrs. Eppinga stated that
the "Buck-a-Brick" campaign was not a success. the cost of publicity and
associated public relations materials amounting to nearly as much as the
amount contributed.

Between March 1 and April -1, 1961, several appeals were made for

funds by both Frey and newspaper editorials. The Board wanted its budget

178

approved in the legislature. The dealine for inclusion of the budget in the

legislative appropriations was April 1, 1961.

 

A M Rapingreiss editorial of March 19, 1961, summed up the
situation. It stated that there were ten critical days ahead for Grand Valley
State College. It stated that 928, 000 dollars had been pledged. A site was
needed, and at least 250, 000 dollars would be needed for that. Thus, 322,000
dollars were still needed. It stated that the large firms had all responded
splendidly; the small concerns had been niggardly; and only 13, 000 dollars
had been raised by the"Buck-a-Brick" campaign, which was not gratifying.
The editorial pointed out that those who stood to benefit most supported the
college least. To fail to raise the necessary funds meant a delay in reaping
the benefits of a new college.

Most of the contributions of labor were listed in the newspapers by the
amomt different locals gave. By March 9, 1961, Robinson reported that
labor contributions of the eight-county area exceeded 21, 000 dollars. By
April 14 they had exceeded 30, 000 dollars, and on that date a check from
UAW-CIO International for 25, 000 dollars was received in matching funds
as promised.

By March 9, the North-Ottawa fund drive had reached 91, 541 dollars,
and the Holland-Zeeland drive had been started, using the procedures Frey
had used in Grand Rapids.

Individual group contributions were listed in the newspapers, among which
was 13, 985 dollars contributed by the Kent County Medical Society which put

the drive over the top of one million dollars, according to the Grand Rapids

 

Press. Other contributions continued to comein after April 1, 1960. The

largest amount was a 150, 000 dollar grant by the Grand Rapids Foundation

179

on April 10. This amount plus the 50, 000 dollars given earlier was eight
times larger than any amolmt before given by the Foundation to anyone else.
This 200, 000 dollars matched an amount of 200, 000 dollars that had been
donated anonymously.

A spokesman for the Foundation said that the Foundation made the grant
because of a strong belief in education and that the new college was an asset
to the entire area. It would increase the earning power of area citizens,
eventually contributing to the development of new products, bring new business
to the area, and contribute generally to the growth of the area. Also, he stated
that the University of Michigan and Michigan State University were growing too
large and were too far from Ludington and Manistee, Also, he stated that
the state was big enough and wealthy enough to accommodate a new college.

Other sizable pledges that had been made previously included Keeler
Brass, 30,000 dollars; Lear, 25, 000 dollars; Seidman Foundation, 50,000
dollars. Gerber Baby Foods of Fremont and Sperry and Hutchinson of New
York also made sizable pledges.

Communications were slipping. James Brock of UPI wrote Seidman a tart

letter complaining that the Unitedgljpess wasn't notified of the 150, 000 dollar

 

Foundation grant and of the details of the site selection which had occurred
on April 8. Seidman replied that as far as he knew all the news media con-

tinuously had been kept informed of events as they occurred.

The results of t_h<3_e_f_f_9_r_t_§. On April 11, Senator Frank Beadle stated
according to the magpidg 31388 that the Grand Valley State College
appropriations had been reinstated in the budget. Twenty-four members of
the State Senate Appropriations Committee and of the House Ways and Means
Committee had met at Seidman's home on March 14. The meeting was called

180

to acquaint them with progress on the site acquisition and on the attainment

of the million dollars. Governor Swainson had requested 250, 000 dollars for
the new college in his budget message in January. On June 2 the appropriations
for higher education recommended by the legislature were approved by Governor
Swainson. They included 150, 000 dollars for the new college.

So Grand. Valley State College was officially a state institution. The
Board had been confirmed on April 6 and of the total cost of establishment,
the state had contributed 150, 000 dollars, the community over 1,300,000 dollars.

The time and effort expended by those who had worked for it could not be
measured in dollar amounts. But the anticipated returns would, it was believed,
far exceed all that was spent. The fund campaign was continued into June until
enough was received to purchase whatever land was needed for the site. The
million dollars were used consequently for capital outlay.

Thus, at this time, June, 1961, the college was a reality. It had the site
(see Chapter IX), it had achieved some status and recognition (see Chapter
VIII), it had funds, and it had absolute state sanction in the Board's approval
and allocation of funds. Further problems in. finance are not the purpose of
this study.

. In most of the literature on raising the million dollars the name of Richard
Gfllett does not appear very often. Seidman, however, when commenting upon
the facts of the raising of the million dollars could not emphasize strongly enough
the value of Gillett's work in the fund drive. "He just went out and got
twenty-five of the best fund raisers in the community and went to work, "
he said. But one of the members of the CEFYC said this: ”That's the kind
of guy Seidman was. Imagine getting Dick Gillett to do all that work. "

As a point of interest, the appropriations of other selected institutions

of higher education in Michigan for the year 1961-1962 as approved by Governor

181

Swainson, Enrolled Senate Bill 1095, 7lst Regular Session, 1961, are here

listed:
University of Michigan $ 35, 376, 647
Michigan State University 29, 677, 219
Wayne State University 15, 582, 125
Western Michigan University 5, 085, 975
Ferris Institute 2, 089, 940
All Jlmior Colleges 4, 382,490
Grand Valley State College 150, 000

Obviously, Grand Valley State College had a long way to go before achieving
the distinction of being a major state institution of higher education, but the

beginning seemed firmly established.

 

CHAPTER X
ON NAMING THE COLLEGE

. Representative Thomas Whinery, sponsor of House Bill 477, in a
letter to the writer dawd November 12, 1962, stated that the name Grand
Valley State College was supplied by Representative Andrew Bolt after the
bill was drafted.

As early as January, 1959, correspondence between Seidman and Senator
Edward Hutchinson shows that there was some concern over what a new college
should be named, should it ever materialize. Hutchinson had expressed concern
over the name at the January 7, 1959, meeting (page 54 ). This was before
the J amrich study had been authorized. Seidman had suggested the names Kent
State and Michigan College. Hutchinson had not been favorable to either. .

In February, 1959, a notation in the Seidman correspondence bears these names:
Michigan College at Grand Rapids, Kenowa College, Muskenowa College, Kenmont,
Kentville, Kentwood, and Walker College.

The name that Bolt is said to have supplied stuck. At the first Board meeting
mention was made that a coordinated publicity approach should be made to place
the new college before the public. The possibility of an essay contest to be
held among area students to get a new name was Suggested. This was to be
related to the need for a legislative amendment to Public Act 120 to add the
word "state" to the name Grand Valley.

The November 1, 1960, minutes report that there was apparently widespread
dissatisfaction with the name "Grand Valley," its being considered too bucolic

and provincial according to notations in the correspondence Lfiles and some

182

183

newspaper reports. Seidman reported at the meeting that the area schools
would be willing to sponsor a contest for a new name, and that the press and
radio were willing to cooperate. Stafford suggested a prize of one hundred
dollars or a one—year's tuition scholarship. Stafford was authorized to get

the contest under way, and the Board assumed approval would have to be gotten
from the legislature.

Stafford worked with the publicity and information services provided by
Aurey Strohpaul and Max Henkel of the West Michigan Tourist Bureau who had
said they would handle publicity for the college. He reported at the November 22
and December 8 meetings that he was getting the contest under way. He was urged
at the-December 8 Board meeting to proceed rapidly, since the college was getting
such a tremendous amount of publicity, and the name "Grand Valley" was being
used. The December 20, 1960, newspapers announced that the name contest
was under way, and that a four-year tuition shholarship would be awarded the
winner or a recipient of his choice.

On January 13, Stafford announced that he had received about 2, 500 suggested
names for the college, and that he would have a report at the next meeting.

At the February 10 meeting Stafford submitted a list of all the names that
had been submitted. (Appendix XXVII) . The Board still felt, as the minutes
indicate, that the mame would need to be approved by legislative amendment.
It resolved at this meeting to 1, review the contest entries and get an informal
sampling of opinion from prospective istudents and others; and 2, each Board
member would select ten names in order of preference to be sent to the Chair-
man no later than March 10.

This was done. And at the March 10 meeting the Board, being cognizant

of the fact that since Grand Valley College and Grand Valley State College were

the two names most often selected by the board from the large list, a winner

be de:
oi rec
In it 1
new 11
Marc
prem
and 3

other

.adi c

actio

(D

184

be declared. The reasoning behind the Board's decision is stated in .a letter
of recommendation from Seidman sent to the Board preceding the meeting.
In it he states that since there was no prevailing preference for any particular
new name, and since the deadline to enact new bflls in the legislature was
March 17, and since action to change the name in the legislature might appear
premature since neither the site nor the million dollars had yet been secured,
and since to insure passage of an amendment changing the name might invit 6
other individuals to pass amendments to the original act, it might be best to
. add only the word "State" to the name and allow usage rather than legislative
actionto effect the change.

‘ Seven persons had suggested the name "Grand Valley State College" in
the contest. The winner was determined by lot. He was Frederic H. Brack,
20, of Grandville, Michigan. He assigned the scholarship to his sister,

Mirianne Lovins, 7 , a second grade student at Grandville West Elementary
School.

CHAPTER XI
SOME OPINIONS--MILD TO STRONG

The establishment and organization of the college did not come about with-—
out some extended comment from various individuals in the eight-county area.
Two such comments were in direct opposition to the establishment of a new
college, and two were concerned with what direction the planning for the

new college was to take.

The Speyfegrthgpamphlet. In a twenty-two-page booklet dated March, 1961,
published in Muskegon, entitled (_3_i_yi‘9_Aff__a_1;r.s Rm James R. Seyferth,
editor, several statements concerning the new college are made; and pages of
statistics are presented.

The first statement is this that any discussion concerning the new college
ought to have as one of its principle points of departure the Michigan tax
situation especially as it relates to higher education. - It stated that Michigan
spent 1,097, 200, 000 dollars for all purposes in the fiscal year 1959-1960. Of
this amount, 440, 300, 000 dollars were spent for education, more than was
spent for any other single flmction of government, divided as follows: public
school education: 334, 700, 000 dollars; higher education ( including community
colleges); 100, 600, 000 dollars; and other education: 500, 000 dollars.

The expenditures of the state were traced from 1950-51 to 1959-60. A An
increase of 65. 9 per cent in 1959-60 over 1950-51 for all expenditures was
noted. There was, however, the pamphlet stated, an increase of 114. 4 per cent
in expenditures for education. Figuring the depreciation of the dollar. and the

population increase there was a per capita constant dollar increase of 44. 1

1192:?

 

‘ tail

 

186

per cent in expenditures for education in the nine—year period; a pgcapita
constant dollar increase of 11. 5 per cent in all expenditures. It stated
further that there was a 159. 9 per cent increase in spending for higher
education; a 74. 7 per cent per capita constant dollar increase in expenditures
for higher education in the nine-year period. The pamphlet stated further
that the per capital constant dollar percentage increase in expenditures were
4. 5 and 6. 5 times as great for education and higher education as they were
for other purposes.

Comparisons were made of expenditures per capita and per 1, 000 dollars
of personal income between Michigan and seven "competitor" states, as they
‘ were termed: lllinds, Indiana, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania,
and Wisconsin. In expenditures per 1, 000 dollars of personal income, Michigan
ranked first with 131 dollars. The median was 113 dollars. Michigan ranked
second in expenditures per capita, 288 dollars, 29 dollars above the median
of 259 dollars.

In expenditures for. education based upon per capita basis and on a per
1, 000 dollars of personal income, Michigan also ranked first, with expenditures
of 116 dollars, 25 dollars above the median of 91 dollars, and 53 dollars, 14
dollars above the median of 39 dollars, respectively. A

'In expenditures for higher education, the pamphlet also ranked Michigan
first when compared with seven states: expenditures per capita were 26. 08
dollars, 13. 10 above the median of 12. 98 dollars; and per 1, 000 dollars of
personal income expenditures were 6. 72 dollars above the median of 5. 15
dollars or 11. 87 dollars.

State and local government employment for higher education also ranked
‘ first when compared with the seven states. Employment per 10, 000 of
population in 1957 was 25. 9 in Michigan. The median was 11. 9.

Na

187

The income of institutions of higher education was also figured: Michigan
institutions of higher education received 11. 33 dollars per capita, ranking
first, 155. 8 per cent or 6. 90 dollars above the median of 4. 43 dollars.

Concerning per gross student expenditures in 1957 excluding special
programs, agricultural experimental programs, extension work, capital
outlay, and community college aid, Michigan was compared with Ohio. Ohio
spent 48, 851, 000 dollars--obtained from state appropriations of 38,182, 000
dollars and student fees of 10, 668, 000 dollars. Michigan spent 109,035, 000
dollarsfrom state appropriations of 87, 174, 000 dollars and 21, 861,000
dollars in student fees. Ohio receives twenty-two per cent from student fees,
Michigan twenty per cent. Ohio enrollnient in 1957 was 61, 500; Michigan
enrollment in 19 57 was 91, 500 in higher education. The per student expendi-
tures from state appropriations in Ohio were 618 dollars; in Michigan 953
dollars; from student fees. in Ohio, 17 2 dollars; in Michigan 239 dollars,
with the exclusions listed above. . Ohio spent 790 dollars per student; Michigan

spent 1, 192 dollars per student in higher education'excluding the programs
listed above. 8

The pamphlet also measured the relationships between students who come
into the state for their higher education and those who leave for the same purpose.

The figures given showed that Michigan in 1958 led all seven states with'a
net inmigration of 11, 170 students. From a total of 112, 426 total enrollment
in Michigan colleges, 97, 397 were in-state resident enrollees, and 15, 029 were
out-state resident enrollees. There were 3, 859 Michigan residents in out-of-
state coleges. Of the seven states, only Indiana, Ohio, and Wisconsin in
addition to Michigan had more out-state residents enrolled in their colleges
than in-state residents enrolled out-of-stahe, and that the next highest inmigra-

tion was in Indiana, 5, 192, about 6, 000 fewer than the Michigan net inmigration.

188

The pamphlet further stated that one out of four students who enrolled as
freshmen failed to enroll the second year.

Another table showed the percentages of total number of students enrolled
in public four-year institutions of higher education, the amount spent by private
institutions of higher education, and the percentage of total students enrolled
in graduate and professional schools. In Michigan in 19 58, 77. 5 per cent were
enrolled in public four-year institutions, highest of the eight states, the median
being 45. 6 per cent. In Michigan, private college expenditure per capita
was 3. 24 dollars in .1955, lowest in the eight states, the median being 10. 19
dollars. In Michigan, of the total enrolled in graduate and professional
schools in 1955, 94. 3 per cent were enrolled in public institutions, the highest
percentage of the eight states, the median being 42. 2 per cent.

The net investment of dollars in physical plants of private institutions
of higher education in 19 55 in Michigan was compared with that of the other
seven states: the investment in Michigan, 65,416, 000 dollars, was lower than
the investment in any of the seven others, with the exception of Wisconsin,

64, 634,000 dollars. The median was 184, 356, 000 dollars. But the Michigan
figure, according to the pamphlet, was only 14 per cent of the total net invest-
ment of both private and public institutions of higher education. The Wisconsin
investment was 37 per cent of total investment. The median percentage was

56 per cent.

The pamphlet went on to review certain aspects of the Russell Report, listed

 

the Board of Control of the new college, and listed seven of the proposed sites.

A map of the eight-county area showed county populations, and maps of Michi-

gan showed the locations of four-year colleges and two-year accredited institutions
in the state. Circles of about fifty-mile radii were drawn to show how the Kent,

Ottawa, and Muskegon area were unserviced by existing four-year institutions.

189

The conclusions drawn from the maps were that the Russell Report was
correct in stating that if a new college should exist, it should be located west
of Grand Rapids, and that benefits from a college would go beyond just the
educational benefits. Construction and maintem of a twenty to thirty
million dollar plant, millions of dollars in salaries, and thousands of dollars
for services and supplies would aid the economy of‘the area. Furthermore,
the college would provide a stabilizing effect by reason of the economic bene-
fits and the interests it would draw.

Yet, there were two and a half pages of conclusions that negated the idea of
a new college, conclusions based upon the statistics offered.

1. In the past ten years and after allowing for population growth and
inflation, net total expenditures for the State of Michigan for other than educa-
tion have increased 11 per cent. All educational expenses have increased 44
per cent. Higher education expenses have increased 75 per cent.

2. In relation to the income of the people, and in comparison with seven
of its leading competitor states, more money is spent in Michigan than in any
other state for state and local government services, 16 per cent more than the
median; more money is spent in Michigan than in any other state for public
higher education, 130 per cent more than the median.

The reason given was that there were fewer private institutions of higher
education in Michigan. It stated that for every dollar spent in Ohio, 150 dollars
were spent for public higher education in Michigan.

3. On a per capita basis, state and local government funds provided in
Michigan in support of public higher education are two-and-a-half times those

provided in the median spent by competitive states.
It was emphasized that for every one Michigan student who gets his educa-

tion outside the state, four come in. It costs 953 dollars for the student who
comes in from the outside; only a small amount of the cost of his education

190

is paid by tuition; most of the cost is borne by the state.

4. If there were a new college, all the above will be pronounced, no matter
where it is located. Thus, the question is not where it should be but whether
it should exist at all, not only from the standpoint of costs but from the stand—
point of what is in the best interests of education.

5. Public education depends upon government and taxes. Taxes depend on
the economy and strength of an area and its people. Economic strength is not
created by governmental expenditures. If this were so, Michigan would be the
strongest state economically; but it is not compared with its competitors. The
Michigan economy is weak, it states. Government and education do not create
economic strength but depend upon it. Common sense says that no new college

shanld be created.
6. So, the pamphlet continued, Grand Valley State College is not the best

means whereby to provide education for the people if it is measured against
the criterion of economic strength. More time, effort, facilities, class-
rooms, laboratories, and educational resources are being spent on students
who drop out of existing colleges than Grand Valley State College will provide
for in 1975; there are more current drop outs than will enroll ‘in Grand Valley
in 19 7 5. Also, more students come into Michigan for their education now than
will be provided for by Grand Valley State College in 197 5.

The recommendat'nns were these:

1. The curriculum of secondary schools should be strengthened and
entrance criteria should be changed so that the drop outs would be screened
before they enter. Also, out-of-state enrollments should be limited to the
number that leave Michigan to go to other states for higher education. Should
these recommendations be followed, the pamphlet asserts, Michigan could”

have the equivalent of two Grand Valleys in existing resources.

191

2. There is a need to more efficiently use existing facilities. Grand
Valley only adds to the existing problems.

3. The above does not mean that the author would always oppose a new
college. But he opposes it until present facilities are fully utilized and
efficiently operated so that the strength of efficiency will generate greater
strength. (51-1974) 1

It is not the purpose to refute or support Seyferth's arguments. His
pamphlet appeared at the time when the battle for the site was at high pitch,
and Muskegon was in a position of possibly losing its bid. Also, Donald
Seyferth' s statements that Muskegon should donate no funds .unless the
college was certain to be located in Muskegon (page135 ) and his letter
to Seidman (pages 63 and 225 .) indicate that he may have been motivated
by a strong spirit of concern over the welfare of his own community, even
atthe expense of other communities. James Seyferth's pamphlet is more
philosophically oriented; yet both approaches discourage the new college
establishment.

The Mrs. Siegel V_V_._ Judd letteg‘, After J amrich had presented his report

 

on November 30, 1959,‘ Seidman had distributed copies to the members of
the Citizens' Advisory Committee and had asked that each one review it

and make his. suggestions and recommendations. Seidman had asked that
the comments be returned to him by January 22. Mrs. Judd's comments
are dated April 25, and were accompanied by four pages of excerpts from
both the J amrich and Russell Reports to support her contentions. The com-

plete text of her letter and the support follow.

192

C April 25, 1960

From:

Mrs. Siegel W. Judd

747 San Jose Drive, S.E.
Grand Rapids, Michigan

To:

Mr. William Seidman, Chairman,

Citizens' Committee to Study the Need for a Four-Year
College in Allegan, Barry, Ionia, Kent, Montcalm,
Muskegon, Newaygo, and Ottawa Counties,

400 Peoples National Bank Building

Grand Rapids, Michigan

Dear Mr. Seidman:

You requested that the members of this committee review Dr. J amrich's
report on the higher education needs of this eight-county area and send
their comments to you by January 22. I regret that my comments come so
late. It has taken some time for the far-reaching implications of the educa-
tional philosophy underlying this report to percolate into my understanding.

This report recommends the establishment of a new tax-supported,
four—year college for this eight-county area. As I interpret its reasoning,
together with that of Dr. John Dale Russell's "Survey on Higher Education
in Michigan" prepared for the Legislature in 19 58, from which the J amrich
report stm, the recommendation for the new college is based on the follow-
ing assumption:

That the taxpayers of Michigan are obligated to
provide a post-high school education for every
young person who wants it, regardless of his
ability to absorb it.

I am writing to say that I can not accept a proposal for a new college rest-
ing on this principle. My objections to this principle are as follows:

1. It will, of necessity, degrade the quality of educational standards in our
institution of higher learning.

2. It will not, therefore, benefit society but will, on the contrary, intensify
the present social trends toward mediocrity both in intellectual standards,
in moral standards of work and responsibility, in sense of purpose.

3. It will work an injustice to the earnest, able student who seriously wants
the best possible education.

4. It will further intensify the wasteful competition among our present tax-
supported institutions of higher education by adding to, rather than

1‘33

solving, all their existing problems of unlimited size, admission
standards, educational function, quality of program, and finance.

5. It will create a bottomless pit for tax funds under a tax system that
is an antique, inequitable patchwork quite inadequate to cope with
such an obligation.

There are those who will dispute my interpretation of the Russell and
J amrich reports, since no where in them is the underlying assumption des-
cribed in the exact terms as I have stated them above. However, a careful
analysis of both reports, what they say and what they leave unsaid, drives
me to this conclusion.

In questioning the wisdom of their proposed policy, I recognize that I
am pushing against the current in the main stream of public thinking about
higher education. May I, therefore, ask you to bear with me while I
explain my concern more fully than is ordinarily appropriate for a letter?

About a century ago we decided in America that the taxpayer should
provide education for every chfld through the eighth grade. Then we
extended this into the secondary school. Today in many areas of the
State we have assumed the tax support for two more years of education
in the Junior (or Community) Colleges, though attendance is voluntary.
We have, all of this time, also supported four and six-year colleges and
universities for those who were interested and able to take advantage of
them.

What, then, is new about the proposal for a four-year college in the
Grand Rapids area? The facts in the two surveys indicate that within the
next fifteen years, due to population increase plus an increase in the per-
centage of those of college age who will want to go to college, there will not
be room in our present institutions to accommodate them.

The words, ”want to go to college, " provide the key to the philosophy
of higher education underlying these two reports. We have to decide, as
taxpayers, how far we shall go in fulfilling the desires of this growing
population. Dr. Russell's and Dr. J amrich's answer is that we fulfill them
100%. We must, they propose, provide the opportunity for a post-high
school education for every young person who wants one, regardless of his
ability to benefit by it.

I am enclosing a somewhat fuller analysis of these two reports on'this
point. The following quotations, however, give the gist of it:

Russell: (pp. 128-130) "Any limitation which may be set (on
the enrollment of any one institution) should be administered

in such a way that NO RESIDENT OF MICHIGAN IS DENIED THE
OPPORTUNITY to attend a conveniently located institution that
offers an instructional program SUITED TO HIS NEEDS AND
ABILITIES."

J amrich: (p. 126) "Not only MUST the provisions be made for
the increasing numbers of youth seeking higher educational

194

opportunity, but these opportunities MUST be provided SO THAT
THEY ARE APPROPRIATE TO THE ABILITIES AND INTERESTS

OF THE STUDENTS SEEKING THE EDUCATION. In other words,
_'_.post-high school education programs, if they are to meet the needs

of our youth, should be DIVERSE ENOUGH TO PROVJDE CURRICULA
APPROPRIATE TO THE ABILITIES AND INTERESTS OF THE ‘
STUDENTS. "

This point of view represents a direct reversal of traditional concepts
of higher education. Instead of requiring that the applicant measure up to
the ability required to benefit by the educational program of the institution,
we must provide a program keyed down to the level of ability and interest
of any person who wants to go to college. To a considerable extent these
statements in the Russell and J amrich reports merely recognize a situation
which has been creeping up on us for some time. But we find this viewpoint
here openly espoused as a basic policy for tax-supported higher education
in our State.

If these reports represent the concepts of higher education accepted by
the leaders of our institutions of higher education and by the public, then
there appears to be a time-lag in public thinking about higher education as
compared with the thinking about elementary and secondary education that
is emerging today.

On the elementary and secondary level we are waking up from the
narcotic effects of what was first known as "progressive educatiOn";
that is, the concept that a child should be asked to learn only what he is
"interested in learning and that he should be "helped" along so that he
would never experience failure.

Today we are beginning to insist that the child learn to read, write and
think clearly and that he study English, math, science, languages, whether
he is "interested" or not. We are beginning to see the waste in holding our
more gifted children back for the slower learners. We are, further, beginning
to demand that our teachers be, themselves, educated persons, required to
prepare themselves in subject matter as well as in teaching techniques.

But on the college level - if we accept these reports - we are still in the
dark ages of "progressivism. " We must provide every boy and girl from the
ages of 18 to 21 with a place to go to school four years more. (J aques
Barzun, Dean and Provost of Columbia University, remarks that we used
to speak of the "college may and woman. ") But we must not expect too
much of him. We must offer him courses on the level of his ability - whatever
that may be. _They must be courses that will meet his"interests. " And if he
has trouble adjusting to ”college life, " we must "help" and coddle and push
and pull him along until he achieves a B. A. degree. (See Russell, p. 29.)

This concept assumes there is some magic in the B. A. degree - just as
we once thought there was some magic in "progressive education. " To be
sure, a degree is an open door into the professional schools, but deans of
professional schools are complaining that even applicants with native intel-
ligence have not yet learned to read or write or reason.

195

It is true also that a degree is required now for a job in a number of
occupations - but business, too, may be discovering that under our present
standards of education, it is no guarantee of ability. A degree is required 7
to teach school - but when it comes from a college of lax entrance require-
ments with courses "suited to the ability and interest of the student, " it
is no guarantee of the kind of teacher our new standards for elementary and .
secondary education will call for.

Dr. J amrich claims that the new public philosophy about higher education is
that it produces "generalized social values. " Apparently we have a vague
notion that the more of our population who carry the magic badge of a B. A.
degree - or who even can say they "attended college, " the better our citizenry
will be. This, we will find - after we have spent millions of tax dollars - is
a hoax on society if the degree represents nothing more than four years of
courses that give the student no concepts of serious work, of the nature of
intellectual attainment, or of a purpose in life.

But the damage lies not alone in our failure to get our money's worth in a
competent, responsible citizenry. The damage lies also in the injustice we
will have done to our truly qualified young people who have a high order of
ability and an urge for learning. These are short-changed by the demeaning
of the programs of our institutions of higher learning to meet the"ability and
interest" of those less able or willing to absorb them.

The damage lies further in wasting the years and the talents and the money
' of those young people who would have profited more by a type of special
technical training or by an earlier start in learning on the job.

What are the causes and cures for this dilemma in which we find ourselves
with respect to higher education in our State? I would like to mention two
causes: first, in society itself an acceptance of less than the best as being
"a satisfactory level, " (to quote Dr. Jamrich, p. 98) - our age is coming
to be known as the "Age of Mediocrity;" second, and more specifically,
the competition among our ten State-controlled institutions both for students
and for appropriations without any philosophy, plan or pattern in the State

as a whole with respect to size, quality or function each institution should
serve.

As to the first cause, the general attitude of society, I would not pre-
sume to know the cure, but one might sugest that it will be a boot-strap
operation - and one strap may have to be a strengthening of our education
system from top to bottom.

On the question of the destructive competition among our institutions of

higher learning - which discourages limitation on size, keeps admission
requirements low and the number of easy courses (and their costs) high -

I would suggest a study of Russell's recommendation for a coordinating
governmental agency with legal status and authority.

The taxpayers of Michigan pay practically all the capital costs and 75%
to 80% of the operating costs of our State-supported institutions of higher
education, according to the Russell and J amrichreports. Dr. Russell
states (pp. 168-69) that his proposed program (providing higher education

for all who want it) will amount in 1975 to $187, 000, 000 in annual operating
costs - as compared with $70,000, 000 in 1956; plus an annual expenditure
for the next 20 years in capital outlay of $39,000, 000.

Dr. Russell found the leaders of our institutions of higher education
"reluctant to discuss the State's ability to finance this program, " believ-
ing that this is the business of the government and the citizens. They did,
however, express the attitude that "as more people use the educational
facilities. . . more favorable attitudes by the public toward taxes for higher
education can be expected. "

Dr. Russell admitted that the present tax system "is strained beyond its
limits" and that there is "need for a 'break-through' in inventive thinking
foranew kind oftax," '

Dr. James B. Conant would agree with Dr. Russell about the condition
of our tax system. In his book, "The Child, the Parent and the State, " he
calls for a "radical revision of the tax structure of the states'. . . indicates
that the demand for federal aid grows out of the failure of state legislatures
to put their own financial houses in order.

Does it make sense that we should launch into a program of unlimited
expansion of our State facilities for higher education - beginning with a new
college in the Grand Rapids area - before we face up to the realities of our
State tax system?

Should we not, then, before accepting a program of expansion based only
on population growth and the percentage of young people wanting to go to
college, ask ourselves such questions as these:

1. fly should we guarantee this opportunity to our young people? Is it,
as so many critics of our colleges indicate today, to give them "social
status, " (J aques Barzun says the college .degree has become the "last
remaining mark of class distinction. "); to give them a chance to find
a mate; the privilege of prolonging irresponsible adolescence; to keep
them off the labor market a little longer? Or do we want to provide
our country with citizens of solid intellectual attainment from which
Our community and our nation should expect to benefit?

2. If the purpose of providing opportunity for higher education for our
youth is to educate them, can this be done in institutions of unwieldy
size on a mass basis with student bodies diluted with persons unable
or unwilling to take advantage of a truly educational program ?

3. More particularly, can we educate - not merely "train" - teachers
for our elementary and secondary schools in institutions lacking
high entrance requirements - consequently lacking high quality
program?

4. Should we not attempt to solve the following problems before launch-
ing so deeply into expenditure for new institutions that we can't turn
back? For example:

197

a. Should we not insist upon the implementation of the Russell recom-
mendation for some form of coordinated planning by or for our
various State-supported institutions of higher learning?

b. Should we not demand higher standards of admission to all present

1 tax—supported institutions, reserving post-high school education
as a privilege - not a right - for those who want to learn and who
have earned the privilege through achievement?

0. Should we not first tackle the reform of our State tax system, as
Dr. Russell suggests, before we start spending money we are
presently unable to collect?

It is easy to accept the proposal for 'a new four-year college in our Grand
Rapids area - if we don't look at it in relation to the proposed program for the
State as a whole. We all approve of education. We like our young people.

We like to have them near home - at considerably less cost. We aren't against
the economic advantage we hope a student body of 10, 000 may bring to our
community.

But as citizens of Michigan we are at a cross-roads on higher education
policy of far-reaching implications. Our decision now will have a long-
_ term effect on (a) the welfare of our young people, (b) the quality of our
institutions of higher learning, (c) the financial burden on the taxpayer, both
in number of dollars and in what he will get for his dollar.

It behooves us to give serious thought now to all three aspects of this

proposed policy of higher education which we are on the brink of putting into
action.

I appreciate the work and the interest that you and‘yOur colleagues have
put into this matter - I am sure in a sincere concern for the public interest.
I regret, however, that for the reasons stated at the beginning of my letter,
I must disagree with you on the support for a new college prior to action
in the other directions I have suggested and a rethinking of the proposed
philosophy as a basis for our State-wide system of higher education.

I am certain, therefore, that you will wish me to resign from your com—
mittee, since it is now committed to such a college, and I hereby do so.

Very earnestly yours,
/8/ Dorothy L. Judd

Mrs. Siegel W. Judd

C

I.

198

O From:
P Mrs. Siegel W. Judd
Y

ASPECTS OF THE RUSSELL AND JAMRICH REPORTS WHICH
CONFIRM MY CONTENTION THAT THE PROPOSED NEW
COLLEGE FOR TIE GRAND RAPIDS AREA IS BASED ON TIE
PRINCIPLE THAT TIE TAXPAYERS OF MICHIGAN MUST PRO-
VIDE POST-HIGH SCHOOL EDUCATION FOR ALL YOUNG PEOPLE
WHO DESIRE IT, REGARDLESS OF THEIR ABILITY ,

Russell, John Dale, "Higher Education in Michigan,"
Final Report of a Survey made for the State Legislature,
September, 1958.

J amrich, John X. , "A New College," a report to the Legislative
and Citizens Committees on the Eight-County Study of Higher
Education Needs in Allegan, Barry, Ionia, Kent, Montcalm,
Muskegon, Newaygo, and Ottawa Counties. .

STANDARDS OF ADMISSION

Nowhere in either report is there a recommendation that the problem of the
crowding of our colleges and universities be handled at least in part by
selecting applicants on the basis of their abflity and interests on stand-
ards higher than those prevailing at present.

A. The Russell Report (pp. 128-130)

Dr. Russell explored this matter with the heads of our state-controlled
colleges and universities. All but one of these believed that "it

would not only be unwise to try to keep young people from continuing
their education beyond the high school, but it would be impossible to
administer any plan that would have limitation of total college
attendance as an objective. "

He next inquired about the wisdom of limitation of enrollment for any
one institution ("not their 01m" - be significantly inserts). Here
the attitude most often expressed was, "Let nature take its course"

Believing, himself, that an institution "may get too large for the

best educational service and for the most efficient operation," he
suggests (deep in the text), that the Legislature handle the problem
"by setting a ceiling on the number of students on which appropriation
would be based. " He does not, however, make this one of his final
recommendations.

He discusses the selective basis for entrance required by the University
of Michigan - and the fact that"it has become one of the outstanding
educational institutions of the country and of the world. " Then he

A.

199

Russell Report (continued)

adds: "As long as other Opportunities are available in Michigan for
the students who do not qualify for entrance in the University of
Michigan, the idea of selective enrollment at the freshman level is
defensible. " (p. 144) -.
(The implication here is clear: selective enrollment on the
basis of ability for the rest of our institutions of higher
learning would not be " defensible. " The citizen should
note, incidentally, that several of these "other institutions"
which take students unable to make the U. of M. "train
teachers for our elementary and secondary schools.)

His conclusion is that the increasing demand for post-high school
education be handled by establishing new colleges:

"Any limitation which gay be set (for enrollment at any one
institution) should be administered in such a way that _ng
resident of Michigan is denied the opportunity to attend a
conveniently located institution that offers an instructional
program suited to his needs and abilities." (pp. 128-30)

 

The J amrich Report

Dr. J amrich in proposing a new 4-year college for the Grand Rapids
area, follows the same basic educational philosophy. He arrives at
the projected enrollment for such a college in the years 1965-197 5
on data about population growth, growth of the 18-21 year ,old age
group, the rising % of high sChool graduates now attending college ,

and a {spot survey of the desires of parents and students now in high
schoo_j

In one table he matches the ranking of these same students in their
high school grades with their expressed desires about a post-high
school education. He notes that about 75% of those wan_ti_r_1g to go to
college fall in the top 60% of their high school class academic rank
and hence he concludes: (pp. 97-98)

"The fact that such a proportion of those intending to go on

to college AT THIS LEVEL OF MEASURED ABILITY (top 60%)
would indicate that it is very sound to give consideration to the
large percentage of area youth indicating their intention to

go on to college. . . . . The expressed interest of attending a
local college, if one were established, comes from students
AT SATISFACTORY LEVELS OF ABILITY. "

To help us evaluate just how "satisfactory" this top 60% level is as
a standard for college entrance, we may note that a recent freshman
class at the University of Michigan (with its selective admission)
was composed as follows: (1959-60 catalogue)

200

B. The Jamrich Report (continued)

II.

III.

48% of the class came from the upper 19% of their high school class.

 

20% H H H H H i! second1(% H n n n H
18% H H H it it it third 10% n n n H H
86% H n n n :1 "upper 30% u n n n n

We should note further that J amrich does not say that entrance to the
new college should be confined to the top 60%. Nor does he substanti-
ate his reasoning that the top 60% is a "satisfactory level of ability"
for benefiting by a college education. He simply uses the figure as

a guide for arriving at projected enrollment.

QUALITY OF THE HIGIER EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM

Both Dr. Russell and Dr. J amrich plead for high quality in the education
provided by our State schools of higher education (Recommendation #11).
Dr. Russell asks for "appropriations at a level that will permit the main-
taining of high quality programs. " And Dr. J amrich says, (a little less
certainly) "A general principal might be that in the State of Michigan

all of our colleges and universities must be provided with adequate
support in order that they may maintain undergraduate programs of
equally high quality. " (page 127)

Neither attacks the problem of hgw to provide an educational program of
high quality for a student body admitted without regard to assurance of
its ability or interest to benefit by such a program. In this day of
shortage of able teachers, one may question whether any amount of
money can attract good teachers to an institution with an unresponsive
study body.

The validity of the plea for a high quality program must be set up .
against the statements of both men that the college must be suited to
the ability and interest of the student - without establishing any
minimum standard for measuring ability and interest.

BASIC PRINCIPLE

In his introduction Dr. J amrich states as justification for requiring tax
support for higher education: '

"Higher education brings with it GENERALIZED SOCIAL
VALUES and should THEREFORE BE SUPPORTED TO THE
LARGEST POSSIBLE DEGREE BY ALL OF SOCIETY. " (Intro-
duction). ~

Until we know what he means by "generalized social values" we can
not determine whether we wish to spend our tax money for this purpose.
Like the terms, "high quality program" and "satisfactory levels of

m ability, " it is not concrete or specific. We must be sure, to quote
‘Jacques Barzun, Dean and Provost of Columbia University, "that the

familiar Sound of words does not produce the illusion of meaning. "

I

J

201

In summarizing his report Dr. J amrich states: "This assumes, of
course, that there is general agreement on the BASIC PRINCIPLE
THAT EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITY SHOULD BE PROVIDED FOR
A MAXIMUM NUMBER OF OUR CITIZENS." (P. 126)

Dr. J amrich does not define "maximum” number" directly, but one
is forced to conclude that he means all who m to go to college
without regard to ability or interest, since he repeatedly states -

as did Dr. Russell -' that the colleges must be "suited to the
abilities and interests of the students. "

Mrs. Augusta Eppinga, Seidman's secretary brought Mrs. J udd's comments
to the attention of the writer in the fall of 1962. She stated that Mrs. J udd's
comments were well taken by Seidman and the CEFYC, but in the busy weeks of
the first Board meetings, the search for administrative help, the site contro-
versy, and the necessity of securing the million dollars, this comment of Mrs.
Judd was left unanswered. Also, Mrs. Judd had released her letter to all
news media without previously consulting with Seidman or others. This caused
some dismay in the CEFYC. It is far too early to make any judgment now
whether Mrs. J udd's fears that Grand Valley State College would compound
mediocrity were well founded. The catalog for the 1963 school year emphasizes
liberal arts education; on page eleven the entrance requirements are these:
"The minimum requirements for regular admission to the college are the
completion of an approved program of studies at an accredited high school and
the recommendation of the high school principal. The high school program
should include three years of English, three years of mathematics, science,
or a combination of both, and three years of social studies. No foreign
languages are required, but preference may be given to students with foreign
language proficiency.

"Applicants who do not meet these minimum requirements should arrange
to take the scholastic aptitude test offered by the College Entrance Examination

Board no later than March, 1963.

202

"The college reserves the right to waive the usual entrance requirements
in special circumstances."

Further interest in higher education throughout the state on the part
of Mrs. Judd is documented in the minutes of the Constitutional Convention of
Michigan in 1961. The proposals with which she was concemed--the boards of
control for state institutions of higher education--do not bear directly upon the
establishment of Grand Valley State College, and are, therefore, not here

reviewed.

- HT_h_e_Gr_'a_nd Valley citizens for a better _college proposal. Although the
statements made by a group called the Grand Valley Citizens for a Better
College came in July and August, 1961, a date beyond the historical scope of
this paper, their comments, in a way, support the comments made by Mrs.
Judd; however, they seem to have been made in a different spirit from hers.

The comments of this group were sent to all the news media, to each
member of the Board of Control, and to each member of the Citizens' Advisory
Committee, with a letter attached. (They appeared in the July 2, 1961, edition
of the Grand Rapids Press.) The attached letter stated that the committee
should set up admissions standards, that there should be no frill courses
in the new college, that mediocrity was not wanted, that a "college degree"
and ari'educatiori ‘were not synonymous with "learning," that marginal
students should not be admitted, and that academic standards should be kept

at a high level. The comments indicted the J amrich and Russell Reports

 

for their implications of suiting the educational offerings to fit the abilities
and interests of the students instead of selecting students whose interests
and abilities were suited to the curriculum. The letter urged that the Citizens'

Council appoint a new president who agreed with the above policies.

203

Apart from the above comments appearing in the letter to the Citizens'
Committee, the essence of the release to the news media and the Board
follows:

1. The new college should be dedicated to liberal education, for it had
the duty to supply reason and conscience in the social order to the body of
educated persons it would furnish to society.

2. The college should affirm that the end of a liberal education is achieved
when the student is brought to an understanding of enduring truths which govern man's
being: the principles of self-control and the dignity of man.

3. The end above should be sought through intellectual discipline exacting in
its character. which regards knowledge as an end in itself and infinitely more
valuable than simple utilitarian Skills.

4. The college should emphasize classical literature, moral philosophy,
language, history, pure sciences, logic, rhetoric, and religious knowledge.

It should avoid vague survey courses , general education, and similar substi-
tutes which provide passing acquaintance with a large body of knowledge but
no understanding of it.

5. The college should avoid vocationalism.

6. There should be a minimum of electives. There should be a recognition
of hierarchy in higher learning. The undergraduate often does not know how to
wisely choose alternatives.

7. The student body should be kept small.

8. The student who attends just for extra-curricular benefits should be
discouraged. There should be an emphasis upon the benefits of personal
relationships and a respect for individuality.

9. Commercialized programs of athletics which tend to weaken the quality
of education should be avoided.

204

10. The above principles should be maintained in admission policies. Any-
one who could not or would not benefit from them should be refused admission.

The group wanted the Board of Control to approve the above. The proposals
were signed by about thirty men.

On September 15, 1961, Seidman and members of the Board of Control

met with representatives of the Better Citizens' Group at the Morton Hotel

 

according to the MIKE“ Press of September 16. Seidman stated that
concern for what the students wanted did not necessarily mean that the college
would provide only what they want. Spokesmen for the group affirmed that they
felt that education for the masses was wrong. Seidman asked whether they
wanted education only for the top 10 per cent. The spokesmen said they would
not want to fix a figure. Steven Vander Wiele, a professor of English at
Calvin College, and a member of the group, stated that there should be an
emphasis upon the humanities. The group wanted the students to come up to
standards and opposed any college that created a curriculum to fit the abilities
of the students.

Richard M. Shuster, attorney, of Hastings, Michigan, a member of the
Citizens' Committee, sent a letter to Seidman. Seidman stated that he could
find no better refutation of the Alexander proposals. In his letter Shuster
makes these points: I

1. The theory of knowledge for the sake of knowledge is false. Knowledge
must be useful and applicable to produce either products or thought.

2. It is selfish to admit only those who can pass tests or who have proven
themselves. What about those who in spite of ability got poor grades or a poor
high school education or those who were weakly motivated in high school? It

is far better to decide after a year of college whether they are fit to be in college.

205

3. The salaries of even the most anti-pragmatic professors are paid for
by thoSe with utilitarian skills. V

4. The fact that some college survey courses are poor and the fact that
there are abuses by students in these types of courses does not mean that all
survey courses are no good.

5. An ivory-tower college is not desirable. The college does not exist .

for the faculty.

The Eldersveld letter. Dr. A. M. Eldersveld, then assistant clean at
Grand Rapids Junior College, prepared a nine-page statement in August, 1961.
It outlined five questions that needed answering in planning for the college, and
needed answering in this order: (1) For whom will college education be
provided? (2) What curricular offerings shall make up this college education?
A (3) How shall these curricula be taught? (4) Who shall teach? (5) What
type physical plant shall be constructed? Eldersveld stated that he was con-
cerned since the newspaper reports on the progress of the college had been
full of information on construction and administrative appointments but empty
of any information on the questions listed above. He felt that before buildings
should be planned, there should be some kind of idea of for what and for
whom they were planned. He then offered possible potential enrollment
figures for the new college when it opened and the kinds of curricula (students
might want, based upon Grand Rapids Junior College statistics, his assumption
being that a good share of those who would have attended Junior College would
seek admittance to the new college when it opened.

Eldersveld also made suggestions on new teaching techniques, such as were
later proposed at a conference in October, and raised the question of how the

school year would be divided.

206

In the fall of 1961, Dr. Eldersveld told the writer, who was then an
instructor at Grand Rapids J unior College, that he had written such an
article for publication in the Grand Rapids Press. He said that he had of—
fered the article to Seidman for Seidman's scrutiny. He mentioned at this
time that he had withheld the article and had not submitted it. A copy .
of a letter from Seidman to Eldersveld suggests why the article was
not printed in the _l_3_r_'_e_s_§_. The letter, dated September 5, 1961, asks
that Eldersveld consider not submitting the article to the newspapers.

The letter also states, however, that should Eldersveld desire to publish
the article, he should feel free to do so. The article was never submitted.

Later events which are revealed in the Grand Rapgis Press, in the Seidman

 

correspondence files, in the Board minutes, and in other materials show that

all the facts suggested by Mrs. Judd, by the Grand Valley Citizens for a

Better College, and by Eldersveld were studied, discussed, and considered

by the Board and by the administration of the new college as they Imdertook to

shape its character. Eldersveld said later that he became aware that there

was planning being done in the areas with which he was concerned and that he

felt that his article was not as necessary as he thought it was when he wrote

it. For example, the minutes of a meeting which took place in October, 1961.

are in the Seidman files. This meeting was called to formulate plans to develop

the campus and to determine how to meet the high expectations of incoming freshmm.
These points were minds: The curricular core would be liberal arts, not pro-

fessional courses. There would be a central learning center where study, research,

and discussions would be augmented by visual aids. Outstanding visiting professors

would conduct all-college courses for students and faculty. The faculty would have

at hand the use of the latest educational devices and methods. The incoming

students should not be frustrated, it was felt. The college should be a quality

 

conege,
assistan
Kalama
Dn Ar
State U
and Dr
fion,\
dang
a plat
I‘
thee.
daum
ing a
"Ac;
The
real
Seri

(tom

001).
Out

the

207
college. Participating in this meeting were Dr. James Albertson, executive
assistant to the president, Ball State University; Dr. Larry Barrett, dean,
Kalamazoo College; Dr. David Henderson, executive dean, Chatham College;
Dr. Armand Hunter, director, division of broadcasting services, Michigan
State University; Dr. Dan O'Dowd, dean, Michigan State University-Oakland;
and Dr. Allan Pfinster, visiting professor, center for study of higher educa-
tion, University of Michigan. The meeting was chaired by Dr. John Visser,
dean, Grand Rapids Junior College, on loan to Grand Valley State College as
a planning consultant.

Further evidence of concern over the character of the college is found in
the copies of application to the Ford Foundation for grants. One long proposal
dated May, 1961, is entitled "A Proposal for Flaming Curriculum and Build-
ing Needs of New Four-Year State College in Michigan" with a sub-title
"Academic Excellence with Maximum Efficiency in the Twenty-First Century. "
The proposal describes the unique opportunity at Grand Valley to do something
really different. The proposal seeks to bring together national leaders in a
series of planning conferences to shape the destiny of the new college, these
conferences to be held at intervals throughout the coming months.

And, memos, letters, statements by Seidman, and minutes of the Board
all testify that the quality of education offered at the new college was of utmost
concern. No appointment, from president to clerical help, was made with-
out considering what effect would be made upon the desired high quality of
the character of the new college.

It is not the purpose here to record‘ activity of this nature. These
examples are offered as indications that the same thorough planning con-

tinued after the establishment of the college as had occurred in the establish-

ment stages.

It was
mmmei
the cone]
and had '
was 2131;
mOVed t
CEFYC
View,
Were S.
Ceflsed
acthe
Counc-
tughus
Board
Was a
tion it
DeedE

int‘Er.

r600:
ineel

haw

208

CHAPTER XII
INTERVIEWS WITH TIE CEFYC

It was felt that whatever conclusions reached may have been formuled
in some instances through hunches and speculative guesses. To both verify
the conclusions and to identify certain points in the events that had occurred
and had been recorded, the members of the CE FYC were interviewed. Each
was asked the same set of questions (Table XV). One, James Idema, had
moved to Denver, Colorado. He was mailed the questions. Each of the
CE FYC members was mailed the interview questions previous to the inter—
view. Each was willing to take the time to discuss the questions and most
were still enthusiastic about the college, even though the CEFYC function had
ceased to exist for over two years. Two, Watkins and Dutcher, were still
active in the new college work. Dutcher as chairman of the Citizens' Advisory
Council, and Watkins who as a member of this group was organizing "college
nights" in various communities. Of course, Seidman, as chairman of the
Board of Control, was still deeply involved. Also, Bennett stated that he
was at the time of the interview concerned with the lack of vocational educa-
tion in Grand Rapids, He, as a manufacturing executive, felt that the community
needed more technological-vocational education at the secondary level. His
interests and work in education apparently continued.

The members of the CEFYC are successful men. Seidman's history is
recorded in Table XVI. Van Ess is a public accountant and was at the
inception of the CE FYC president of the University of Michigan Alumni Club.

David Dutcher, an attorney, is with a prominent Grand Rapids law firm, and

 

 

1. In the e
certain
crucial
Dan; E

2. Can yo
establi

magni

on im
Peopl

5. It 39¢
reSp
With-a
dIEa
that
With

60 HO“

con
Ina]

11. E

12.

209

Table XV. Interview Schedule with CEFYC

 

 

10.

11.

12.

 

L

In the establishment of any institution of such magnitude as GVSC , there are
certain periods of crisis. Can you identify those periods that you feel were
crucial to the successful outcome of the plans to establish the new college?
Date, nature of crisis, circumstances surrounding crisis.

Can you list in chronological order the highlights of the chronology cfathe
establishment of the new college? Begin in October, 1958, and J une, 1961.

This relates to number 1. What were the four or five hurdles of greatest
magnitude in order of magnitude.

This also relates to number 1. What are the four or five reasons, in order
on importance, why GVSC is today a reality. These reasons may be events,
people, relationships, anything.

It seems that the CEFYC was composed of dedicated, capable, enthusiastic,
respected, energetic young men. Without their coordinated efforts and
without the strong leadership provided by the chairman, their plans and
dreams might well have failed. Specifically, can you identify any factors

. that made the efforts of this committee succeed where several other groups

with similar aims failed?

How would you rank the factors of opposition to the establishment of the new
college if there were any that were identifiable, then or now. These factors
may be real, imagined, vocal, silent, organized, unorganized, overt, covert.

In your opinion, howirnportant was community support? I do not mean here
the support of organized groups that did sign resolutions supporting the
effort. I mean here the support of the bulk of the people, the majority
whose opinions are rarely heard, seldom offered, often ignored. Did you
once or do you now have any guess on how effective or necessary the
support of these people was in your efforts?

Why did you, personally, take an interest in this venture?

' Would you name ten people who you think were especially important in the

success of the effort. (include legislators, officials, etc.)

Do. you think the Grand Valley State College story would be a good public
school lesson on how a democracy works?

Do you feel that there are some events that had better not be resurrected?
(I do not have anything in mind; I just wonder whether you have. You need
not mention what it is if you do have anything in mind.)

When did you personally feel that the college would, in fact, exist?

I!

EDUCATI

U0 so NA)

ORGANIZ

CIVIC:

Table XVI.

_ EDUCATION:

U. S. NAVY:

ORGANIZATIONS:

CIVIC:

SPEAKING AND
WRITING:

EXTRA-CURRIC ULAR:

OCCUPATION:

210

L. William Seidman Biography

 

East Grand Rapids High School

Dartmouth College - A. B. 1943

Harvard Law School - L. L. B. 1948

University of Michigan Business School - MoB.A. 1949

Lt. , U. S. Naval Reserve (Destroyers) 1942-46
Bronze Star

Phi Beta Kappa (Dartmouth)

Beta Theta Pi (Dartmouth)

Beta Gamma Sigma (University of Michigan)

Beta Alpha Psi (Michigan State Univ. - Honorary)

Lincoln's Inn (Harvard)

Michigan Bar Association

American Bar Association

American Institute of Accountants (Member, Committee
on Fedendl Taxation)

Michigan Assn. of Certified Public Accountants
(Member, Federal Taxation Committee)

Board member:
Blodgett Memorial Hospital
Youth Commonwealth for Boys (Chairman)
Grand Rapids Councfl on World Affairs
Grand Rapids Art Gallery
Chairman, Citizens' Advisory Committee re 4-year
college for Grand Rapids area

Speaker - Controllers Institute, Florida Estate
Planning Council, Texas Tax Institute, Michigan
Bar Association, Young Presidents Organization,
Tax Executives Institute, Michigan CPAs, etc.

Lecturer - Practicing Law Institute, New York, N. Y. ,
Wagner College, Staton Island, N. Y. , etc.

Articles - The Tax Magazine, Insurance Law Journal
Commercial .& Financial Chronicle, University of
Michigan Business Review, Banking Law Journal

Member of faculty of Michigan State University
Extension Service (teaches an "investment"
course at Grand Rapids)

University Club, Peninsular Club, Kent Country Club,
Kentree Polo Club, Macatawa Yacht Club,
Thornapple Slopes , Inc.

Enjoys siding in the winter and plays polo in summer.
Partner in Seidman A Seidman.

 

 

was voted
in 1961.
group, I
specializ
F. Willi
on the B<
Robert
Fum‘m
Martin
rePres
Post
Telep]
ASSOC
an avj
atton
TheSt
their

and ‘

I‘eSO

SDe.

211

was voted, young man of the year by the Grand Rapids Chamber of Commerce

in 1961. Robert G. Watkins is president of States Associates, an insurance
group. He has a law degree from Northwestern University and his firm
specializes in insurance counseling for large business and industrial groups.

F. William McKee, attorney, is City. Attorney for Grand Rapids. ' His wife is

on theBoard of Governors of Wayne State University. She, too, is an attorney.
Robert Bennett, J r. , vice president in charge of manufacturing for Stow-Davis
Furniture Company, is an engineering graduate from the University of Michigan.
Martin Buth, who operates a highly successful dairy farm, is also a state
representative. James Idema, at the time of this writing, is with the Dagger
Post. Harry Lawford is Southern District Manager for the Michigan Bell
Telephone Company. He was president of the Michigan State University Alumni
Association at the time of his work with the CE FYC and stated that he maintained
an avid interest in Michigan State University affairs. Richard VanderVeen,
attorney, is active in politics, and is with a successful Grand Rapids law office.
These men are all around middle-age; several were under forty when they began
their activities with the CEFYC. They seemed articulate, educated, good listeners,
and: demonstrated a concern over the community in which they lived.

There was almost unanimous agreement in replying to question one that
resolving the separationof interests by the two alumni groups was most essential.
If the two groups who each wanted a branch could not be gotten together, the effort
of the CEFYC would not succeed. Thus, the presidents of the two groups, Van
Ess and Lawford, were asked to serve on the CE FYC. Seidman was not partial
to either group. There was agreement, too, that the legislative actions were
cruCial to the success--the sanctioning of the J amrich study, the passage of
House Bill 47 7, and the appropriation made in April, 1961. They pointed most

specifically, hOwever, to gaining sanction for the J amrich study. There was

alsc 1g
intereSI

The
drive 5
was 01'!
Aquina;
When a;
hardly

Ide'
Viewed

Darrow

Stated

DOSitiv

knew h'
31100 881

212"

also agreement that the site controversy was crucial in that the Muskegon
interests attempted to block appropriations.

There were other crisis points identified. Several stated that the fund
drive success was a crisis point. Two stated that the support of the community
was crucial. Only one pointed towards the necessity of getting Calvin College,
Aquinas College and Hope College support. He stated that these college presidents,
when approached, gave approval, and that they foresaw that their colleges could
hardly provide for students from their own denominations or faiths.

Identifying exact crucial points in time Was not easy for most of the men inter-
viewed. Those who had worked with the legislature, however, pointed to the
tnarrOw time margin with which both the J amrich study sanction and House Bill
477 were released from committees. Any further delay on each of these would
have killed the bill or resolution. These were points at 3Whi0h success would
be continued or delayed--even stopped entirely. They all felt that the bad
financial condition of the State of Michigan made the legislative approval all
the more remarkable.

The chronology, question two, follows almost exactly the arrangement of
the study itself. The hurdles, question three, identify with the crisis points.

There was unanimous agreement that the one reason for the success of
the venture was the leadership of L. William Seidman. The interviewees
stated that without Seidman the effort would not have succeeded. They were
positive in this belief.

Initially, one member said, events were not carefully planned. No one
knew how events would emerge. Seidman knew, he said, that if they were to
succeed, they had to get the conflicting forces in existence to join, or at least,

to not oppose. So, he said, the CEFYC went on ahead, and while other groups
conflicted, they proceeded. He thought Seidman's skill in avoiding headon

conflict
essentiz

The
and the

Press '

De(
art
th’i

leE

Ar.
1111
St.

a.

213

conflict with others and his skill in winning them to their cause was the
essential factor.

There was also considerable agreement that the open lines of commtmication
and the role of the newspapers was an important ingredient of success. Full
press coverage of meetings and events was noted as being significant.

Also, the fact that the CEFYC was made up of people who were representative
of different factors of influence was of extreme importance for the success of
the venture. The alumni groups were represented; manufacturing interests were
represented; the Chamber of Commerce was represented; both political parties
were represented; the Rotary was represented; and in the larger Citizens' group
there was representation from all possible influence areas.

Another reason for success which all those interviewed agreed upon was the
practice of continuous presentation of the facts to any group, no matter how
small. Watkins stated that many times a member of the CEFYC would find
himself addressing a group of ten ladies in someone's living room, presenting
the facts of the J amrich Report while balancing a cup of tea on one knee, hold-
ing a cookie in one hand, and keeping a sheaf of statistics intact on the other
knee.

There was also agreement that the lack of opposition on the part of the
people "of the community was extremely important. Had they opposed it, the
area legislators would not have favored it. Concerning the area legislators,
two active participants in the opposition party stated that one reason the area
legislators acted is precisely because had they not done work in the legislature
for the establishment of the college, they risked defeat in the next election.

And since the cause of the new college was favored by the community, the
incumbents were compelled to take positive action. One of the campaign

statements of the opposition to the incumbents is always "they never do anything

for the area they represen "

Time
importan
had to do

Other
money tr
actin'tie:
satisfam
identific
for solu
an expe;
relation
by Seve
Who We:
Vander“
hating

Repubii

214

Time was a factor, an important one. The interviewees stated that an
important reason was that most of the CEFYC had the time to do what they
had to do. The nature of their occupations, they stated, gave them this time.

Other factors mentioned were these: their willingness to spend personal
money to pay for their expenses; the kinds of wives who would not inhibit their
activities; Seidman's ability to get people to do hard work for no pay; personal
satisfaction of working for the college; and the approach to the problem:
identification of the need, analysis of the need, presentation of the need, plan
for solution of the need. Several members emphasized the fact that they had
an expert's report, the facts of which were not easfly controverted. Political
relationships with the legislature and the governor were also cited as important
by several. They stated that there was a good relationship with the legislators
who were Republican and also good relationships with the Democratic governor.
VanderVeen and McKee were strong Democrats. Seidman was bi—partisan,
having supported VanderVeen in his bid for Congress and having run on Romney's
, Republican slate in 1962.

Two persons interviewed placed considerable importance upon the role of
labor and its support and the support of the Wayne County Democrats. Had
these opposed it, they said it would never have gotten through the legislature.

In responding the question six, ranking the factors of opposition, there were
scant replies. The only real opposing force seems to have been the Muskegon
force that emerged over the site selection. One stated, however, that there
was also little cooperation in getting figures for the Jamrich study from the
Muskegon area. Others referring to Muskegon, cited the work of Dr. Arnold
Ott. He, they said, was of tremendous help in getting what cooperation there

was from Muskegon.

The:
support
support
Yet, Lb
was ag:
meet'm
organ

Th
comm:
it wer
lack 0
did no

lack (3

he We
harde
beC 211
Mich

Slate

his j
SDht

£01-

an:

Qu1

215

There were conflicting replies to the question of how important community
support was. All agreed that it was necessary. Yet, all agreed that active
support from people was not really essential--that the leaders were important.
Yet, the real work, it was agreed, was done by a relatively small group. There
was agreement that without the incessant educating activity of speeches and
meetings the effort might have failed. There was agreement that all the
organizations' support was essential.

This paradox was resolved by most in two ways. They stated that without
community approval, the legislators would not have introduced the bill, and if
it were introduced, would not have supported it. Furthermore, they said that
lack of community opposition was a snrt of favorable negative support. They
did not state that they thought the community apathetic; rather, they felt that
lack of opposition did signify approval of what was being done.

The reasons each gave for participating were candid and varied. Each felt
he was involved because he chose to, and the more he became involved, the
harder he worked. Several realized they were first asked to participate
because of their sphere of influence; Van Ess, president of the University of
Michigan alumni; Lawford, influential in the Rotary and president of Michigan
State University alumni; Dutcher, past president of the Junior Chamber of
Commerce; McKee, active in Democratic politics. Yet, not one denied that
his interest and involvement and work was probably more important than his
sphere of influence. Van Ess stated that he never before enjoyed such hard work
for no pay.

The same names emerge as important to the success of the venture when
the CEFYC were asked to name important people. Outside Seidman
and the other members of the CEFYC , several people were singled

out as having been especially influential. Richard Gillett, who

 

. Ar—n

was influe
Charles 1
was vita]
Arnold (
The Gr:
mentiox
Greem
basins
eight.
to. F
ment
Robe
of Sn
801m
man
arcl

Han

The

216

was influential in the raising of the million, is singled out by all. Representative
Charles Boyer was identified as a man of respect and stature whose support

was vital in the legislature. The work of J amrich was repeatedly mentioned.
Arnold Ott's influence made Muskegon less a strumbling block than it was.

The Grand Haven group, McCall, Van Volkenburg, Sherwood, and Kistler are
mentioned. Frey is given credit for chairing the ftmd drive. Stafiord, of
Greenville, is hailed. Watkins' suburban and eight-county contracts with his
business interests was extremely important. He had personal friends in many
eight-county towns. David Butcher's work with the Citizens' Council is. referred
to. Robert Howlett, who was Kent County Republican Party Chairman, is also
mentioned as being the stimulus to gain a response from the area legislators.
Robert Pew, of the Citizens' Advisory Committee is mentioned by one as being
of such socio-economic status that he could easily gain high level capital per-
sonnel support. Philip Buchen, an extremely successful attorney and business-
man, lent close support to the effort. Also, Mrs. Nancy Bryant, who kept
archives, was mentioned as were Governors Williams and Swainson, Raymond
Hatch, and several legislators.

What seems significant is that the same people emerge as being influential.
There is unsolicited agreement that the same people were responsible for
. most of the success-not at the exclusion of others, but that the results
depended upon the leadership given by these people.

There was unequivocal agreement that the process of establishing Grand
Valley State College was in the fine st ideal Democratic tradition; that nothing
even quasi-legal was done, and that if the story were translated, it could be
sent to all parts of the globe as an example of Democracy in action. And apart
from a fear on the part of some that a recollection of disagreements caused by

the site controversy might be unwise, no one expressed any reservations over

resurrect
Most
aPpropri
when Ho
dollars '
dollars
seemed
smdy,
Th
fact, ‘

total;

217

resurrecting any events. f

Most of those interviewed felt the college was a reality when the legislature

appropriated its first budget request. Two said they felt assured of its success

“when House Bill 477 was passed. One felt it was a reality when the million
dollars were raised, and said the Grand Rapids Foundation grant of 200, 000
dollars was the capping event. He stated that the Grand Rapids Foundation
seemed to be a key factor, since Foundation funds had also financed the J amrich
study.

The conclusions and implicants that follow are based upon the historical

fact, upon the interviews , and upon inductions made from an involvement in the

total process.

CHAPTER XIII
CONCLUSIONS

The sequence of events and activities that made the new college a reality
w a s not the result of any magic although some of those interviewed shook
their heads in wonder as they reflected upon the things that they had done.
This chapter will attempt to identify the factors that made their efforts
successful and will suggest that is implied for others faced with a similar
problem of community significance. For although the establishment of Grand
Valley State College is a unique occurrence, the conditions that brought success
to the efforts of those involved seem not to be unique.

R. W. Gerard, (44-134 to 146) in an investigation into what is the best way
to prepare qualified men for creative social science research, made certain
conclusions after investigating how present institutions of higher learning
were developed. Apart from the discussion of the best way to prepare qualified
men, the analysis of the nature of the growth of institutions is pertinent here.

Gerard states that people who lead in the establishment of innovations are
usually young, uncommitted people who operate in times of social unrest.
Should their efforts succeed and the innovations they suggest be accepted and
institutionalized, sets of formal rules and requirements are necessary to
regulate the numbers of people who are attracted to the new institution.

Gerard states that new organizations of higher education are successful
if the following conditions prevail: 1, a social need exists; 2, a state of social
stress and transition is current; 3, there is personal leadership; 4, sufficient
funds are ready; 5, there is adequate content in the field for which the

218

institution er:
a personal i:
Factors
to dispense
munity; 2, i
see or force‘
matter fielt
Factors
these: thei
by Other es
and other 0
Success its
interest gr

TW'O 0U

 

Whitehe ad ,

 

T11acie

219

institution exists--students, subjects, materials, etc.; and 6, there exists
a personal interest on the part of the community leaders.

Factors that inhibit success in establishment of a new organization established
to dispense higher education are these: 1, a conservative or reactionary com-
munity; 2, interference of vested interests with selfish motives; 3, inability to
see for foresee changing goals; 4, inability to efficiently reorganize subject
matter fields; 5, perennial conflict between teaching and research.

Factors that allow consolidation and enable maintenance and growth are
these: the prestige of the bakcers of the institution, accreditation and support
by other established agencies, and the recognition and power of the trustees
and other officials. Conversely, Gerard states that deteriorating factors are
success itself, increasing size, creeping routinization, control by special
interest groups, and the victory of conservative routine over creative imagination.

Two other studies in leadership, one by J. F. Thaden and one by T. N.
Whitehead, identify characteristics of leaders. Whitehead discusses also the
phenomenon of change as it is brought about by the leader.

Thaden (51) studied the characteristics of leaders using those found in W_h_9_'_s_
m as his population. He concluded that prominent "leaders are predominantly
men; middle-aged or older, college-education, engaged chiefly in professional
services, working in larger metropolitan centers, and are very much joined
with their fellow men in a multiplicity of diversified types of organizations.
Leaders are social contact makers. They have adapted themselves to. a wide
range of social relations. They are less isolated and less individualistic than
the average layman. "

Whitehead (41-72, 73) who discusses leadership in a free society analyzes
the steps leading to a technical advance. He states that the following steps and

socio-psycholo'gical phenomena obtain in change situations:

220

1. The leader shares with the group a profound loyalty to the technical
procedures by which they carry on their "way of life. "

2. He is trusted _as one with skill and as a guardian of social customs.

3. He, being one with intelligence, obtains unusual insight into casual
relations in his procedures, and he begins to reflect.

4. He continues in his traditional procedures not because of society's sanc-
tions, but because he "sees why. ” He has shifted ground unnoticed by himself
and by the group.

5. Sooner or later, he stumbles upon a new way. His way is accepted. The

group follows the leader because he, to them, is the right man.

Personal characteristics 9f the CEFYC and others. The personal character-
istics of the members of the CEFYC bear some similarity to those characteristics
identified by Thaden (51) . His conclusions that leaders are predominantly
middle-aged or older, who are college-educated, engaged chiefly in professional
services, work in larger metropolitan centers, and are often joined with their
fellow men in diversified types of organizations, (with the exception that many
were below middle-age) is borne out in this study of the establishment of Grand
Valley State College. It is also verified here that they are social contact
makers, and that they adapt themselves to a wide range of social relations.

The facts of Seidman' s activities are partially set forth in Table XVII.

At the present time, January, 1963, he is engaged in additional activities

that go beyond those connected with the new college: the establishment of a new
television station; the opening of a branch office of the firm, Seidman J; Seidman,
in Switzerland; the duties connected with serving on the advisory board of

Governor George Romney, recently elected to that post, and other activities.

221

Whitehead's statements concerning the leader: that he shares the group's
loyalty to the procedures by which they carry on their way of life, is also
demonstrated by the manner in which the CEFYC operated.

Their activities and the methods by which they gained their admitted end,
the establishment of the new college, could serve as an object lesson in
democratic procedures. There is no demonstrable action they took that was
quasi-legal or questionable. They operated within the framework of legal,
social, and moral consent. Friendships were earned, not bought. Although
Seidman himself is wealthy, the fact of his wealth was not in itself the
determining factor that made the CEFYC successful. True, he invested his
personal money into the effort, but the investment of money is dimunitive
compared with the investment of time, talent, energy, and physical effort.

The statements of Whitehead that the leader is trusted as one with skill
and is a guardian of social customers; is intelligent and gains insight into
things; and that his actions, based upon insights, are followed by others because
i of their faith in him are also demonstrable in this study.

For the initial ambivalence, and groping for procedure evident on the part
of CEFYC in late 19 58 and very early in 19 59 soon disappears. That there was
confidence in both means and ends is clear from the decisive tone of letters
and memos in the correspondence files 0f 19 59 and continuing years studied
here. That there was support for Seidman's leadership is also evident from
the close cooperation and firm support given Seidman by his close associates
and by the county—wide committees.

Seidman stated that he was not in his field at all when he began, being
educated in law and being a certified public accountant. To engage in activities
that would involve him in this ambiguous area, education, where experts them-

selves are in disagreement, was not an involvement that a prudent man would

222

blithely step into. The nature of leadership is such that it often transcends
expertness in a specialty.

Seidman and the members of the CEFYC displayed such desirable qualities
as enthusiasm, integrity, decisiveness, intelligence, and faith in their beliefs.
Their activities were governed by a sense of direction, and their correspondence
displays friendliness towards their fellow men.
A Those things that are hazardous to leadership as are mentioned by Ordway
Tead (34-214) such as love of power, emotional instability (sullenness, anger,
despair, moroseness), obsessive fears, inferiority feelings, tendency to
rationalize, sexual frustrations and maladjustments, and sadistic tendencies
are not evident in the facts studied here. Rather, the principals of the establish-
ment of Grand Valley State College seem to have had more than the average man's
share of intelligence, dependability, altruism, socio-economic status, and ability
to cope with problems as they arose. These qualities are the same as those
Stogdill (33-56, 57) identifies with the leader. Seidman and his cohorts seem
also to have been blessed with qualifies of initiative, persistence, self-confidence, _
altertness, and insight into problem situations. They displayed a desire to co-
operate with others, and the variety sources of letters that were sent to the
CEFYC indicate they were popular with other people in the community.

This study also supports the statements of Gerard. In the eight-county area

the social need was established by the J amrich and Russell Reports. There was

 

a potential state of stress; certainly more than just potential in the minds of

the leaders and in the minds of whomever they could reach with the facts of the
two surveys. Other studies in population and social problems by Philip Hauser,
J. F. Thaden, and Dav1d Goldberg (7, 36 and 6) indicate that the problems

brought on by a booming population growth will have to be met by an educated

‘f

223

and articulate citizenry. There was no lack of personal leadership and funds
were made available. What Gerard refers to as content seemed certain: stu-
dents would appear and materials for them would be provided should the new
college succeed. The personal interest of the community was generated by the
CEFYC and their associates; all the ingredients that Gerard sees as essential

to the success of a new institution seem to have been present.

Community characteristics and inhibiting factors. Certain factors which
are generally recognized as inhibiting the success of a new public venture were
also present: a conservative or reactionary community and interference by
vested interests with selfish motives. Seidman stated that the CE FYC did not
pray for divine help, but they did have a faith in the mixture of human will
approved by a mystic force: their theme songs were "High Hopes" and "Some-
body Up There Loves Me. " Both Seidman and Buchen stated that they had done
research on the establishment of new institutions of higher education in the
United States, and that they had been able to find no new college that had been
- established as Grand Valley State College had been established within a quarter
of a century. There had been branch colleges and several municipal colleges,
scores of community-jlmior colleges, many private colleges converted into state—
supported colleges, but no new institutions such as this one. And this occurred
in a community that has been labeled the stereotype of the arch-conservative,
arch-reactionary community. Their success refuted the gloomy prophecies
of local seers and seem to belie the statements made by those who had pointed
to the inhibiting factor of a conservative or reactionary community.

Grand Rapids, Kent County, Ottawa County, and a good share of Allegan,
Muskegon, and Newaygo counties have a substantial population of conservative

Dutch. These districts are traditionally Republican. That they are reactionary
may or may not be true.

ifthect

l
emanation I

 

the new coli
a college c1.

311d that it s'.
only a mute-
in Lansing,

for a new ct

 

which endoi
favorable (I
The p0.
in direct c
States, Ir
PhImIEy,

that the S

224

If the commimity is conservative and a bit reactionary, there must be an
exfianation why the conservative element did not inhibit the establishment of
the new college. One ventures to state that the apparent advantages of having
a college close to home may have been important to the conservative people
and that it seemed good business to even the most conservative Hollander, with
only a mute few exceptions. Even Geerlings, the foe of government spending
in Lansing, was won over. It made good sense to Hutchinson to spend money
for a new college to get a bargain in education (page 96 ). And the organizations
which endorsed the new college resolutions (Tables V and VI) are not traditionally
favorable to governmental spending.

The position of the Grand Rapids Chamber of Commerce was, for example,
in direct contrast to the position of the Chamber of Commerce of the United

States. In the February 1, 1963, Michigan Education Journal (47-412) Ladd

 

Plumley, United States Chamber of Commerce president, is quoted as stating
that the so-called shorgage of college and university facilities " exists only

in the minds of those who wish to see the Federal government take over the
responsibility for managing and financing higher education. " Plumley also
states that academic facilities are adequate for immediate enrollment increases
of 300, 000 to 400, 000 students. Yet the Grand Rapids Chamber of Commerce
supported the resolution calling for the establishment of the new college and
sponsored the first meeting called on January 7, 19 59, which kicked off the
successful venture. Frey, as president of the Grand Rapids Chamber of Commerce,
is representative of the kinds of people who backed the new college. The activi-
ties and behavior of the Grand Rapids Chamber of Commerce do not support any
statements that the community's conservatism inhibited the establishment of

the new college.

225

It was good business for Grand Rapids in more ways than one. The initial
economic benefits of building contracts were obvious, and other benefits that
come from having a college in the area are not tangible but real. Further-
more, the state would bear the burdm of supporting the college in years hence.

There are indications that the conservatives in the community are becoming
moderate in their views. Charles Feenstra, a conservative, was defeated by a
young Republican moderate in the last state elections, and Perry Greene, who
retired, was replaced by another young Republican moderate. Another indica-
tion of modern thought invading the community is this: the Holland School
Board has just within the past two years completed a high school that was built
to accommodate a radically new curriculum, a curriculum that breaks away from
established, traditional, scheduling and methods. This is not an indication of
backward thinking. The essential features of the new school were the subject

of two recent articles appearing in The Nation's Schools. (434 5)

 

Probably more important as an inhibiting force was the element that had
selfish interests as motives for objecting to the new college. One identifiable
person was Donald Seyferth, who vigorously opposed the new college for
various reasons, not the least of which was its not being located in Muskegon.
For though it may well have been allegiance to conservatist ideals that prompted
his opposition, his letters and his speeches indicate that he sought to keep
Muskegon money in Muskegon for Muskegon (pages 63 and 13 5)

James Seyferth's pamphlet (53) also indicates this philosophy, here advocating
keeping Michigan money in Michigan for Michigan.

And there seems to be little doubt from the Muskegon Chronicle articles

 

(pages 133 and 135 ), from Stafford's editorial (pages .153: 154)
and from Achterhoff's and Kammerer's statements (pagesl37 . 14. that the

college was wanted in Muskegon because it would be economically good for

Muskegon.
attitude w]
why it shc
Thus
personal
the “em
But
Willem
Was in
CODEg
Wealtl
T
an e)
to of
Som
ing

1ea(

app
the
lot:
anc-
the
0m
I10

1110
the

226

Muskegon. The Grand Rapids Building Trades Council- expressed this same
attitude when the Allendale site was nearly decided upon: they saw no reason
why it should not be in Grand Rapids, perhaps eying fat building contracts.

Thus, it seems that more vigorous opinions came from those who saw
personal wants threatened, either for a self or for a commmity, than from
the "conservative community" as a whole.

But the existence of poverty in the presence of what could become a beneficsnt
opulence did loom large. Not real poverty, and not real beneficence, but what
was in the relationship to each other a have and have-not relationship. The
college would bring to whatever community in which it located a measure of
wealth.

There was the possibility of state expenditures of millions of dollars over
an extended period. The building and services expenditures alone tempted many
to offer sites. The real estate development in the community would realize
someone a profit. The college planners took precautions against adverse zon-
ing and planned carefully to forestall any "carnival" atmosphere along roads
leading to the college.

In fact, in one letter, mention is made of the difference between the
approaches to Michigan State University from the west on Grand River and
the east on Grand River, suggesting that the establishment of a jumble of odd
lots of hamburger stands and trailer courts be forestalled by adequate zoning
and planning. But, whether there be hamburger stands or split level homes,
there will be profits. And none of the communities were of splendor and
opulence. Thus, in the face of the prospect of opulence where there had been
no opulence, the land development companes were formed as the college became
more and more a reality. That there was no more struggle over the site than

there was is some evidence that there was no subterfuge involved in the part

 

of the B03
site backe
gent and a
rationale :
used in th
from the 1
by a new :
The CEFE
in Such a
to any of .
'0 gain th
Others ha
W
site back.
aCtiviues

Spent mlg

allow COD
institufio
recogniti

That
net withc
citizens.
With a la
vice‘prg

also a s

 

227

of the Board of Control in the site selection as was suggested by the Muskegon
site backers (Chapter VII). It also indicates again that facts based upon intelli-
gent and authoritative investigation are hard to refute when they are used as the
rationale for decision. The Muskegon interests did refute the facts that had been
used in the selection of the site; but the overwhelming weight of the facts gotten
from the university and other speciality experts was too much to be dispelled
by a new set of facts gathered by what Stafford identified as "selfish" interests.
The CE FYC and the Board of Control had never conducted any of their activities
in such a way that any selfish interests on the part of any could be attributed

to any of their actions. Achterhoff, however, the leader of the Muskegon fight
to gain the college, admittedly had real estate near the proposed Muskegon site;
others had said that the new college should be viewed as a new industry--the

Muskegon Chronicle used the words lure and win when reporting on Muskegon

 

site backer's activities. This type of attitude was never apparent from CEFYC
activities. In fact, the total of the time spent by each and the personal funds

spent might make one wonder just why they did it anyway.

Sociggeconomic and presiigg [53915213. Gerard also reviews factors which

' allow consolidation and growth, among which are prestige of the backers of the
institution, accreditation and support by other established agencies, and the
recognition and power of the trustees and other individuals.

That the members of the CEFYC and the Citizens' Advisory Committee were
not without prestige is apparent from an examination of the occupations of these
citizens. On the CEFYC were three attorneys, two accountants (one a CPA
with a law degree), two insurance company representatives, one industrial
vice-president, one commercial utility executive, and one farm owner who was

also a state representative. All these occupations rank high on the socio-economic

 

index scales|
Advisory Cc
110 membe
architects,
chemist, f.
salaried n
and propr
Status. 1
0f prime
Committ
of Consic
A cl:
thelesS
396). 1~

pails-In:

228

index scales in Reiss (25—238, and 263 to 275). The members of the Citizens'
Advisory Committee also rank high on socio-economic status indices. Of the
110 members of the Citizens' Committee there were three physicians, two
architects, five bankers, eight attorneys and judges, four clergymen, a
chemist, five bankers, two accountants, ten local public officials, twenty
salaried managers, owners, and proprietors, four retail trade managers

and proprietors, five editors, and reports, and others of occupations that have
status. In nearly all class-status indices occupation and source of income are
of prime importance. The names of most of the members of the Citizens'
Committee are not uncommonly found in the newspapers; in fact, several are
of considerably more prominence than any of the CE FYC members.

A classification that differs from socio-economic rating scales but never-
theless classifies occupations into broad categories is found in Krout (16—392 to
396). Krout says: "Perhaps the most significant evidence of the cultural
patterning of social roles comes from the field of occupational activity.
Occupation means a goal-seeking activity. And occupational roles serve to
differentiate the group's membership and also tend to account for social
stratification. In America one can find no less than eighteen occupational
groupings which may be subsumed under six major 'class' headings represent-
ing cultural strata. " These cultural strata, Krout says, are social status
levels determined by freedom and frequency of association and general similarity
of cultural values. The eighteen occupational groupings and the six major
"classes" Krout identifies as follows:

1. Multimillionaire or supercapitalist

(international banker or stockbroker)

2. Millionaire. industrialist

(large scale manufacturer)

 

 

Class

kl

Clas

C13,.

C1.

229

3. Political executive
(governor, congressman, judge, mayor, etc.)

Class II T_h_e_ upper status "middle" w

 

4. Business executive
(Superintendent, bank president, vice-president, cashier, etc.)
5. Small manufacturer
(engaged in specialty manufacturing)
6. Independent or semi-dependent professional
(lecturer, solois't, doctor, lawyer, writer, actor, etc.)
7. Dependent professional
(engineer, teacher, research man, reporter, musician, pharmacist, etc.)
Class III The lower status "middle" _gro_up
8. Middle-class merchant
(jobber, store owner, etc.)
9. Farm owner or large-size farm operator
Class IV flew status "working" group
10. WPA (professional and skilled workers)
11. Petty political or business jobholder
(inspector, clerk, mailman, bookeeper, etc.)
12. Artisan or skilled craftsman
13. NYA (high school and college worker)
Class V The lower status "working" mpg
14. Unskilled laborer
(farm hand, bod-carrier, logger, etc.)
15. Sharecropper

16. PWA (construction) worker

230

Class VI The economically dependent (status-less) gro__up_

17. The unemployed

18. The relief population

Krout has listed, in addition to the above major pgsitive status classes,

a seventh, negative status group, consisting of culturally unapproved "vocational"
groups,

19. The (acknowledged) shyster lawyer

20. The (acknowledged) medical quack

21. The (acknowledged) loan shark

22. The gambler

23. The taxi dancer

24. The drug-peddler

25. The vice-promoter

26. The prostitute

27. The institutional inmate

Of the CEFYC members, none could be classed lower than Class II of
Krout's classifications, the dairy farmer of Class III also belonging in Class
I by virtue of his being a state legislator. Of the Citizens' Groups, none of
ofthose in Table VII, page 49 ., fall below Class II, and of those in Table VIII
and Table XIV, where occupations are not Hated, investigation bears out that
fewer than five per cent fall below Class II.

Furthermore, the prestige of the studies indicating the need for a new college
was an important factor. When a study is performed by experts who carry with
them their university status, the average citizen is hardly apt to challenge the
statistics-mar one of some community standing or wealth or position. Modern
man is not too far removed from the time of the witch doctor who with some

mumbo-jumbo could terrify or sooth, depending upon his purposes. The

231

January 7, 1959, and the November 30, 1959, meetings at which the studies
werei'_'translated" by the CEFYC into a plea for action by the legislature
and the community were successful. The success was not accidental, nor
would the meetings have been planned had Seidman and his committee not
been fairly sure that the prestige of the sponsors (in the first instance

the Grand Rapids Chamber of Cemmerce, and in the second instance, the
Citizens' Committee) and the prestige of the reports themselves would tend
to compel the legislators, the educators, the newspapers, the businessmen

and other citizens to endorse their efforts.

Opposition and leadership commitment. Whether or not one agrees with
the expressions of Seyferth and of Judd, one must recognize that although
Seyferth may have been motivated by reactionary views and a sort of selfish—
ness for h__i§_community and fistate; it took courage and conviction to defy
the "sacrosanct" Russell and J amrich Reports. His figures and statements
do indicate that there is some need for concern when the numbers of students
who do not return after their initial year at college is greater than the number
who will attend any new college by 1970. Also, J udd's interpretation of the

philosophy underlying the Russell Report and the J amrich Report is that of

 

an analytical mind. It took considerable courage on her part to make her

assertions opposing the next college. Her letter indicates another thing:

she took seriously the request to tender her opinions concerning the J amrich

M in writing, a request made by Seidman on November 30, 1959.
Gerard's first principle is that people who lead in the establishment of

innovations are usually young, uncommitted people. It could be added here,

that if they start out uncommitted, they soon become committed. The CEFYC

' became committed. Their title establishes that. Community unconcern worked

232

favorably for them at first; one might say, that continuous total community un-
concern works favorably for any cause in America if the backers of the cause
can successfully gain their end outside of total community sanction such as an
election in .which a high percentage of registered voters vote. When concern
arrives, it is often too late. The Muskegon apathy referred to on page 134
is an example of that. Cynics state that any cause can succeed if the leaders
can work when not too many know what is happening. This does not imply that
the CEFYC were clouding their activity; rather, they sought community
interest. The fact that there was not more opposition similar to Mrs. Judd's
is striking evidence of lack of community thought and speculation on what all
was implied in the advocation of a new college.

Thus, the question arrives, did Seidman and the CEFYC really want frank
comment and discussion, or, were they looking for total approbation from those

to whom they gave the J amrich Report after the November 30, 1959, meeting?

 

Gerard states that leaders usually begin uncommitted. But, as shown by the
activities of the CE FYC, they become committed. And, becoming committed,
will they tolerate dissension? Mrs. Judd resigned, apparently feeling she could
not honestly work for something she did not believe in. Gerard states that
should these uncommitted people succeed and should the. innovations they suggest
he accepted, sets of formal rules and requirements are necessary to regulate
the numbers of people who are attracted to the new institution. At the time of
the J amrich presentation on November 30, 19 59, was the innovation, the new
institution, a reality in the minds of CEFYC ? If so, were the rules and regula-
tions "set" already so that dissension would destroy the institution? There

is no absolute evidence that there was any intelerance on the part of the CE FYC
of new ideas or suggestions. Any blatant opposition was fought against with the

weapons of logic and facts. But when the basic facts were questioned, there was

233

no fight. Logicians say, always question first the premises; that often destroys
the argument. But what does one do when the holder of the premise will not
do battle over it and when the majority support the premise? Mrs. Judd

resigned.

Inter-institutional relationshiLS. Gerard states that the new institution

 

tends to be strengthened by accreditation and support of other institutions.

The new college, although it has not yet received accreditation (and may not
until it is well under way), has received recognition and support of other major
institutions of higher education. This support and recognition was sought early
and received. How was this support and recognition attained? .Was it given
through good will and benevolence on the part of the others, or was it given in
the hope that there might accrue some benefit to the others. All correspondence
and information indicate that the major universities gave aid out of a spirit of
responsibility and professional ethics. Yet, there are hints--Hannah's concern
that the University of Michigan was seeking to gain control (page 116 ), 'IErrill's

statements (page . 17 ), and the article in the Michigan Daily (page114)

 

--that the CEFYC or the Board of Control may have played its advantages.

It was a newly formed institution. If any of the other institutions of higher
education ofiered aid, the new college would gain, certainly, but so would the
institution offering assistance. It was a sort of institutional ploy, higher-
educational institution-one-upmanship. And Grand Valley State College bene-
fited from the game. Seidman stated in a conversation that the CEFYC was
able to function so well in achieving its purpose because while the University
of Michigan and Michigan State University groups each wondered what the other
might do next, they, the CEFYC, went ahead with the plans to establish a new

college, not entering any interinstitutional battle; rather, they found that by

giving the large institutions a voice in the planning of the new college, the
large institutions felt less threatened by the fact of the establishment of the

new college.

Yoluptary enterprise as Q American phenomencn. One might think of Eduard

 

Lindeman's paraphrase of Alexis de Toqueville's statements about voluntary
enterprise (18). De Toqueville, upon returning to France, in lectures to his
French students, would tell them this:
The Americans are a peculiar people. If in a local community

a citizen becomes aware of a human need which is not being met, he

thereupon discusses the situation with his neighbors. Suddenly a

committee comes into existence. This committee thereupon begins

to operate on behalf of the need. And mirable visu, a new community

function is established. In the meantime, these citizens have per-

formed this act without a single reference to any bureaucracy or to

any official agency.

Later, says Lindeman, de Toqueville developed this obServation to the status
of a democratic principle which again, liberally interpreted, emerged as follows:
i" 'The health of a democratic society may be measured by the quality of ser-

vices performed by its citizen volunteers. . . . ' "

Operative characteristics (if volunteer mpg. Lindeman, speaking of
volunteer activities, cites certain principles that must be stated if the volunteer
organization is to succeed: "(a) The precise functions and operations which
volunteers will be asked to perform, (b) the classification of the varieties of
volunteer service described as job analysis, (c) the personality and equipment
for these various forms of volunteer service, and (d) the appropriate placement
of volunteers with respect to their capacities, inclinations, and their individual
talent.

What Lindeman is saying in essence is that the duties must be identified

and that the personnel by proper division of labor must do what they best can do.

235

The CE FYC did admirably work on this principle: where county—wide funds

had to be solicited, Grand Rapids Chamber of Commerce President Frey did

not chair that particular effort; it was done by Copeland, another banker, who had
his interests outside of Grand Rapids. When Board of Control appointments
needed to be made, members who had been active in the Democratic Party were
utilized. Watkins, it is reported, had excellent liaison with suburban groups;
Buth, with legislative groups; Idema was adept at public relations work. The
examples are numerous. -

Further, the legal details were anticipated, especially in the early days of
the Board activities. The service of Philip Buchen was of utmost value. He
counseled concerning land options, and, after appointment in June, 1961, fomd
it necessary to clarify the exact powers of the Board as stated in Public Act 120
when matters of expenditures of money came up. )In addition, the services per-
formed by the Board members themselves after their appointments matched to
a great degree their experience and their ability, as is evident'in the relations
established in Ann Arbor and at Wayne State by Dr. Hoobler; and the program
planned by Robinson to get the funds contributed by labor based not on worker

voluntary contribution but based rather on contributions from local treasuries.

Implications for others. What then are the implications here? What can be
found in this history that is valuable for other communities who seek to establish
a public college ?

Certainly the principles of Whitehead (41), Gerard (44), Lindeman (18), and
Thaden (51) are borne out here. But, it might be well to establish a pattern

that seems to have emerged in the Grand Valley State College history.

Establishipg the need. To begin with, the need must be felt and the facts

 

of the need must be established. These facts can best be established by

. 230 .
acknowledged experts who have legal sanction for their work. It is very difficult

for anyone to refute authority that has both legal and status validity.

Implementation g thi facts. But the facts themselves are of little use,

 

unless they are implemented. To expect the collectors of facts to implement
the facts is to expect what rarely occurs. The gap between research and
management, between research and teaching, between experimental developmental
laboratories and manufacturing exists. In nearly every instance the doers do
not do research; they act upon the facts of the research. Whenever Seidman
needed further facts to substantiate the activities of the CEFYC, he called upon
known resource people: Varner for costs of education, J amrich and others
for commuting figures, Buchen for legal opinions, State Building Division for
test borings, and others for other facts.

But the implementers themselves must be articulate, educated, and intelligent

also; for theirs is the task of interpreting the facts and translating them into

action.

The conditions 9_f_ implementation. This task of translating the facts into
action to meet the need is a complex affair that entails several separate condi-
tions. These conditions, however, are interrelated. They can be called,
inexactly, the legal condition, the temporal condition, the fiscal condition, the
moral condition, the personnel condition, the education condition, and group
size. Each of these conditions is related to the other; one cannot be discussed
apart from its interrelationship with and interpenetration of the other conditions.

The legal condition is made up of individuals and legislative acts, past and
present. Within legal condition the volunteer committee seeks to meet a need.
To secure legal sanction, the individuals who are responsible for that must be

"courted"'to a degree. This "courting" may require some obsequious attention.

237

But, a moral condition prohibits that this be done beyond reasonable pragmatic
necessity, and not to any point of the practical and necessary ends completely
justifying a moral means. The practice of the CEFYC was to depend upon their
personal relationship and their ability to educate those reaponsible to provide
legal sanction, thereby transcending any necessity of excess friendship formations
that might later demand repayment of some kind.

This legal sanction is secured further by personal relations with others in the
community who also are in positions to assiSt in attaining legal sanctions, and
these personal relations involve educating those others.

Therefore, a program of education is necessary. This educational program
requires that the articulate and educated volunteer committee carry on activities
almost continuously, activities that are carried on with community organizations.
These organizations are found in business, industry, educational institutions,
and governmental institutions; social, fraternal, service, or other organizations
usually are cimprised of individuals connected with the above; and they, too, are
included in the continuous education program whose end is the securing of legal
sanction necessary for the establishment of the new institution.

Of course, these tasks cannot be performed unless there is both money and
time available. Therefore, the volunteer committee that seeks to resolve the
need should be composed of individuals who have the time to spare and of at
least a few individuals who can afford to invest personal funds when necessary.

This says something about the character of the personnel involved in the
volunteer committee. They are usually community minded, unselfish, energetic,
idealistic, responsible, physically well and mentally alert, successful in their
own personal work, and probably have a fairly high idea of their own capabilities.

They are not accustomed to expect failure.

238

Lines of communication must be kept open and the information passed along
must be accurate. Also, information must not be withheld. If activities are
kept open, are democratic, are fair, are legal, are honest, and if information
on them is kept available, failure should not arrive because of the disillusion—
ment of uninformed participants.

One might say, also, concerning these points that the limited size of the
CEFYC was a factor in its successes. Their planning and discussion sessions
could be both informal and intensive. It was not too difficult for each to be present
when meetings were called since the number of participants was limited and it
was pre-arranged that each would hold Friday noon open for the purpose of meet—
ing. Annulis dropped out of the CEFYC mainly because he could not meet at noon,
according to Seidman.

This limited size allowed for informality, true; yet the chairman still exerted
his leadership and gave direction to the meeting. A great deal of information
could be exchanged at the small CEFYC meetings. There are three reasons for
this: the members came to know each other well and did not have to stand on
ceremony or hesitate because of any danger of being misunderstood without having
a chance to clear up the misunderstanding; the members were committed to one
goal and had faith in each other's commitment; and the danger that the purposes
of the meetings might be diverted by small talk was avoid by the ability of
the chairman to keep to the buSiness at hand.

One of the dangers of the small planning group such as the CEFYC is this:
they know where they are going before anyone else does, and willy-nilly, they
may fail to disseminate the information they possess to other necessary factors
in the community. This unintentional failure to bring others up-to-date on plans

and developments often may result in the feeling on the part of necessary

ll

 

\
, . e
. _ A
. . .
I, .
A
..
_ \ a e
. L .
s .
. _
. .
e . ..
. . .A .
e \
.
e
4
i . .
O
, F
.. nil. .
.. . .
.e
.
a .
‘ e
x _
a . .
v
.e
_
i .. e . . .
.\ §
\
3
'4
.— .
»

 

239

community support factors that they have been disfranchised, that their

right to know has not been allowed. This occurrence is totally unintentional

on the part of the small group, but is often unavoidable when a select and
privileged clique moves slower in their information distribution than in their
action and in their planning, and where their size enables them to move com-
paratively fast. Fortnmately, the CEFYC did not keep scret any of their

plans; in fact, Seidman stated that just the opposite was their stated and avowed
practice. They made public every move they made so there could come no
accusations from any quarter that the group was cultivating special interests of
selfish motives. The CEFYC established the practice early to openly publicize
their aims and their activities. Until the Board of Control met in closed execu-
tive session, (which is acceptable practice in both public and private institutions)
there is no activity whichis recorded in personal correspondence files that is not
also recorded in the newspapers, . with the exception of some personal correspondence

pertaining to details that had no direct bearing on plans or activities concerning the
new college. Thus, an investigation of how the new college was established reveals
that secrecy is not a desirable characteristic of planning groups if they seek
ultimate public approval and ultimate legal sanction in a democratic society.

Not that there might not have been some human feelings that what was
accomplished was private property, not to be shared with late—comers who were
neither asked nor wanted. But if these human feelings were present, they were
,not acted upon. Continuously, rather, anyone who offered advice or who joined
the effort was welcomed, and if he continued to lend aid and support, he was
given a place in the effort with a job to do. Should his interest develop as a
selfish one, the very unselfish nature of the total effort soon made selfish
participation impossible. Those individuals who reaped economic benefit
I from the new college establishment reaped it not because they participated with
that end in mind, economic benefit. Many would profit in real estate, building

 

DEC.
dEp
Cha
am
i11d:

Cat,

ett
Th
ke]

240

- contracts, architectural fees; however, those who would profit were not

involved in the total plannme establish the new college. They profited as

 

_they expected to when theLwent into their business or profession, and as they
are obliged to in a capitalistic society. If they do not profit, they do not con-
tribute to the‘perpetuation of the society based upon a profit motive. The profit
motive, however, was not the motive of those who worked to begin a new college.
There is no evidence in any historical fact to indicate differently.

Therefore, since personal economic benefit was not a motive of any of the
CEFYC and others, there was no compulsion to buy favors from any of the
legislature. The idea that sanction must be purchased to be attained is not
necessarily true. If legal sanction is bought, further success then often
depends upon further purchase. If success is gained without its being pur-
chased, then further success will not have to be purchased. Money spent for
attaining success is spent for the cost of the process,» not for the cost of what
individuals are involved in the process. If Seidman had legislators and edu-
cators at his home and the cost of entertaining them was borne by him, it was
a price paid for the process, not a price paid to anyone. These were the con-
ditions under which education of the participants could best be achieved and
where the conditions of building personal relations could best be achieved.

And personal relations and friendship are achieved best by open communication
lines.

The support of the press is essential. This support is best gained at the
top. The press in the entire eight-county area supported the. CEFYC. The
editors of the various newspapers were invited to the January 7, 1959, meeting.
They knew what was going on. Knowing, they wrote intelligently. They were
kept informed. Again, the condition of education and inter-personal relations

was met.

241

An extremely important part of the personal condition is the response
given to others. As was stated on page 78 , Seidman correspondence
shows complete regard for others. This inter-personal relationship is
essential for success. For nothing is as deterrent to success as adverse
public opinion, whatever it may be.

Complete apathy is better than partial opposition. What happened in
this history is this: there was favorable opinion in influential quarters and
no opposition on the part of any vocal large group of citizens. They stood
most to benefit. The two statements of opposition came from quarters who did
not have the supporting conditions necessary for their opposition to succeed.
Seyferth's was partially in opposition to even those who opposed the college
being located anywhere but Muskegon; J udd's was the voice of one crying in
the wilderness, a valid voice perhaps, but a voice crying in the face of well-

organized and well-supported other voices.

Other factors. The factors that inhibit success are also legal, moral,
financial, pragmatic, personal, educational, and temporal. Obviously a
breakdown in any one of these conditions when it is working favorably will
inhibit success. But, more important, is the breakdown of forces and condi-
tions that are not locd, yet are related to the local conditions.

For example, the local community is yet a part of the state and a part of
the nation. All the resolve and desire in the local community cannot overcome
the opposition of overwhelming state-wide forces if the support of these state-
wide forces is necessary. And should state—wide support be gained and should
Federal approval be necessary, if Federal approval is not gained, the state-wide
desires are not fulfilled. Thus, when Concurrent Resolution Number 28 was held

up on the Senate Committee by Morris (pages 64, 65), all the local desire

could have been to no avail had he chosen to continue to oppose the resolution.
The same principle is true for other legislative activity.

Here the education and articulation of the volunteer committee, Seidman,
and local backers was of extreme importance. It took knowldge of legislative
procedure, knowledge of the legislative structure, knowledge of where support
might be gained and lost, knowledge of when to speak and when not to—-and what
to say--were vital. There is no substitute for these attributes.

The statement"you have to get the community behind you" is tossed about,
especially in times when a community need is discussed and ways to get it
fulfilled are tossed about. But evidence here seems to show that it is naive to
think this alone is the formula for success. All the "community" contributed
toward the new college in time and money was negligible compared with the
effort of the CEFYC. Fewer than 19 per cent of the large Citizens' Committee
and others nominally associated with the establishment of the new college really
worked.

The statement "get your key people involved" is also bandied about. This
is nonsense as it stands alone. What if they want to appear to be "involved"
but won't get "involved"? If they are key people, they must become willing to
spend their own time and money, if necessary, to bring success. It would be
possible to identify scores of "key people" in the eight-county area who con-
tributed nothing to the new college effort. None .‘of the CEFYC prior to 1958
would be considered top-level "key people. " True, each is of, high occupational
status, but, when considered in relation to others of that status in the area,
their names have not traditionally emerged. There are more on the large
Citizens' Committees. But those on the large Citizens' Committees did not
do the bulk of the work--with a few exceptions, of course. The flux of member-

ship of the "establishment" in the eight-county area has, no doubt, increased

in the period between 1958 and 1961, for the young men of the CEFYC through
their work have created for themselves respect and eminence and a. place in
that "establishment. "

And the legislators of the area also have had, it seems, an opporttmity to
test their effectiveness in supporting local legislation. Since the, facts of the
establishment of Grand Valley State College, Feenstra has been deposed and
Greene has retired. Greene, byvirtue of tenure and membership on committees
was able to effect considerable good. Feenstra's work seems negligible.
Thomas Whinery's work in introducing the legislation speaks for itself. Yet,
it seems here that there was far more efiective change wrought by the people
outside the legislature than by the people in the legislature. Correspondence,
communication and relations were not limited to only those representing the

eight-county area. Rather, legislators from districts throughout the state

were often written to. Perhaps effort was unnecessary with lawmakers in the

' eight-county area. Perhaps their work with their colleagues will never be known.
The fact that there was often direct communication between Seidman and the
members of the legislature-i—and with the governor and with the administrative
officers--indicates that more was needed besides reliance upon area legislators.

The most important factor in his history was the nature of the individuals
who banded together to fulfill a need and the way they went about it. A flat
statement of a few hundred words won't do to explain how it works. Nothing is
that simple.

And, finally, this must be said: In the appeals for funds, in the proposals
accompanying the requests for funds from foundations, in the letters sent to
candidates for president, and in other literature explaining the nature of Grand
Valley State College, the uniqueness of the new institution is emphasized. It is

unique in this respect: it is tied to no existing institution, to no existing alumni

244

body, to no existing set of traditions, to no established methodology, to no

sets of prejudices accompanying tradition, to no political party, to no local
selfish interests, to no single community group with any common interest other
than the good fortune of the new college. This uniqueness of the new institution
was not accidental. When the CE FYC struck out for an independent institution,
they set the pattern that the new college was to take. Their choice was based
upon good reasons. Whether they will have made a choice that runs counter to
choices that will be made by most other states in meeting their higher education
needs is yet to be seen. At the time of this miflng, the University of Michigan
is making a strong effort to establish a branch in the tri-county area by taking
over Delta College, a two-year community college in the Midland-Bay-Saginaw
counties area near Midland. Establishing this college was the source of the
debate that held up House Bill 477 as reported on page 39 . Apparently,
the recommendations of Russell that helped the CEFYC make their decision to
go independent have not been fully accepted by others who are in positions to
make decisions for or against independent new colleges.

Thus, though Grand Valley State College is not a bell-whether, the manner
of its establishment can be an interesting and significant precedent for those who
must also make the decision whether through community initiative, work,
support, and partial control (by the support and interest of its Citizens' Advisory
Council) is the best way to establish a new college; or whether the establishment
of branches of large, centralized state institutions is preferable.

The success of Grand Valley State College will bear watching. For there is
at present no other college in the land quite like it. It is state-supported,

c ommunity-centered, independent, controlled byits own state-sanctioned Board
of Control, tied to no special interest group, and has been established in the

post-war world to meet needs that were not well identified before the fifties

248

except by visionaries that were seldom heard. Whether Seidman and his
group were apt visionaries will have to be seen.

The enrollment for the first class in the fall of 1963 is estimated at
250 students. This is not a great bite out of theestimated increase of 7, 400
students over the previous year's enrollment in Michigan institutions of
higher education. Apparently, the new college was established none too soon.
Whether the enrollment projections for the next ten years are accurate will
determine wlBther the college grows as expected. Seidman, in a conversation
in Febriary, 1963, stated that there would probably be an enrollment ratio in
the United States of around 80 per cent in the not-too-distant future.

At the January 7, 1959, meeting, Seidman stated facetiously that his
only interest was being coach of the football team. There is no team and
no record yet. Preliminary scouting reports, however, seem to indicate
that once they get started, they should mark up a good record.

..l.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

246

O?

10,

ll.

12.

13,

10.

11.
12.

' 13.

“1

BIBLIOGRAPHY

A. BOOKS

Brumbaugh, A. J. , and Myron R. Blee, Higher Education and Florida's
F__u__ture, Volume 1, Recommendations and General Staff Report,
University of Florida Press, Gainesville, 1956.

Campbell, William Giles, A Form Bock f_q_r Thesis Writing,
Houghton Mifflin Company, New York, 1939.

 

Flexner, Abraham, The American College, The Century Company, New
York, 1908.

Gee, Wilson, editor, Research _1'.r_1_ the Social Sciences) the MacMillan
Company, New York, 1929.

 

Goldberg, David, Allen, and J. William Smit, Estimates of Population
Changes _‘11_1_ Michigan, Michigan Population Studies No. 1, Department
of Sociology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 1960.

,College Enrollment Potential i__n Michigan 1960 to __1975 Michi-
g_ anPwulationw Studies No.3 Department of Sociology, University
of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 19 61

Hauser, Philip M. , @pdgfion Persmctives, Rmrs University Press,
New Brunswick, New Jersey, 1960.

Hawes, Gene R. , The New American Guide t_o_Collges, Columbia University
Press, New York, 1962.

Heald, Henry T. , Chairman, Committee on Higher Education, M__ee__ting____ the
Increased Demand for Higher Education i_n_ New York State Education
Department, Albany, New York, 1960.

Henderson, Algo D. , Policies and Practices _in Higher Education,
Harper and Brothers, New York, 1960.

 

Hfier Education in the United States, edited by Mary Irwin, American
Council on Education, Washington, D. C., 1961.

Hollis, Ernest V. and Ralph C. NI. Flint, U. S. Office _o_f_ Education
Bulletins of 194____5_, No. 8, U. S. Government Printing Office, 1945.

 

Holy, T. C. , H. H. Semans, and T. R. McConnell, A Restu_dy_ of the
Needs of California in __1H 1gl_1er Education, California State Department
of Education, Sacramenta,1955.

 

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

21.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

J amrich, John X. , A_ New College, Center for the Study of Higher
Education, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan,
December, 1959.

Kandel, I. L. , "Historical Backgrounds to Higher Education in the
United States, " Yearbook of Education, 1959.

 

 

 

Krout, Maurice H. , Introductinn *2. Social Psychology, Harper: and
, Brothers, New York, 1942.

Lansing, John, Thomas Lorimer, and Chikaski Moriguchi, How Peogle
Pay for College, Ann Arbor, Michigan, Institute fOr Social Research,
1960.

 

Lindeman, Eduard C. , in Leadership ilVoluntary Enterprise, edited
by Charles W. Merrifield, Oceana Publications, Inc. , New York, 1961.

 

Macrorie, Ken. , "The Process of News Reporting, " in The Use a___nd
Mis__u_se of Language, edited by S. I. Hayakawa, Fawcett __‘—Publications,
Inc. , Greenwich, Connecticut, 1962.

 

Martorana, S. V. , The Community College i9_Mich_1g’ an, Staff Study No.
1 of the Survey of Higher Education, P. O. Box 240, State Capitol,
Lansing, Michigan, June, 1957.

Master Plan Survey Team, A_ Mastgi; Plan f9; Higher Education 13‘
Cglifornia 1960 £1975, California State Department of Education,
Sacramento, California, 1960.

 

 

McConnell, T. R. , _A_ General Pattern _fgr American Public Higher
Education, McGraw Hill Book Company, Inc. , New York, 1962.

The Minnesota Commission on Education, Higger Education ig_Min_n§sota,
University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, Minnesota, 1950.

 

 

Moos, Malcolm, and Francis Rourke, The (Lampus and the State,
John Hopkins Press, Baltimore, Maryland, 1959.

 

Reiss, Albert J. , Otis Dudley Duncan, Paul K. Hatt, and Cecil North,
Occ:1_1pations and Social Status, Free Press of Glencoe, Inc. , New
York, 1961.

Robertson, David Allen, American @versifies and Cgllegeg Charles
Scribner's Sons, New York, 1928.

Russell, John D. and Orvin T. Richardson, Geographic Origins of
Michigan College Students, Staff Study No___.__ 2 of _t_h_e Survey__ of High er
Education i_1_1 Micggan, P. O. Box 240, State Capitol, Lansing, '
Michigan, 1957.

 

Russell, John Dale, _‘ghg_r Education in _Michigan, The Final Report o__f
the Survgy of H gher Education in _Michigan , P. O. Box 240, State
Capitol, Lansing, Michigan, 19 58.

 

 

 

29.
30.

31.

32.
33.
34.

35.

36.

37.
38.
39.

40.

41.

42.

“9

, Institutional Planning forH High er Education i__n Mich1gan Staff
tudy__No.l;i_g_f_t_1_1_g Survey of ___Higher Education in __Michigan, P. O.
8Box 240, State Capitol, Lansing, Michigan, 1958.

 

 

 

 

 

,hPreliminary Report to the Michigan Legislative Study Committee
9;; High er Education, P. O. Box 240, State Capitol, Lansing, Michigan,
1957.

 

 

Starr, Richard, 1113 nginniggs gf_Gra’.duate Education i_n_Americg,
University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1953.

 

Steiner, Gilbert Y. , and Romayne R. Ponleithner, Public ___heHig
Education in ___Illinois, Staff Report to the Committee to Recommend
a State Plan for Public Higher Education, Springfield, Illinois, 1961.

 

Stogdill, Ralph M. , "Personal Factors Associated With Leadership.
A Survey of the literature, " in The __Study of Leadership, edited by
C. G. Browne and Thomas S. Cohn, The Interstate Printers and
Publishers, Inc. , Canville, Illinois, 1958.

 

Tead, Ordway, 1113 Ari 9_f_ Leadership, McGraw Hill Book Company, New
York, 1935.

Ten Broek, Andrew, American State Universities and the University__ of
Michigan ,Robert Clarke and Company, Cincinnati, 1875.

Thaden, J. F. , @pulation 91 Michig' an Counties, Technical Bulletin B 24,
Institute for Community Development, Continuing Education Service ,
Kellogg Center, Michigan State University, March, 1962.

Thwing, Charles F. , American Collgges, G. P. Putnam's Sons, New York,
1893.

,A HistoEy___ of Higher Education in _A_—_merica, DeAppleton and
Company, New York, 1906.

Veblen, Thorstein, The Higher Le_irgi_ng_i§ America, Academic Reprints,
Stanford, California, 1954, Copyright 1918 by B. W. Heubsch.

Wolfle, Dael, "The Size and Quality of Future School and College Enroll-
ments, " in Demographic Analysis, edited by Joseph Spengler and
Otis Dudley Duncan, the Free Press, Glencoe, Illinois, 1956.
Whitehead, T. N. , Leadership _ig a Free:&cieg, Harvard University
Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1936.

ARTICLES

Armstrong, W. M. , "On Writing Contemporary History," Social
Studies, 53: 52-54, February, 1962.

43.
44.

45.

46.

47.

48.

49.

50.

51.

52.

53. I

54.

I“
Buehring, Leo E. ,"This School is a Designer's Dream, " The eflgtion's
__S_____chools, 70: 5, page 60, November, 1962.

Gerard, Ralph W. , "The Evolution of Higher Education, " Behavioral
Sciences, 2:2, April, 1957.

 

Megaw, N. "Proposal for a New College of Liberal Arts, " American
Association of University Professors Bulletiii, 47:330-338, December,
1961. ‘

 

 

Schipper, V. J. , "Free Holland High: How It Got That Way, " The
Nation's Schools, 70:5, page 68, November, 1962.

 

" 'So-Called Shortage,‘ Says Chamber of Commerce, " Michigan Eguca:
tion Journal, 40:12, page 412, February, 1963.

'

 

 

UNPUBLISHED DISSERTATIONS

Cox, John Elmer, A Brief 1113wa of Texas Wesleyan College, in
Abstracts g_f Field Studies for the __Deggee“ of Doctor o__f Education,
XIV, University of Microfilm, Ann Arbor, “Michigan, 19 54.

 

Hartman, William F. , The Historygi the Colorado State College of
Edgcationnthe Teachers Colgge Period--1911-1935, in Abstracts
o_:f__ Field Studies i_or the ___Degree___ of Doctor of _Education, XIV,
University Microfilm, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 1963.

 

 

Horton, Allison Norman, Origin and Development o_t;_ th_e_ State College
Movement i_n__ Tennessee, unpublished doctoral dissertation,
George Peabody College for Teachers, Nashville, Tennessee, 1963.

 

 

 

Thaden, J. F, Leaders as Re_______corded i_1_1_ Who's Who in America and

 

 

i__n RUS and their Group and Inter-Group RJationsFipmgan State
University, 1930.

 

PAMPHLE TS

_A Comparison of the Sites a_t Allendale, Me and MuskeLn f___or _a__
' 10, 000 Student College, Michigan Department of Administration,
Building Division, Lansing, Michigan, April 24,1961.

 

 

 

Civic Affairs Review, edited by James R. Seyferth, P. 0. Box 491,
Muskegon, Michigan, March, 1961.

 

Universi_ty Park, _A Propgsal by Greater Muskegoii, prepared under
partial direction of John Achterhoff, Muskegon, Michigan, February,
1961.

 

 

n
l
.-.H—v..__ #

I
y
A-

55.

56.

57.
58.
59.
60.
61.

62.

251

NEWSPAPERS AND OTHERS
Archives, Grand Valley State College, College Landing, Allendale,
Michigan.

Grand Valley State College Catalog, 1963-64, College Landing,
Allendale, Michigan.

The. Graiici Haven Tribune, Grand Haven, Michigan, 1959 to 1961.

The Grand Rapids Press, Grand’Rapids, Michigan, 1955 to 1961.

The Greenville Daily News, Greenville, Michigan, 1955 to 1961.

The Muskeggn Chronicle, Muskegon, Michigan, 1958 to 1961.

The Rocldord g_egistg‘, Rockford, Michigan, 1959 to 1961.

The Seidman Files: CEFYC Correspondence, Board of Control Cor-
respondence, Site Files, Ford Foundation Correspondence Files,

Board of Control Minutes, Grand Valley State College Correspondence
Files, Citizens' Council Files.

252

Appendix I. A COLLEGE FOR THE WESTERN MICHIGAN AREA--
THE NEEDS AND POTENTIAL
. Harold W. Rockwell, Chairman _
Committee For a Four-Year College For Western Michigan

For the past several years a number of people in this area have been
concerned about the growing number of young people who are in need of higher
education. We were aware of the fact that the existing publicly supported 4-
year institutions were not going to be able to handle appreciably more stu-
dents than they now have enrolled. For this reason, in 1957 a group of us
appeared before the State Board of Agriculture to ask their consideration of
a western Michigan branch. At that time the State Board of Agriculture
appeared interested in our problem, but pointed out that the legislature
had recently appropriated a sum of money for a comprehensive study of
the entire problem of higher education for the whole State of Michigan.

For this reason, nothing more was done by our group until February of
1958, when, with the information we had picked up from the Legislative
Committee studies, we again appeared in front of the State Board of
Agriculture and asked that they consider a branch for western Michigan.

In addition, we asked that the State Board of Agriculture make available
for the establishment of this branch college the 100—acre tract immediately
west of Grand Rapids, owned by Michigan State University, and now known as
the Graham Experimental Station. We were pleased when the Governing Board
of Michigan State University took action on our request that same day by adopting
a resolution stating that the 100-acre tract would be made available for this
purpose if the legislature approved the establishment of this college and if
there was sufficient interest on the part of the people of this area. ‘

Of the more than 40 persons who attended this meeting with the State Board,
people from Kent, Ottawa, and Muskegon all spoke on the proposal. This
group represented business, industry, agriculture, labor, and education.

Dr. Hannah's response to our group was that our job now was '.(1) to
determine how widespread the interest was in this proposal, (2) to determine
the attitude of the state legislature toward a branch, and (3) to establish a
committee to recommend a curriculum and to carry out liaisons with the
two existing junior colleges within the eight-county area. I am appearing here
this afternoon on the first part of our assignment-~that of attempting to determine
the degree of interest in this area. Because you gentlemen are the local leaders
who are instrumental in moulding public impressions and reactions, we appreci-
ate this opportunity to appear before you. A talk such as I am giving this
afternoon is being repeated time and time again in front of other groups, both
in our county and in the surrounding seven counties, who are interested in
this project.

I would like to divide my story into three parts--the first of which is to
point out the need for higher education facilities in this area. In 1956-57
there were 66, 586 graduating seniors from high schools, and, at the same
time, there were 115, 203 freshmen in these same schools--an increase of
approximately 75 percent. In the eight-county area with which we are primarily
concerned, according to the latest available figures, the college-age population

253

Appendix I. (Continued) A COLLEGE FOR THE WESTERN MICHIGAN AREA--
THE NEEDS AND POTENTIAL

is approximately‘37, 000, and it is estimated that it will reach 75, 000 by 1970.
Presently 18 percent of the state-wide college-age population is attending
publicly supported institutions. The average for our eight-county area is only
13 percent. We feel that the principal reason for this failure on the part of
our area to measure up to the state average is the fact that we are in a low in-
come area, and the total cost of room and board for students to attend college
away from home makes a college education virtually impossible for many
youngsters. If we intend to do nothing more than to remain at 71 percent of
the state average, there will still be 13,000 prospective students in this eight-
county area in a very few years.

We intend to take the necessary steps to come up to the state average.
Interestingly, the Department of Labor has recently announced that although
the national work force will increase in future years, the need for unskilled
workers will actually decline. It is estimated that the demand for professional
and technical personnel will increase by more than one-third, and the need for
executive and managerial personnel will increase about 22 percent. We sum
this up by saying that while our work force will be larger, the facilities for
training the people for the jobs that will be available do not exist at this time.
The cost of attending school away from home, and the limitations of our exist-
ing publicly supported institutions in regards to how much larger they can grow
, make it imperative that additional publicly supported degree-granting institutions
be created with the least possible delay.

Point two of our proposal is that a branch should be established within this
eight—county area. The Legislative Study Committee on higher education
points out that this is one of the two biggest population areas not now served
within our state. If you will look at the map that I am holding here, the areas
I have noted with the small circles indicate the location of existing publicly
supported degree-granting institutions. The large circle indicates an area 30
miles in radius around Grand Rapids which, at the present time, is not ser-
viced by any publicly supported institution. We feel this graphically explains
the points brought out in the legislative study report. We are recommending
Grand Rapids as the location instead of Muskegon or Ottawa counties because
it is in the center of this area and can, therefore, serve effectively alarger
number of people. We also feel that Grand Rapids is the more logical location
to serve this area because, as I have mentioned earlier, the State Board of
Agriculture has been kind enough to commit a 100-acre land start to our
project. '

W9 do we recommend that this be a branch of an existing publicly supported
degree-granting institution? First, because we feel that as a branch of an
existing institution the recognition and accreditation which will be so important
to the graduating seniors will be immediate. Secondly, by having it a branch
it can make use of an already well-qualified staff and faculty, and a branch can
offer immediately a much broader curriculum than would be possible in a
beginning institution. Another important fact is that a big-name school, known
throughout the world, will be in a better position to attract the high caliber
of faculty which you and I will want to educate the young people of our area.

 

. 1
\— . . .
. .
. A -_
. ..
., \
t.
.. .\ .
A»;
- ~.
7 V
A L; ... .o , . ..
. .. . .4
- - .
- _L . ..- a
- . x .
, , u. . 1
, , ,
, __ . . . .....~
7 .V ‘d
, 1 .-.
x ' -
. . ,
.. -

 

"2 54

Appendix, I. (Continued) A COLLEGE FOR THE WESTERN MICHIGAN AREA-
THE NEEDS AND POTENTIAL

The last point of our proposal is that this should be a branch of Michigan
State University rather than any other state-supported institution. The
reasons for this are (1) the proximity of Michigan State University to Grand
Rapids which will mean economies in both time and money, and also in the
close relationships of one school to another, (2) Michigan State University
has a long and historic relationship to the varied interests in this area and
has been working with education, agriculture, homemakers, yout h, business,
industry, and organized labor through its extensive field programs, and (3) the
very hard economic fact that Michigan State University owns and is willing to
make available a valuable 100-acre tract which could be the beginning of a
campus development.

Let me summarize what I have wanted to get across to this group.

First of all, the increasing numbers of youngsters in Michigan make it
imperative that additional facilities for higher education be provided.

Our present institutions are about as large as they should be.

The percentage of our college-age population attending publicly supported
colleges and universities from this geographical region is sharply below that
of the average for the state, and it naturally follows that this area is, therefore,
being penalized.

The primary reason for this is the fact that we do not have easily accessible

. to our youngsters a publicly supported degree-granting institution so that they
may live at home and get a college education.

. Itis our belief that there is a genuine need for the establishment of a degree-
granting publicly supported institution in the Grand Rapids area and that it
should be a branch of an existing university.

For a variety of reasons-—particularly because of the availability of a
valuahhe 100-acre campus site--we believe that the interests of this area
could best be served by having this established as a branch of Michigan State
University. .

We hope that the members of this group are interested in our project, and
we would appreciate receiving letters from the members and a resolution from
your group expressing your interest in establishing a branch of Michigan
State University to serve this eight-county area.

255

Appendix II. A FOU R-YEAR COLLEGE FOR THE GRAND RAPIDS AREA

Fifteen Questions and Answers

1. Q. What indications are there that the Grand Rapids area needs a
a four-year, state-supported, degree-granting institution?

A. There is much evidence to support the claim that the Grand Rapids
area genuinely needs such an institution. The case is made clear
when we examine the following figures taken from the study of
higher education needs in Michigan being conducted by a special
committee of the Michigan Legislature:

Table 1. College-age Population of Each Michigan County, Number
of Students from Each County Attending Michigan Institutions
of Higher Education in 1955-56, and Percentage That Students
from each County Attending College in Michigan are of College-
age Population of the Respective Counties

A—L

 

 

(4-Year)
College-age No. 81 % Attending No. 8: % Attending
Population State—Controlled College in
County (1955) Institutions Michigan Colleges
Number Percent Number Percent

Allegan 2, 882 370 12. 8 485 16. 8
Barry 1, 691 239 14. 1 ' 267 15. 8
Ionia 2, 301 332 14. 4 394 17. 1
Kent 1 5, 287 2, 088 13. 7 4 , 481 29. 3
Montcalm 1, 994 272 13. 6 327 16. 4
Muskegon 7, 146 739 10. 3 1 , 548 21. 7
Newaygo 1, 510 146 9. 7 196 13. 0
Ottawa 4, 326 +566 13. 1 1 1,250 , 28. 9
37,137 4,752 12.8 8,948 24.1
State Average 17. 9 29. 3

 

. - A

M

 

This shows that the youth of this area, not now served by a four-year,

degree-granting, publicly-supported college, is being deprived of

the educational opportunity afforded the young men and women of other
regions of the State.

256

Appendix II. (Continued) A FOUR-YEAR COLLEGE FOR THE GRAND RAPIDS AREA

As a result, only 24. 1 percent of the youth of this area go on to
Michigan colleges, while 29. 3 percent of this group go to college
when we look at the state as a whole. In other words, about 20
percent i__—ewer students from this area now go on to college than
is true for the state.

The onlyvalid reason advanced for this is the lack of such a colleg

 

within close proximity to our homes.

 

If such a college were established, what would be the effect on existing
colleges in the area, such as Grand Rapids Junior College, Muskegon
Community College, Hope College, Calvin College, and Aquinas
College?

The specific answer to this question, like many others in connection
with this development, must be worked out by all the parties and
institutions involved so that the total interests of the area are best
served. It is possible, for example, to begin with the junior and
senior years only, which would serve to supplement the junior
colleges in the area. Relationships with private and parochial
schools could undoubtedly be worked out to the satisfaction of all
institutions and in a way which would actually be beneficial to the
existing institutions.

What kinds of training would ”be available at such a college?

Again, the citizens of the area could determine the general direction
of the program. If the new college is a branch of an existing
university, it would have a much more varied curriculum from which
to draw than would an independent institution. General and informal
discussions to date have suggested that this area's needs could best
be served by a program based on liberal arts, but with special
emphasis upon engineering, teacher education, and possibly business
administration and agriculture.

What amount of money would be needed to start this college?

The budget needs would fall into two categories - buildings and
operations. The initial buildings could be provided for from $2
million to- $4 million, and the operating budget required would vary
with the enrollment. It could be expected that about $800 per student
would be required during the first year, and approximately the same
for the second year.

Where would these funds come from?
While it would be exciting to have some individual or corporation

contribute several million dollars in support of this new college,
it is probably not realistic to expect this in our area. Since,

257

Appendix II. (Continued) A FOUR—YEAR COLLEGE FOR THE GRAND RAPIDS AREA

however, this is a legitimate public need in an area already too-long
slighted, it is reasonable to expect that the legislature will provide
the funds needed when the community shows its interest.

What economic benefits would the Western Michigan area have as a
result of the location of a collegiate institution here?

The economic benefits, in a very direct way, would be considerable.
It is estimated that the communities of Ann Arbor and East Lansing
each have between $60 million and $70 mfllion brought into local
circulation annually from their respective institutions. In addition
to this gain, there is the added attraction this provides to industry
seeking a new location, as well as residents seeking out a home
community.

More importantly, however, is the great advantage this would pro-
vide for our young men and women and their parents. Today it
costs about $1, 500 per year to attend Michigan State University or
the University of Michigan. If a good-four college could be
located within commuting distance, it would reduce this cost to

not more than $500 per student per year. This not only means
dollar savings for parents, it is--literally--the difference between
a college education and no college education for many.

What cultural advantages would the area enjoy from its presence?

The very presence of the faculty of a large four-year college would
add significantly to the cultural resources of the comm1mity. Beyond
this, an institution such as the one under consideration would obviously
attract accomplished students who, in turn, would be a source of
talent for music, the arts, drama, and in many other areas. Finally,
this type institution would be the focal point for professional artists
from this country and from the world.

How would such a college be administered?

The precise administrative organization of a four-year college

in this area must be determined by the citizens of the area in co-
operation with the Legislature and possibly other universities.

If the institution is.to be an independent college, it would, in all
likelikhood, be governed by an independent board of trustees and
would be a part of the total state-wide system of higher education.
If, on the other hand, it is to be a branch of an existing university,
then it would be administered locally by a president who, in turn,
would be responsible to the governing board of the parent institution.
If the branch idea developed, there would undoubtedly be a local

advisory group to reflect the needs and the thinking of the area
being served.

9.

258

Appendix II. (Continued) A FOUR-YEAR COLLEGE FOR THE GRAND RAPIDS AREA

Q.

Have branch colleges or universities been tried before? With
what kind of results? .

A. Branch colleges or universities are fairly common throughout the

country. Perhaps the most notable such organization is in the State
of California where the University of California at Berkeley now
has several major branch colleges including the University of
California at Los Angeles. Here in‘Michigan, the University of
Michigan has a branch located in Flint and another being devdloped
in Dearborn. Michigan State University has under construction a
major branch to serve the Oakland and Macomb County areas. In
those states where the branch approach has been developed, it

has generally been considered successful.

What does the Survey of Higher Education in Michigan being conducted
by the Michigan Legislature say about the needs for higher education
in Western Michigan?

The SurveLof Higher Education in Michigan (commonly known as the

 

Russell Report) states:

"A superficial review of the Michigan situation leads to
the conclusion that the most likely location for another
state-controlled college is Grand Rapids.“ This city has

a flourishing community college, which should continue
a) render its effective service when and if a state college
is also established in or near the city. Three theological
seminaries are also located in Grand Rapids, but a state
college would in no way duplicate the service of those
institutions. Two church-related colleges of Liberal Arts
are also located in Grand Rapids. Leaders in both these
Liberal Arts colleges have assured the directors of the
survey that the location of a state college in Grand Rapids
would not affect those institutions adversely.

"Grand Rapids is the second largest city in the State,
only Detroit having a larger population. Grand Rapids is
sufficiently distant from other state institutions so that
there would be no objectionable overlapping of services
in the new area if a new state college were located there.

"A second area that seems to offer some potential as a
location for another state college is the Saginaw region. "

It should be noted that in the preliminary study, Saginaw was indicated
as the No. 1 prospect for a new state school. This has now been
changed to make Grand Rapids first, as the foregoing quotation
illustrates.

 

art.

 

 

 

 

259

Appendix II. (Continued) A 'FOUR-YEAR COLLEGE FOR THE GRAND RAPIDS AREA

11.

12.

13.

14.

Q.

Q.

15. Q.

A.

What effect does locating a college in the community have on attendance
by area students?

The Legislative Study of Higher Education in Michigan reveals that
the percentage of college-age ymmgsters actually attending college
in a county where a college is located is double the percentage
attending from a county without a college and that, in general there
is a close relationship between the location of a college and the
percentage of studeds who attend college.

What locations are available for conveniently locating such an
institution ?

It would seem logical that the location of a four-year publicly-supported
institution in this area would be on the west side of Grand Rapids so
that it would be easily accessible to the students of Kent, Muskegon,
and Ottawa Comfies.

When could this college be ready to open its doors to students?

Working as fast as seems feasible at this time, it is probable that the
doors could be opened for entering students for this new college by
the fall of 1961. Even with this haste, hundreds of youngsters in this
area will have been denied a college education before it is possible to
provide the facilities here for our young men and women.

What is the situation at other state institutions regarding admissions ?

The enrollment at the University of Michigan is now approximately
twenty-three thousand students, and at Michigan State University it

is approximately twenty thousand students. Rapid growth is occurring
at all colleges and universities, and the inevitable result is a firm and
noticeable rejection of increasingly large numbers of applications for
admission. It has been publicly announced that Michigan State ‘
University is rejecting approximately 50 percent of all the students
who apply, and it may be assumed that the University of Michigan is
rejecting a similar percentage. The percentage of rejections will
obviously be higher in the years ahead when the great influx of stu-
dents now in our high schools begins to swamp the admissions offices
of our existing colleges and universities. ‘

What can you do to see that a college is brought to your area?

Primarily, you can volunteer to assist the Committee for a Four-
Year College for Western Michigan. Study committees will need

to be appointed and many problems resolved. You may also assist

by contacting all the members of the Legislature from this area and
expressing your strong desire for having a college brought to Western
Michigan to serve our ymmgsters.

260

Appendix III. Is A New Degree-Granting College Needed in The Grand
Rapids Area?

1. 'l_‘_l_1§_Survey of. Higher Education _i_i_1_ Micggan, in Staff Study No. 2, page
53, states: m

"Both sets of data in Table 7 confirm the wisdom of setting up
facilities of degree-granting level at each of the three locations
where branches of the State universities are to be established

(or are already established). 0f the three other locations

studied, Saginaw seems to ofier somewhat the best potentiality

of service to a large number of students, and Grand Rapids

also seems to afford the possibith of developing a degree-granting
institution that would serve a fairly large population group. "

p 2. Further evidence of this need is found in the data from page 10, Table l,

of Staff Study No. 2. This information shows clearly that the eight comties
involved have a substantially lower percentage of college-age youngsters attend-
ing state supported four-year institutions than does the state as a whole. This
means that the young men and women in these eight counties are not finding it
possible to acquire a college education to the same extent as are the youngsters
in the other'counties of the state. Furthermore, this study indicates that even
when privately supported and community college enrollments ard included,

the average attending college in this eight-county area is still sharply below

the state average.

3. The overwhelming need for a publicly supported four-year college program
to serve this area can be more clearly recognized when we note that there are
currently more than 65, 000 young men and women living with in a 28-mile radius
of the proposed site for a new college. (It should be pointed out that this calcula-
tion is based upon a college age bracket of 18 to 24 as compared to the more
restricted age bracket used in the legislative study.) It is estimated that this
figure shall jump to 103, 000 in 1970. Stated differently, it can be seen that
within an easy commuting distance of this proposed college there is a staggering
potential of college-age yomgsters, and that this will increase by more than

50% during the next 12 years.

4. There seem to be three alternatives for the people of Michigan in providing
a solution for the problems of higher education:

(a) The existing institutions shall grow to what may be an unmanage-
able size-w-possibly as many as 50, 000 students at some of our larger
state institutions;

(b) New degree-granting colleges must be created in strategic areas
of the state, or

(c) Increasingly large numbers of qualified young men and women from
our Michigan homes shall be denied an opportunity for a college
education.

 

l a I i
.
.l
.
. . i
i i
. h
.
l 1 A A
. A
a r . n
” .
_ . Y. . .
, f _ _ . a
. . _
m
, . i 1 t
. ,_ u _ , i 1

#7. i,
r

 

.
.
. , A
n
i Q i
.
. , t
... . J
A A I
A
, (
; 4
._ , i t
A i
_
, l
r , w ..
.
4. J ,
,
.
t L
i l , _ .
I W). .
... i
I . _ \ A
r, t r i . 4 .
. i
. i , _
v _ t /
A , _
\ .
. v
I. ial.
, a
. . n A
, .
r a n n
, i
..

 

 

2'61

Appendix III. (Continued) Is A New Degree-Granting College Needed in The
' Grand Rapids Area?

It would seem clear that the only reasonable and workable alternative
is the establishment of new four-year colleges in some of the more populous
areas of the state. Certainly, the Grand Rapids area should rank high on
any such list. .

5. Recognizing the overwhelming need for the immediate establishment of a
degree-granting college in this area, the next question revolves around the
issue of an independent versus a branch-type development. There are obvious
advantages to both approaches. It seems, however, that the greatest gain to
the area can come from the establishment of a branch of an existing university
for these reasons:

(a) The status and prestige of an existing university can give
an immediate and lasting advantage to this kind of development.

(b) The administrative technique and know-how can be readily trans-
ferred from an existing university to a branch development, and
hence avoid many of the errors which would accompany a completely
independent establishment.

(c) A branch of an existing university could make available a much
wider curriculum, either through the new branch or on a "loan" basis
from the central university. 'An independent college would necessarily
begin on a modest basis and with a highly restricted curriculum. It
would be many years, if ever, before such an independent college
could offer a curriculum beyond the general education or liberal arts
program.

6. 0n the belief that a four-year college is genuinely needed in this area and
that the area's needs could best be served through a branch of an existing
university, it is proposed, further, that the area and the state would benefit
by having this a branch of Michigan State University for these reasons:

(a) The fact that Michigan State University, itself, is but 65 miles
from the proposed site would effect substantial economies in the
creation and operation of such a branch and would make possible
a close relationship between the central university and the branch.

(b) Michigan State University has for more than 40 years been
working in cooperation with the many interest groups in this area,
and the relationship is a cordial and understanding one. This
University is held in the highest regard by agricultural, business,
labor, and educational leaders, and by establishing a branch to
serve the area could provide a central focus for its many programs
already serving the people in these eight counties.

(0) The widely diversified programs of Michigan State University
more nearly coincide with the needs and interests of the residents
of these eight counties than any other single university.

(d) The philosophy of Michigan State University--that of making
educat bn work to help solve the problems of people--is one recognized

1.;

 

262

Appendix III. (Continued) Is A New Degree-Granting College Needed in The
Grand Rapids Area?

and appreciated by the people of this area, and it could be
expected that much enthusiasm and support would follow the
establishment of a branch of this University.

(e) While the fact that the Governing Board of Michigan State
University has agreed to make available an ideally located 100-
acre site for this development should not be the final determining
factor, it is, nevertheless, a real and tangible point of beginning.
Since this site is available and since it is located in a position to
serve the larger population centers of the counties involved, it
would seem reasonable that this offer should be accepted at the
earliest possible date and that plans for developing a suitable pro-
gram should move without delay.

Appendix IV. Seidman's Letter to the Legislature Urging Support
of a New College

Dear Mr.

’

 

It is with considerable pride that I can inform you, on behalf of the
Committee to Establish a 4-Year College, that many of your colleagues
in the Legislature have endorsed our efforts with their enthusiastic support.
They have done so both by personal contact and by signing statements to
this effect following our meeting in Grand Rapids on January 7.

It would be gratifying to have the support of our entire eight-county
representation in Lansing for this project which we feel is so vital for
our area.

Will you join hands with us and work for the recommendations of the
Legislative Study Committee which clearly indicate the needs for establish—
ment of a state-supported, four-year college in this area? As you have
read in the newspapers, hundreis of your constituents have pledged their
support to our cause. We will welcome an indication of your support as

quickly as possible in order that we may give your comment appropriate
publicity.

I am looking forward to your response in the near future.

Yours very truly,

L. ' William Seidman,
Chairman

264

Appendix V. Announcement of Citizens' Committee Officers and November
30 Meeting

October , 19 59

To the Members of the Citizens Advisory Committee
to assist the special Legislative Committee in
their study for the need of a four-year college
in the Grand Rapids area:

The Committee of the Michigan Legislature (Representatives Whinery,
Boyer, and Nill, and Senators Greene, Feenstra and Lane) wishes to thank
you for your willingness to serve on the Advisory Committee. The Legislative
Committee has appointed the following as temporary officers of the Citizens
Advisory Committee:

Chairman - L. Wm. Seidman

Vice Chairmen - David Dutcher , _ Kent
Richard Lindland ' Muskegon
Wendell Miles Ottawa
Ross Shoec raft Newaygo
Mrs. Richard M. Cook Barry
Dale Stafiord Montcalm
James W. Pettapiece Allegan

Secretary - Mrs. John Kistler

Treasurer A - Robert P. Van Ess

At our first meeting opportunity will be given to elect permanent officers. '

As you know, the Michigan legislature authorized a study of this area with "
the purpose of determining the need for a four-year state-supported college
in the area, and for determining how such a school should be started if such
need is established. The study is being financed by the Grand Rapids Founda-
tion, and Dr. John J amrich has been at work since June on the project. The
legislative action called for this citizens committee to provide counsel with
regard to any recommendations for legislation.

' Thus our basic function will be to individually review Dr. J amrich's rough
draft and each submit his comments and recommendations to the Legislative
Committee for its consideration. It is expected that it will be necessary to
have only two meetings of the Committee as a whole.

Your temporary chairman would like to call our first meeting for November
30, at 8:00 p. m. at the Peninsular Club. Dr. J amrich will report to us on the
progress of the study at this time. After his talk we will have a general dis-
cussion and freshments will be served.

Any suggestions with respect to the operation of the committee will be
most welcome.

 

 

 

      

  

m
- {an}

       

\
‘V

W ,4

 

THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A FOUR-YEAR COLLEGE IN THE EIGHT COUNTY AREA

 

 

*THE
ESTABLISHMENT
OF A
FOUR-YEAR
COLLEGE

IN THE

EIGHT COUNTY
AREA

 

A state-supported tour-year col-
lege can become a reality tor
the eight counties—Kent, Ot-
tawa, Muskegon, Newaygo, Alle.
gan. lorry, Montcalm and Ionia.
This new college was created
by the Michigan legislature with
the signing at the Bill on April
26, T960. contingent upon the
people in the area raising the
tunds to get it started.
Here is the background

 
 
 
  
 
 
 
  
 
 
       

 

 

 

 

*THE
BLISHMENT
OF A
TOUR-YEAR
COLLEGE
IN THE

IT COUNTY
AREA

A stole-supported leer-yea col-
TOO‘ son hem-0 a reality for
'50 tight counties—Kent, at.
I”, Muskegon, Newaygo, Alle—
M. lorry, Montcalm and tom.
This new college was mated
by the Michigan legislature wit:
the signing at the Bill on Am
26, TOGO, contingent upon the
in the area raising the

lands to get it storied. 4
Here is the batigroun

   
  
 
  
 
 
  
   

 

 

 

 

. In an eight-county area, with Kent as its center, a rapidly
mcreasmg number of our ualified young citizens are being
denied the opportunity for (higher education. The percentage
of our college-age population attending publicly supported col-
leges and universities from this geographical region is sharp]
below that of the average for the State, and it naturally follows
that this area is, therefore, being penalized. This will continue
to be the case until facilities for higher education are made
available to them.

Because of this problem, the Committee for the Establish-
ment of a Four-Year College in this area met first in the fall of
I958. It was organized on a temporary basis to ponder a recently
published report by the Michigan Legislative Study Committee
on Higher Education, prepared by Dr. John D. Russell, Direc-
tor of the Survey. Here are some excerpts from the Russell
Report, from the section dealing with Planning for Future
Development:

“Observation would indicate that the two largest universi-
ties in Michigan are probably now nearing the point
where further expansions would not be in the best inter-
est of the entire State program or of the institutions

themselves.” ' g ‘ ‘

“After weighing the pros and cons of the question . . . the
Director of the Survey has reached the conclusion that
the encouragement of the development of additional
branches of existing State educational institutions in
Michigan would be unwise . . . In a case in which the
need for a degree-granting program is clearly manifest,
the State should establish a new college under State con-
trol rather than allow or encourage one of the existing
institutions to establish a branch."

0 t C

“It is just as economical to build one or more completely
new institutions as it would be to make expansions of
corresponding size in the existing institutions, . . . In fact,
it may be more economical, in terms of the total social cost
of college attendance, to develop one or more properly
located new institutions, because many students will at-
tend who live at home and thus will not require dormi-
tory facilities and will not be put to the cash outlay for
board and room that would-be required if these same
students have to leave home to attend one of the existing
institutions." 1, . ‘

“Perhaps the most important reason of all for suggesting
the creation of one or more additional colleges is that . . .
a much larger proportion of the college-age population
will attend if an institution is located close to their
homes, than if the potential students must travel some

distance to attend.” , , .

“The principal qualification for the location of. a new
State college shou d be a concentration .ofopopulationthat
is not now adequately served by exrstmg Institutions,
publicly or privately controlled. . . . A superfiaal revrew
of the Michigan situation leads to the conclusnon that the
most likely location for another State-controlled college
is Grand Rapids. This city has a flourishing community

......M. “:2 «1’». —' - . —» . 4 _ , v

college, which should continue to render its eflective serv-
ice when and if a State college is also established in or
near the city. . . . Grand Rapids is the second largest city
in the State, only Detroit having a larger population.
Grand Rapids is sufficiently distant from other State insti-
tutions, so there would be no objectionable overlapping
of services in the new area if a new State college were

located there. , . .

The small group of citizens met to consider the findings of
the Russell Report and to discuss the problem of providing
adequately for higher education needs of the young people of
this area. As a result of their eflorts. more than 100 prominent
citizens, representing business and industry, the professions, edu-
cation, the churches, labor and veterans groups, enthusiastically
endorsed a resolution which urged the Legislature ”to act
promptly in pursuing this recommendation" of its study com-
mittee. Sixteen Grand Rapids service clubs and other organiza-
tions also endorsed the effort. The daily newspapers and weeklies
throughout the area devoted columns of news and editorial space
to the new college cause. On january 9. 1959, all legislators
representing the eight counties, plus school and college people
and newspaper editors, attended a dinner meeting in Grand
Rapids which, in effect, ”kicked off" the major phase of the new
college project.

In March l959, the Grand Rapids Foundation made a $7,500
grant for the purpose of financing a study of higher education
needs in this area, conditional upon the State legislature's
authorization. In june, 1959 the legislature passed a resolution
creating a committee of" three representatives (‘l‘homas j. Whin-
ery, (Jharles .-\. Boyer, and \\'alter ll. Nill) and three senators
(l’erry \\'. Greene, (lhailes R. Feenstra, and Garland 1’s. Lane)
to make the study. The legislative committee, headed by Repre-
sentative \'\’liiiiery', was authorized to appoint an advisory com-
mittee to assist them. l.. William Seidman was named chairman
of a (Iiti/ens .-\(l\ls'in‘\' (.‘ommittee. which included some 50
members from Kent and 30 more from Ottawa, Muskegon,

 

 

3 REPRESENTATIVES 3 SENATORS

   

l. WILLIAM SEIDMAN
THOMAS J. WINERY

lEGISlATlVE COMMITTEE CITIZENS ADVISORY

 

 

LT COMMITTEE

 

 

 

 

 

“W

Appendix VI. Booklet Prepared For Distribution to Designate New

College Progress

on ‘ 4114’

Newaygo, Montcalm, Ionia, Allegan and Barry counties. To
direct the study, the committee appointed Dr. John X. Jamrich,
Director of the Center for the Study of Higher Education at
Michigan State University. Dr. Jamrich has been Close to the
original group at the outset and was assistant to Dr. Russell in
the first statewide legislative study.

More than 70 tables of statistics supporting Dr. Jamrich's
conclusions appear in the report (a summary of which is ap-
pended hereto). The tables deal with population trends, esti-
mates and projections; business and economic indexes; geo-
graphical distribution of college student potential; present and
projected enrollment in existing colleges, and educational aspi-
rations of high school youth and the intentions of their parents
in this regard.

In an address presenting his report to the citizens committee
on November 30, 1959, Dr. Jamrich revealed startlingly con-
vincing data in support of his final recommendation that a
four-year, state-supported, degree granting college be established
in the Grand Rapids area.

Discussing estimates of college enrollment, Dr. Jamrich said:

“The projections made in this study would indicate that,
compared with 1957, the number of college enrollees from the
eight-county area willyhave doubled by 1970, and by 1975, the
number will be two-and-one-half times as large as in 1957.”

And with existing conditions, he said, “by 1965 there may
be 6,000 young people in the eight-county area seeking a higher
education for whom there will not be a facility available”.

In a series of recommendations and conclusions, Dr. Jamrich
suggests that “specifically, the realization of such a college should
be a fact by 1965." He said further:

“It seems reasonable to estimate the enrollments for the new
college at 2,500 for l965; 5,000 for 1970, and 8,000 to 10,000 by
1975."

The new college should be organized as an educational unit,
he pointed out, under state control and with state support but
with its own board of trustees. As for location, Dr. Jamrich has
this to say:

”It is the recommendation of the study that the new college
be located so that it will provide the needed services to a max-
imum number of youths and adults. It is recommended that the
new college be located just west of the city of Grand Rapids."

l. O I R

The new college will “come alive" when the area raises a
million dollars and provides a site. At that time, the State will
undertake the support of the school. The amount contributed
by the area will be but a small part of the total to be spent.
The contribution from the community will mean —

(I) More and better educational opportunities for our area’s

citizens, young and old.

(2) Educational opportunities at a lower cost both to our

citizens and to the State.

(3) Economic benefit by providing a “new business" of the

largest and steadiest type.

(4) A new resource for industry in the area, both in people

and facilities.

(5) Cultural benefits associated with a fine state college.

(6) Attracting good school people to the community with

many varied talents.

 

 

    
       
     
    
 
     
 
     
   

  

A Report to the Legislative and
Citizens Committees on the Eight-
County Study of Higher Education
Needs in Allegan, Barry, Ionia,
Kent, Montcalm, Muskegon, Ne~
waygo, and Ottawa Counties.

by
John X. Jamrich
DirodOr of the Survey

 

 

Center for the Study of Higher
Education
Michigan State University

East Lansing, Michigan
December 1959

 

        
  
     
     
    

 
  

Allegan, Barry, Ionia, Kent,
Montcalm, Muskegon, Newaygo,
and Ottawa. Certain of these
data are also presented for the
state of Michigan as a whole.

   
  
    
   

This study has summarized and analyzed certain data
on selected factors which are thought to be relevant
in making a iudgment regarding the need for
additional facilities for higher education in the
eight-county area consisting of the following counties:

  

  

     

 

 

 

Appendix VI. Booklet Prepared For Distribution to Designate New

POPULATION

CllllEliE
ENROLLMENTS'

new

College Progress

Data presented in this study on population trends indicate
that the general population increase for the state of Michigan
will be about 29.9 percent between 1957 and 1970, and about
28.0 percent for the eight counties as a group. It is clear, how-
ever, that the rate of population increase in the individual
counties in this group will vary considerably from only 10.7
percent in Ionia county to about 36.8 percent in Ottawa county.

Projections of college-age youth (18-21 year olds) were made
for 1965, 1970, and for 1975. Such projections were made for
the state of Michigan and for the eight-county area. The pro-
jections used in this study were made by using recorded births
and applying existing insurance survival tables.

For the state of Michigan, these estimates yield projections
of 520,705 college-age youth for 1965; 595,222 by 1970; and
709,259 by 1975. For the eight-county area these projections are
55,837 for 1965; 63,314 for 1970; and 72,500 for 1975.

The most direct method of making estimates of college en-
rollments for the state of Michigan or for the eight-county area
is to make some estimate of the percentage that college enroll-
ments will be of the college-age youth at any given time. For
example, in 1957, the total college enrollments in the state 01'
Michigan were 39.4 percent of the total college-age population
in the state. One might make several assumptions regarding
this percentage. The'most conservative, and probably the most
unrealistic, assumption is that this percentage will not increase.
Another assumption, and probably the more accurate, is that
the percentage will increase at some rate similar to the increases
of the past, and that at some later date it may well reach a
plateau.

Using the above two assumptions, one obtains two estimates
of college enrollments for the state: 205,157 and 228,589 for
1965; 234,517 and 267,849 for 1970; and 279,464 and 319,185
for 1975. For 1970 and 1975, the second of the two figures
assumes that the percentage that college enrollments are 01'
college-age youth will plateau at 45.0 percent.

For the eight-county area, assuming that either 30 percent
or 40 percent of the college-age youth will attend, the following
projections are obtained: 16,751 and 22,334 for 1965; 18,996
and 25,328 for 1970; and 21,750 and 29,000 for 1975.

In summary, the projections made in this study would indi-
date that, compared with 1957, the number of college enrollees
from the eight-county area will have doubled by l970 and by
1975 the number will be two-and-one-half times as large as
in 1957.

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATIONS

AND CONCLUSIONS . .
n the basns of the data gathered and analyzed for this study,
and consideration of some of the principles cited previously, the
following recommendations and additional conclusions are made:

I There exists the need for additional facility to provide edu-
cational programs beyond the high school in this area.

 

Although the need appears to be apparent for a variety of
programs and institutions, first priority consideration should be
given to the implementation of plans for the establishment of a
new, four year, degree-granting college in this eight-county area.
Specifically, the realization of such a college should be a lact by
1965. It seems reasonable to estimate the enrollments for the
new college at 2,500 for 1965; 5,000 for 1970; and 8,000 to 10,000
by 1975.

The other alternative to this recommendation was briefly
presented in body of this report. Also suggested for considera-
tion was the possibility of establishing a new.degree-granting,
state-supported college in this area with only the junior and senior
years of college on its campus. This suggestion carries with it
the necessity of extending present junior college facilities in
Grand Rapids and Muskegon, and establishing new ones in
other cities of the eight-county area.

 

 

 

 

3 The new college should be organized as an educational unit,
under state control and with state support, with its own board
of trustees. It is suggested that there be at least nine members
on the board, with terms of office so rotated as to provide max-
imum continuity of office.

4 There should be established, in addition to the Board of
Trustees of the college, a Board of Citizen Advisors, in order
that maximum assurance can be given to the successful develop-
ment of the institution. The members of this Board should be
selected by the elected Board of Trustees, with a term of office
at least six years in length.

 

S It is recommended that tuition charges at the new college be
comparable to the changes in our other state-controlled colleges.

6 It is recommended that the educational program of the new
college be developed with a strong undergraduate, liberal arts
emphasis. In addition, the program should offer work in care-
fully identified majors in liberal arts, science, mathematics,
languages, fine arts, teaching, business administration, engineer-
ing, and international programs. It is further recommended
that the development of the curriculum of the new college be
carried out with full advice and sttpport of the educational
leaders of the state's colleges and universities.

The Director of the Study is making the suggestion that, in
the interest of an adequate and effective program of higher edu-
cation, the three state universities now oll'ering extension pro-
grams in this area give consideration to the establishment of a
cooperative, continuing education center. Such a center, which
might actually be located on a campus with the new college,
would provide graduate and adult education programs for.
this area.

 

enrollments

 

 

.ithcral and analyzed for this study,
the principles cited previously, the
d .ttltllllttlldl conclusions are made:

' additional facility to provide edu-
- high school in this area.

its to be apparent for a variety of
is! priority consideration should be
ol plans lor the establishment of a
'12 rollcgc in this eightcounty area.
' such a college should be a fact by
» estimate the enrollments for the
3,000 for I970: and 8,000 to l0,000

this recommendation was briefly
I)“. Also suggested for considera-
.l.tl)llslllllg a new. degree-granting.
itca with onh thejuniorandscntor
\. This suggestion carrieswrthn
resent junior college facrlitics in
ll. and establishing new ones in

.ll(‘.l.

educational until.
trite support, with its own barf:
i there be at least nine inlem “-
so rotated as to prom e m .

organized as an

l1( c

in addition to'the Boartjdzrl
rd of Citizen Advisors. in oIO

n to the successful deve p
Board should be
h a term of office

:l.

.- give -
remix-ts of this
1 Trustees, wrt

es at the new college be

m (harg trolled colleges-

it other statccon

new

ducational program llhetiiil arts
‘)ll undergraduate, 1k .n care-
'g should offer wor i tics
.i‘ljmarts, science, _mathenjgeer:
siness administration?) "(13%" n ed
it is further tic college be

' ne
"lullum Of the 8 educational

lealve progtzm extension PTO'
- r I .
5 now offer gblishmcnt 0 a

- the 95‘“ ich
“m [0 SUCh a center, wh C

"h for.
in us W‘ , ams
iiltpeducatton progf

 

7 It is recommended that the development of the new college
should provide a particular emphasis on general, cultural pro-
grams available to the entire area being served.

8 It is recommended that at least 400 acres of land be pro-
vided for the college. The recommendation is also made that a
classroom and administration building be completed by 1965.
Also included here should be a library facility. Then, by 1968
and 1970 additional plans to be added would include a student
center, an auditorium and fine arts center, and physical educa-
tion and athletic facilities. It is strongly recommended that
consideration of building plans be given a sufficient amount of
time, and that educational and architectural planners be in-
volved at every stage of the planning.

Citizen Advisors

9 It is the recommendation of the study that the new college
be located so that it will provide the needed services to a max-
imum number of youth and adults. It is recommended that the
new college be located just west of the city of Grand Rapids.

 

10 The establishment of the proposed new college will have JUDiOT colleges
implications for the educational programs of the local colleges,
especially the junior and community colleges in Grand Rapids
and Muskegon. It is the recommendation of this study that the
program of Grand Rapids junior College be re-aligned to con-
form more closely with the objectives and purposes generally
associated with community colleges. Its program, and that ol
Muskegon Community College, should add facilities to provide
for the technical~terminal program needs indicated in the data
of this survey by students and parents. Not to be overlooked, 400 acres of land
however, is the continuing need for the provision of certain
general education programs to accompany the technical-terminal
programs.

 

ll Therefore, it is recommended that the area of service of
Grand Rapids junior College should be extended to include
several additional school districts. This will provide a broader
base of financial support and a broader area of service.

 

12 It is further recommended that Grand Rapids junior College
be then re-established under a separate board of control, With
an elected membership from the area of its financral support.

auditorium

13 Finally, it is recommended that the Legislative and Citizens
Committees now proceed to develop detailed plans for the New

College in the eight-countv area.
:6 ® is

       
 

—.l
SClCNCE

TEAcHtHG '
FINE ARTS

  
  

    

 

    

west of the city

liberal majors New College plans tuition

 

 

 

 

. a .
r. . V .. fl _ _ , __4 ‘
- . 4. V _ .... é.- , ..x- '~ :3— Jn_——-- - 7 - - 7 .

College-Age Population of Each County, Number of Students from Each County Attending
Michigan Institutions of Higher Education in 1955-56, and Percentage 'l'hat Students from Each
County Attending College in Michigan Are of College-Age Population.

‘9,

 

c It ' e- .4: 96 9“: ll f W051. - Mint
‘ ‘Poopiiiati‘egne - “State-Contrmd g Fool me, -
(1955) Institutions - Weaken ”cottages

Allegan 2.882 ,
Barry 1,691
Ionia _ 2,301
Kent 15,287
Mantcalm 1,994
Muskegon 7,146.
Newaygo 1510
Ottawa 4326

State Averdge

College Enrollments and Projections of College Enrollees for Michigan
(As Percentages of College-Age).

icoll'e‘geegge " ' .--,, . - - sf - I
in Michigan 3,39;44r. 353,856 weave; . . j
~College-- Enroll. ' . I
ments. in Michigan. . _ , ' ‘ ‘ .4
Colleges and i ' ' " ‘~
Universities 52,815 94,723 1.19.833

Percent of
College-Age

h
College-Age ( )
in Michigan 624,995. 624,995 595,222 595,222 709,300 709,300

College Enroll-
ments in Michigan

Colleges and
Universities 246,232 281,247 234,517 267,849 279,464 319,185

Percent of
College-Age . . . . . 45.0

1‘lhe lower of two college-age estlmates.
a'I’he higher of two college-age estimates.

College Enrollments and Projections of College Enrollees for the Eight-County Area
(As Percentages of College-Age Population).

mn—m
(a) (C) (a) (I!)

College-Age 55,837 55,837 55,837 63,320 63,320

College Enrollees in
Michigan Colleges

and Universities 16,751 19,542 18,996 25,328
Percent of College-Age 30.0 35.0

 

Appendix VI. Booklet Prepared For Distribution to Designate New
College Progress

Each County Attending
hot Students from Each

 

’opulation.
Comparison of Projected Enrollments from the Eight-County Area and the Levels of Anticipated
Service by Presently Existing Institutions in Michigan, 1965
(2) P t Percent That (3) (4) 5
ercen 8-Co. Enroll. 1955 . Excess ot
Instiitition Ehiglititizen‘ls Increase Were of Total Percentage E'iirtiiliiiigrit Column (4)
tor 1965 Over 1957 State Enroll. of This Total from 8-Count Over
In 1955 Enrollment 3' Column (3)
State Controlled Institution 130,025
1!
. j’ ‘ 23 Privately-Controlled
9‘ ‘ Institutions
14 Community Colleges
tent on
9 201,349
10th and 12th Grade Pupils' Certainty of Attending a New Four-Year, State-Supported College
,_ Certainty ot _ Grade in High School _
i . Attending 10th Grade 12th Grade
New College . °¢ v
Very Certain to Attend
.. Probably Attend
,‘ ‘ _‘_ Uncertain
‘ - J Probably Not Attend
Certain Not to Attend
No Response
Area

:oUfllY

 

266

Appendix VII. Michigan 70th Legislature Regular Session of 1960
House Bill No. 477 '

February 22, Introduced by Reps. Whinery, Borgman, Bolt, Boyer,
Nill, Raap, Emmons, Gibbs, Rasmussen, Lohman, Cooper, Olsen,
Cobb and Buth, orChaiprinted and referred to the Committee on
Education.

A bill to establish and regulate a state institution of higher learning
to'be known as Grand Valley college; to fix the membership and the

' powers of its governing board.

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN
ENACT:

Page 1

meqmanh-aamr-o

11

Sec. 1. There is hereby established a state institution of higher
education to be located in an 8 county area comprising the counties of
Kent, Ottawa, Muskegon, Barry, Ionia, Montcalm, Newaygo and Allegan.

. The institution shall be .maintained by the state and its facilities shall

be made equally available and upon the same basis to all qualified resi-
dents of this state. The conduct of its affairs and control of its property
shall be vested in a board of trustees, the members of which shall consti-
tute a body corporate known as the "board of trustees of Grand Valley
college, ” hereinafter referred to as "the board," with the right as such
of suing and being sued, of adopting a seal and altering the same.

Sec. 2. There is hereby established a "board of trustees, " to consist

Page 2

@m-QOSUTFOORH

of 9 members to be elected in the general November election of 1960, 3
of whom shall hold office for a period of 2 years, 3 for 4 years, and 3 for
6 years. At every regular general November election thereafter, ther e
shall be elected 2 members whose term of office shall be for 6 years.
Nominations for said membership shall be made at a party convention
and of the nominations first made, the term of years of each nomination
shall be stated.

Sec. 3. The first meeting of the board shall be as soon as possible
after the election. The board shall elect from its membership a chair-
man and a secretary, a treasurer, and such other affirms as it deems
necessary. Officers shall serve terms of 1 year and until their succes-
sors shall have been elected and qualified. Before permitting the treas-
urer to enter upon the duties of his office, the board shall require him to
file his band to the people of this state with such sureties and in such
sum not less than the amount of money likely to be in his possession as
the board may designate. No officers shall have the power to incur obli-
gations or to dispose of the board's property or funds, except in pur-
suance of a vote of the board.

267

Appendix VII. (Continued) Michigan 70th Legislature Regular Session of 1960

9
10
11

House Bill No. 477

A majority of the members of the board shall form a quorum for the
transaction of business. The board by majority vote of its membership
may enact rules, by-laws and regulations for the conduct of its business

Page 3

{OGDQGOTQWNH

and for the government of the institution, and amend same; and by a
majority vote of the members present may fix tuition and other fees and
charges, appoint or remove such personnel as the interests of the institu-
tion and the generally accepted principles of academic tenure permit

or require, determine the compensation to be paid for services and mate-
rials, confer such degrees and grant such diplomas as are usually con- .
ferred or granted by other similar institutions, receive, hold and manage
any gift, grant, bequest, or devise of funds or property, real or personal
absolutely or in trust, to promote any of the purposes of the college, enter
into any agreements, not inconsistent with this act, as may be desirable
in the conduct of its affairs, and in behalf of the state lease or dispose

of any property which comes into its possession, provided that in so

doing it shall not violate any condition or trust to which such property

may be subject. It is the intention hereof to vest in the board all powers
customarily exercised by the governing board of a college or university
and the enumeration of the powers herein shall not be deemed to exclude
any of such powers not expressly excluded by law.

See. 4. The board shall not borrow money on its general faith and
credit, nor create any liens upon its property. The board, however, may
borrow money to be used to acquire land or to acquire -or erect buildings,
or to alter, equip or maintain them, to be used as dormitories, student

Page 4

EHHHl—i
GONHme-JOIOIrbODNl-I

centers, stadiums, athletic fields, gymnasiums, auditoriums and other
related activities, and it shall obligate itself for the repayment thereof,
together with interest thereon, solely out of the fund derived from rentals
or other income fromthe use and operation of the property so acquired,
or from special fees and charges required to be paid by the students
deemed by it to be benefited thereby; and may pledge all or any part

of the fund as security therefor.

Sec. 5. The board shall determine the location of the college, which
shall be withinjhe 8 county area named in this act, giving preference to
a location in or near the city of Grand Rapids.

Sec. 6. The board shall be deemed a state agency, and as such shall
have the right to acquire property as provided under the provisions of
Act No. 149 of the Public Acts of 1911, as amended, being sections 213. 21

- to 213. 41 of the Compiled Laws of 1948.

268'

Appendix VIII. House Education Committee Amendments to House Bill 47 7

House Bill No. 477, entitled

A bill to establish and regulate a state institution of higher learning
to be known as Grand Valley college; to fix the membership and the powers
of its governing board.

The Committee recommended the adoption of the following amendments
thereto, and the passage of the bill when so amended.

1. Amend page 1, line 7, by striking out "trustees" and inserting
”governors. "

2. Amend page 1, line 8, by striking out "trustees" and inserting
"governors. "

3. Amend page 1, line 11, by striking out "trustees" and inserting
" governors. "

4. Amend page 2, line 1, by striking out "general November" and
inserting "spring," and by striking out "1960" and inserting "1961. "

5. Amend page 2, line 4, by striking out "2" and inserting "3. "

6. Amend page 2, after line 7, by inserting a section 2a to read as
' follows: ..

"Sec. 2a. There is hereby established a temporary board of
governors of 8 members consisting of 1 person to be selected from each
county board of education from the 8 county area involved. The temporary
board of governors shall be responsible for the selection of and securing
of a suitable site for the location of the Grand Valley College and shall
raise the sum of not less than $1, 000, 000. 00, by means other than public
taxation, which amount shall be deemed the minimum amount of assets
required, in addition to the site, to become a state institution of higher
education pursuant to the provisions of this act. The temporary board
of governors may accept gifts, legacies or bequests of property and
shall have the power to hold and dispose of property in trust. The tem-
porary board of governors shall designate 1 or more state or national banks
or trust companies as the fiscal agent of funds coming. into its possession
under the provisions of this act. The state board of education shall be
vested with the powers of and the duty to state in writing that the tem-
porary board of governors has: (1) selected and secured an adequate
site, and (2) has received and holds property in trust of the minimum
sum of $1, 000, 000. 00, as required by this section. Upon the filing of
these findings the remaining sections of this act to be in full force and
effect and the machinery for the selection of the board of governors as
provided in this section shall be effective as of the subsequent spring
election. Upon the establishment of the board of governors and at the
time of the meeting of the first board of governors the temporary board
of governors shall be deemed to be dissolved and its power and duties
terminated. "

269

Appendix VIII. (Continued) House Education Committee Amendments to
House Bill 47 7

7. Amend page 4, after line 7, by striking out all of section 5 and
renumbering the remaining section.

The question being on the adoption of the proposed amendments made
by the Committee. '

The amendments were adopted and the. bill was placed on the order of
Third Reading of Bills.

March 14

270

Appendix IX. Senate Education Committee Amendments .to House Bill 47 7

House Bill No. 477, entitled

A bill to establish and regulate a state institution of higher learning
to be known as Grand Valley College; to fix the membership and the powers
of its governing board.

The following are the amendments recommended by the committee:

1. Amend page 1, lines 7, 8, and 11 after "board of" by striking
(House amendment) ”governors, " and inserting "control. "

2. Amend page 2, after "of 9 members to be" in line 1, by striking
the balance of line 1 and all of lines 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7, and inserting
"appointed by the governor with the advice and consent of the Senate for
terms of 6 years, except of the members first appointed 3 shall serve
for 2 years, 3 for 4 years, and 3 for 6 years. ”

3. Amend page 2, line 8, after "Sec. 3. " by striking the balance
of the line and "after the election, " in line 9.

4. Amend page 2, after line 7, by striking (House amendment) all of
section 2a.

5. Amend page 2, after line 18, by inserting "The board of control
shall be responsible for the selection and acquisition of a suitable site for
the location of the Grand Valley College and shall raise the sum of
$1, 000, 000 by a method other than taxation, which amount shall be deemed
the minimum amount of assets required in addition to the site, to become a
state institution of higher education pursuant to the provisions of this
act. "

6. Amend page 3, line 19, after "property," by striking out "The"
and inserting " With the approval of the legislature the. "

7. Amend page 3, line 19, after "board" by striking out the comma
and "however, ".

8. Amend page 4, by striking out lines 11, 12, 13, and 14.
ARTHUR DEHMEL,
Chairman.
The report was accepted.

The bill and the amendments recommended by the committee were referred
to the Committee of the Whole.

March 30

271

Appendix X. Letter Urging Legislative Support of House Bill 47 7

Gentlemen:

We are writing you with respect to House Bill No. 477, providing for
a new state college in the eight—county area surrounding Grand Rapids.

The proposal for such a school is the result of years of study by the-
Michigan Legislative Study Committee on Higher Education. That com-
mittee's final report (Russell Report, 19 58) pointed convincingly to a
need for additional facilities for higher education in Michigan, and indicated
that the most likely location for another state-controlled college is Grand
Rapids (page 141).

This report was followed by a study by Dr. John Jamrich, Dr. Russell's
former assistant, under the provisions of House Concurrent Resolution No.
28 (1959). Dr. Jamrich's study revealed a real need for a school in the
Grand Rapids area, and indicated that by 1965, these may be 6, 000 students
in this area seeking a higher education for whom there will not be a facility
available (page 82). The report concluded that a college should be started
in this area promptly.

Both studies indicate that this type of new school is the most economical
way for the State to meet its rising higher education needs, since most of
its students would be living at home. Also, it will make it possible for
many to go to college who would otherwise not be able to attend. (See
Russell Report, page 140; Jamrich report, page 122.)

The Bill as submitted provides that the area must provide $1, 000, 000 j
in funds, and a site, in order to establish the college. We accept this
challenge. The need for the school is so great that we feel confident the
community will respond generously. We ask your support of this measure.

Sincerely,

272

Appendix XI. General Guide Lines Suggested by Educational Consultants
January 11, 12, 13, 1961

To: The Board of Control, Grand Valley College.
From: Committee of Consultants

Regarding: Preliminary Report

The Committee of Consultants designated by the several state universities,
in response to yourinvitation of recent date, met in Grand Rapids Wednesday,
Thursday and Friday, January 11-13, 1961. In its sessions the Committee
reviewed many of the problems which will arise in the establishment and
organization of an institution of higher education and discussed several
topics which, in its opinion, will require early consideration. The Committee
is pleased to present for your consideration a tentative and preliminary report.

PART I

THE GENERAL CHARACTER OF
THE COLLEGE

(1) There is a definite need for additional facilities in the eight-county
area to provide educational programs beyond the high school. Projected
college enrollment studies in the J amrich report indicate that complete
utilization of all the facilities of existing institutions cannot take care of
the growing number of qualified college students in the area.

(2) The proposed college should be an undergraduate degree-granting
institution.

(3) The initial program should emphasize the liberal arts in its broad
context, leading to specialities appropriate to the needs of the area and state.

(4) In its planning the college should recognize its obligations both
to the area and the state.

(5) The college should direct its efforts to providing well-balanced,
quality programs in the letters, arts, and sciences for academically able
students who may profit from higher education. The programs may be
preliminary to more advanced study in graduate and professional areas.

(6) The new college should be designed to meet the needs of both com-
muting and residential students.

(7) Consideration should be given to organizing an educational program
which emphasizes broad areas rather than departmentalized specializations.

(8) The institution should plan for a total four-year college program and
for the accommodation of graduates of community colleges.

273

Appendix XI. (Continued) General Guide Lines Suggested by Educational
Consultants - January 11, 12, 13, 1961

PART II

INTER-INSTITUTIONAL RELATIONSHIPS

Consideration has been given to inter-institutional relationships and
the Committee recommends:

(1) That, to explore more adequately relations with the four-year private
colleges in the eight-coimty area, the Board authorize an invitation to those
colleges, as a group, to designate a representative to the Committee of
Consultants.

(2) That the Board consider the following policy statement with reference
to two—year colleges.

That in the planning of its educational program, the Grand Valley
College should recognize the emerging role of the community college
in the pattern of higher education in the State of Michigan and should
encourage such institutions to continue their generally accepted
functions, such as:

a. The offering of academic curriculums for students planning
to transfer to various four—year colleges and universities.

b. The offering of business and technical curriculums for
students planning to enter a vocation of their choice.

a. The offering of guidance and counseling services to all
students including those who have not decided on a specific
educational or vocational goal.

(1. The offering of an evening college program for working stu-
dents and adults. ' ‘

e. The offering of a broad range of adult education programs
in response to community needs.

Specifically, the Grand Valley College should cooperate closely
with the two community colleges located in its immediate vicinity
to avoid unnecessary duplication of program offerings.

(3) That those institutions currently offering adult education and extension
services in the eight-county'area should be invited to: reformulate their
programs and policies in conformity with those which will be developed
locally, lend support to emerging local programs, and thereafter, join local
institutions in the planning and development of cooperative and coordinated
programs of advanced study and adult education.

2474.

Appendix XI. (Continued) General Guide Lines Suggested by Educational
Consultants - January 11, 12, 13, 1961
PART III
SITE SELECTION AND PLANNING
The Committee of Consultants was informed of the several sites which
have been represented as suitable and available. The committee took time
to become informed of their location, but believed it inadvisable at this
time to become involved in a comparison of their merits. Instead, the
discussion was directed toward the development of criteria which should
govern exploratory surveys of available sites. The Committee of Consultants,
therefore, suggests:
(1) That the Board adopt the following criteria:
A. Physical Characteristics
1. Amount of usable land
2. Adaptabith of shape, contour, and orientation to needs
3. Elevation and drainage
4. Character of soil

B. Environment

1. Cleanliness and quietness of surroundings, general
attractiveness, etc.

2. Freedom from hazards
3. Coordination with nearby favorable public facilities
4. Zoning
C. Accessibility
1. Safety and convenience of approach
2. Centrality in contributing area
3. Convenience for community use
D. Services

1. Drinking water
2. Water pressure
3. Sewage facilities
4.

Fire service

I

275

Appendix XI. (Continued) General Guide Lines Suggested by Educational
Consultants - January 11, 12, 13, 1961

E. Costs

(2) That the Board authorize a preliminary survey and evaluation of the
several sites which have been proposed.

(3) That the Board request the "Site Committee" to schedule a meeting
to coincide with the availability of the proposed evaluation report.

(4) Although the committee does not desire to make specific recommenda-
tions at this time, yet preliminary conclusions indicate:

a. That a proper site should consist of not less than approxi—
mately 600 acres including a compact block of 200-300 acres of
"buildable land. "

b. That the site should be in the proximity of the projected
center of population of the eight-county area as determined from
known trends.

c. That careful attention should be given to the developing
pattern of land transportation in the general area.

(1. That inquiries should be made concerning community
planning and community development as well as to neighborhood
characteristics, such as residential, industrial, recreational,
etc. , the location of objectionable features such as railroads,
airports, patterns of air travel, etc.

e. That accessibility of public utilities and services such as
water, sewage, electricity, gas, public transportation, etc. ,
should be reviewed.

f. That some but not overpowering attention should be given to
natural beauties and future possible site development.

g. That a natural boundary on one or two sides is a real asset
and that care should be taken to avoid, as far as possible, future
instrusions, such as highway. and street extensions, etc. , into the
campus area.

h. i That attention be given to the availability of extramural,
cultural, health and recreational facilities and the possibilities for
the development of such supporting facilities and services

PART IV

PRELIMINARY QUESTIONS THAT SHOULD BE ANSWERED LOOKING
TOWARD THE SELECTION OF A PRESIDENT

The committee will give further consideration to the question of procedures
and criteria to be used in the selection of a president and will submit its

276

Appendix XI. (Continued) General Guide Lines Suggested by Educational
Consultants - January 11, 12, 13, 1961

recommendations presently. However, it recommends that the Board give
consideration now to a number of questions that need answers in order to
develop specifications for the position:

(1) Will the college presently have other high echelon officers,
such as an academic dean, a business officer, and a public relations
director?

(2) Is there a man already identified that would be the most logical
choice?

(3) 'To what extent will political considerations be a factor in the
choice of a president?

(4) To what extent will local background or compatability with
local background be an important or essential qualification?

(5) Among broad qualifications that relate to such things as
academic status, educational leadership, public relations skills,
administrative competence, is there an order of priority of con-
sideration? For example, is leadership in creating the educational
program primary, or will the president be expected to devote large
effort to raising money other than by legislative appropriations?

(6) Should the president have special talents for working well
with the Board, staff, and faculty?

(7) What consideration should be given to the feelings and atti-
tudes of candidates toward such things as liberal education (in either
its narrowest sense or in a broad one), specialized education, com-
munity college programs religion, and athletics?

(8) What salary range should be made available?

(9) What other prerequisites and fringe benefits should be included
in compensation, or for the convenience of the office?

(10) Is there a preferred age range?
(11) Will the role of the wife be important?

COMMITTEE OF CONSULTANTS

Chris A. De Young - Grand Valley College
Harold M. Dorr - University of Michigan
Harlan Hagman - Wayne State University
Raymond N. Hatch - Michigan State University
Algo D. Henderson - University of Michigan
James A. Lewis - University of Michigan
Clayton J. Maus - Western Michigan University
John E. Visser - Grand Rapids Junior College

277
Appendix XII. Guidelines for Site Proposals

In the interest of insuring an adequate review of all possible sites for
Grand Valley College, the following guidelines have been adopted by the
Site Selection Committee. It should be recognized that there must be some
flexibility in all suggested factors, but these should be kept to a minimum
if the site is to receive favorable consideration.

GENERAL CONDITIONS

 

It is the intent to recommend a site or sites which have the following
characteristics:

1. An area of 640 acres or more of which about 300 acres will be
"buildable"land. The latter should be in one compact block of the total
acreage.

2. The site should be approximately square.

3. Access to the site by public highway is of primary importance
but such access should not divide the site.

4. Sites should have natural boundaries on one or more sides.
5. Access to utilities will be of prime importance. Particular

attention will be given to sewerage treatment possibilities, and to sources of
water.

6. Current and projected possibilities for surface water drainage.

7. The natural beauty of the site.

8. Sufficiently removed from undesirable neighborhood characteristics
such as - (excessive traffic, slum housing, city dump, etc.)

9. The site should be in the proximity of the projected center of
population (eight—county area) as determined from known trends.

Note: A deficiency in one of the above guidelines will not, in itself, exclude
a site from consideration.

CONTENT OF PROPOSAL
Proposals for consideration mayinclude extensive supporting data, but
for purposes of the initial review the following elements represent a desirable

minimum:

1. A sketch of the site which would be drawn to a scale of at least
4" .-. one mfle. The sketch should indicate:

a. Section(s), town, range and township(s)

278

Appendix XII. (fimtinued) Guidelines for Site Proposals

go

Public road pattern (also projected if known)
Railroads

Streams or lakes

Wooded area

Existing residential area

Existing industrial and/or business area

2. A brief description of possible water sources, sewerage treatment
considerations, and natural gas supply.

3. A brief description of the number of individual land owners, and
the acreage now under option. (Options are desirable but if they are not
readily available at the time of the initial review, the proposal should be
submitted. Option must be obtained, however, prior to final consideration.)

4. Include the specific cost of the site or estimated cost if the exact
amount is unlmown.

279

Appendix XIIIa. State Building Division Criteria for Site Selection--
Investigation of Sites For a Four Year College

Department of Administration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . January 25, 1961

AdrianN. Langius, Director . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . BuildingDivision

This is an examination of the criteria which should guide, and in fact govern,
the selection of a site for a four year college. It will be shown that it is

not sufficient that a site possess a number of outstanding advantages but,
rather, it must be endowed first with certain ESSENTIAL FEATURES in order
to receive any consideration whatever. There must be an assured adequate
supply of water. There must be means of sewage disposal. Topography must
be such as to promote the drainage of surface water. Soil conditions must be
favorable to the support of building foundations, lawns and other plantings.

While the fulfillment of these essential features is necessary if the institution

is to function at all, the site should possess certain other DESIRABLE FEATURES,
no less important, if the institution is to function economically and serve com-
pletely the purposes for which is founded. If the proposed college is to be
primarily a commuting type institution, rather than a residence type institution,
there should be easy access to the major transportation arteries. All approaches
to the institution should be considered from the viewpoint of safety- There should
be a community having a population large enough to offer housing accommodations
for the staff, social and recreational inducements and to insure a labor supply.

There are many other desirable features which should be considered in making
a final selection of the site but they do not have the same sort of effect on the
functioning of the institution, nor do they affect costs to the same degree.

They are subject to compromise. The lack of one may be offset largely by
exceptional features of another. -

ESSENTIAL FEATURES

 

Water Supply: The underground water supply in many localities of the lower
peninsula has reached the point where present demands are draining this
resource at about the same rate as it recovers. All large communities near
the shores of the Great Lakes are now using lake water. Many inland com-
munities are using the water from rivers. At Ypsilanti State Hospital‘the
State has been forced to spend over a million dollars in developing the

water supply. It is obvious, therefore, that before a site is actually
selected there must be obtained official authority to draw from an existing
municipal water supply or positive proof of underground sources as deter-
mined by drilling of test wells.

Sewage Disposal: There must be a means of sewage disposal either a) by
treatment and thence into a stream of sufficient flow or b) into an existing
sewerage system. The high initial cost of a treatment plant together with
the problem of perpetual operation and maintenance should be compared with
the costs of connecting to an adequate existing municipal system. In any

S '
" -I ,, ..'."a
. ,
I
._ .
J.
.

 

~..z- :1 ‘gu‘\l J ‘ AI‘..«

kw ~J. 51.“.t4

-... I- “AA «a lags’c ;\I.q v‘iAU

.Qv-J-JJ- u ‘l a

‘01 "d 0

‘u

'c

d

'\.

280

Appendix XIlIa. (Continued) State Building Division Criteria for Site Selection--
Investigation of Sites For a Four Year College

I

event, before a site is actually acquired there must be official authority to
dispose of effluent at an existing plant or a stream of certain minimum flew
into which effluent from a disposal plant could be discharged.

To 0 gm h : The terrain must lend itself to the rapid runoff of surface water
resifiting from atoms or melting snow while at the same time providing suit-
able sites for buildings, parking, recreational areas and other requirements

of the institution. Due consideration must be given to topographic characteristics
to insure that some apparent asset of a site will not be invalidated by the high
cost of utility construction requiring sewage lift stations and water pumping
equipment.

 

Soil Characteristics: There have been many instances, in private as well
as public developments, where assumed soil conditions have resulted in
unexpected and excessively high construction costs. Before a site is finally
selected the soil bearing capacity and the quality and abundance of topsoil
should be subjected to some tests to establish, in a general way, the fitness
of both surface and subsoil for the intended purpose.

DESIRABLE FEATURES

Highway Access: There must be convenient access to major highways along
lines of approach free from traflic hazards. Careful consideration should be
given not only to existing highways but to all proposed patterns of future high-
way developments.

Land Areas and Dimensions: The institution will attract, at once, all sorts
of commercial and residential developments which will eventually prohibit
expansion. The land area requirements must therefore be established on
the basis of ultimate, not present, needs. The shape of the land area for

an educational institution, as compared with other types of institutions, must
be such as to permit expansion in several directions. Walking time, or dis-
tance, from building to building or other facility, is limited. Obviously, a
long narrow site, even of requisite acreage, will not be acceptable. There
must be sufficient land to provide insulation from surrounding land uses with
some attention to natural barriers.

Community: No institution can function without personnel; any institution can

be maintained more effectively in direct proportion to the amount and diversi-
fic ation of the labor available. That availability is in turn directly proportionate
to the size, nearness and accessibility of a community. Housing, social,
business and recreational benefits will accrue to the institution from the ,
proximity of a rather large community. On the basis of experience at exist-

ing institutions it appears that the community should have a population of at
least several thousand.

281

Appendix XIIIa. (Continued) State Building Division Criteria for Site Selection -
Investigation of Sites For a Four Year College

Other Desirable Features: There can be listed:
Freedom from nuisances, noise, odor, smoke, swamps, other
Favorable zoning regulations
Availability of fire fighting equipment
Availability of electric service

Most of these, and many others like postal and telephone service, are automatically
provided by the requirement of proximity to a sizable community.

Land Cost: As a guard against premature enthusiasm for a particular site
because of its apparent low cost, consideration must be given, and cost analysis
made, of the relationship between the investment for land and the cost of pro-
viding the essentials that have been briefly discussed above. It can readily be
shown that a site costing $200. 00 per acre would actually be more expensive
than one of the same size at $1, 000. 00 per acre if the cost of any of the
essentials become excessive.

There follows a preliminary rating chart on which an arbitrary weight has
been suggested for several of the desirable and essential requirements of a
site. Although the weights attached to each requirement are arbitrary, and
can be adjusted if deemed advisable, -- in any event the effect on each rating
will be similar. It may well happen after all ratings are completed that
further analysis among the high ones, and the appearance of intangible quali-
ties not subject to arithmetic classification, will reveal that one is out-
standing. As a preliminary step the rating will tend to narrow the field of
selection by revealing at once the gross deficiences in many sites investigated.

.. - -. ..a‘-- —- 4 -
0 L ‘ .T {Il""lf) it!
I
U
Q ~ - i- l ' on
. 5 s .- .o ; IA. .rxJPIL Egg; {9 ..., -

I Vii-101! ' If raj-h": iii. i (3.1,:

282

Appendix XIIIb. State Building Division Criteria For Site Selection--
Preliminary Rating Chart

Site Located In Section , T , R Township

 

SUGGESTED RATED
VALUE VALUE

 

1. Size of site available - 600 acres min. . . . . . . z . . . 18 . .

 

(Subtract 1 point for each 50A less than 600) . . . . . .
2. Least dimension of site -.5000' min. . . . . . . . . . .

15. O O

 

(Subtract 1 point for each 500' less than 5000')
30COStOfLandoooooaoaoooooohooeoooooao 15000

 

(Subtract 1 point for each 5. 00 per acre over 250. 00)
4. Distance from nearest point of site to trunk line highway. 12 . . .

 

(Subtract 1 point for each 1/2 mile)
5. Safety of approach from trunk line highway. . . . . . . . 6 . . .

 

(Subtract 1 point for railroad crossing, obstructed view,
etc. )
6. Conditionofpresentroadtosite....... ..... 6...

 

(Subtract 1 point if poor pavement; 2 points if unpaved
7. Distance to nearest city of 5000 population. . . . . . . . 8 . . .

 

(Subtract 1 point for each mile over 5)

 

8. Distance from nearest fire station . . . . . . . . . . . . 5. . .
(Subtract 1 point for each two miles) '
9. Freedom of site from nuisances, noise, odor, swamps,

 

Otherooaoooaaooaooaoaoooooaooao 5'00
(Subtract 1 point for each)
10. Character of surroundings - as estimated. . . . . . . . 5. . .

 

(Subtract 1 point each for industrial or commercial
developments, or other undesirable characteristics)
11. Distancetofuelgasmain.,.,..,,,,,,.,... 3...

 

(Subtract 1 point for each 1/2 mile)
12. Distance to electric power service

0 O O O O O O O O O O O 2. O O

 

(Subtract 1 point for each 1/ 2 mile) __
100

RATmGaaoaaa0000000000000...ooaooooaooo_o

 

1' water Swply O O O O . O C O O O C O O O C C O O C 0 O C O 30 O O C

 

Distance to nearest 8" or larger municipal main .
(in feet)

Subtract 1 point for each 500 ft. up to maximum. of

10, 000 ft. If more than 10, 000 feet assume wells

will be required and score this item 10.

noSewageDi-Sposal.....o................ 30.00
Distance to nearest 18" or larger municipal sani-
tary sewer .
(in feet)..

 

 

'ui
‘

ll!

283

Appendix XIIIb. (Continued) State Building Division Criteria For Site Selection--
Preliminary Rating Chart

Subtract 1 point for each 500' up to max. of 10, 000 ft.
If distance is more than 10, 000 ft. assume treatment
plant will be required and rate this item 10 provided
there is a good flowing stream within one mile of site.
If no stream score item 0.

m.Topography-0000......coco-00090.... 200..
Area of usable land - score 15 for 300 A or more.
(Subtract 1 point:- for each 10 acres less than 300)
Drainage - score this part of topography as one of
following:
Gently rolling - good drainage (5)
Steep slopes - rapid drainage (3)
Flat - slow drainage (1)

 

IV. SoilCharacteristiCS.................... 20.
Bearing capacity - score this part of sofl 15 if
there are schools, commercial or other large struc-
tures nearby on similar sites. If no evidence to
base determination of soil bearing capacity, score
this part of soil 10
Topsofl - score this 5 if 8" or more topsoil.
(Subtract 1 point for each inch less than 8)

 

1'66-
RATmGaaoaaooooaooaoa00000000000000no...
REMARKS
RATING PREPARED BY DATE

 

 

INFORMATION SOURCES

 

284

Appendix XIV. Plans For Site Review and Hearings

GRAND VALLEY STATE COLLEGE

February 1 , 1961

Adjustments have been made in the preferred schedule that may create a
problem for some groups. It is hoped, however, that all.individuals and
groups will find it possible to adhere to the proposed time assignments.

If the time assignments cause a serious problem you are invited to call

the office, GL 1-1588 - Ext. 250, and an attempt will be made to adjust
the schedule.

All site committee members, with an availability form on file, have been
assigned to one review. If other members have free time on February 8
and 9 they are invited to furnish the College office with this information

‘ for possible assignment.

This schedule and two other documents are being mafled to all members of
the Site Committee and to a representative of each site. The two documents
are entitled Investigation of Sites For a Four Year Colleg_g and Preliminary
Rating Chart - For Casual Reviews. The form is for the general information
of all people involved. The latter is to be used by the reviewers in arriving
at a general evaluation of the proposed site. It should be kept in mind that
the suggested values are relative and are included to asdE the reviewer in
obtaining a general evaluation of the site. It is expected that the reviewer
will bring the evaluation sheet to the hearing or mail it to the College office
in time for the hearing.

 

Arrangements are being made for a projector which will be used to project
the sketches of the site at the time of the presentation on February 11, 1961.

Evaluation blanks will be placed in the hands of all Site Committee members
on February 11. These will be completed at the termination of each hearing
and filed with the chairman of the committee.

The success of the review schedule depends on the ability of all individuals
to meet time schedules and adjust to unexpected situations. Those of us
at the College office think that we have such people assigned to the task.
Good luck' ‘

Raymond N. Hatch
Consultant

I Ili‘i t'

285
Appendix XIV. (Continued) Plans for Site Review and Hearings

. GRAND VALLEY STATE COLLEGE

.- February 1, 1961

Plans have been completed for the Site Reviews and for the initial hear-

ings. Numbers have been assigned to identify the sites. The reviews and
hearings have been scheduled as follows:

I. (Allendale)
Date of Review - February 8, 2 P. M.

Reviewers: .
Robert Visscher, of Holland, Michigan
B. P. Sherwood, Jr. , of Grand Haven, Michigan

Host for Review: . '
Keith Baker, of Allendale, Michigan

Local arrangements for Review:
Mr. Baker will provide transportation over the site. The reviewers
will meet him at the Flint Michigan Bank and Trust Co. , Allendale,
on the hour scheduled for the review.

The hearing will be held in the Commons (Ground Floor) of the Grand
Rapids Junior College at 2:00 P. M. , February 11, 1961.

II. (Wyoming-Byron)
Date of Review - February 9, 2:00 P. M.

Reviewers:
Hammond A. Berry, of Grand Rapids, Michigan
Charles A. Rogers, of Muskegon, Michigan

Host for Review:
Paul Strecker, of Grand Rapids, Michigan

Local Arrangements for Review:
The host will provide transportation over the site. The reviewers
will meet Mr. Strecker at the corner of Wilson Ave. , S. W.
and 64th St. on the hour scheduled for the review.

The hearing will be held in the Commons (Ground Floor) of the
Grand Rapids Junior College at 1:00 P. M. , February 11, 1961.

IV. (AMAN PARK)
Date of Review: February 8, 2:00 P. M.

Reviewers:

Manley E. Brown, of Grand Rapids, Michigan

John Van Dellen, of Grand Rapids, Michigan
Host for Review:

Howard Stanton, of Grand Rapids, Michigan
Local Arrangements for Review:

Mr. Stanton will provide transportation over the site. The reviewers

286

Appendix XIV. (Continued) Plans for Site Review and Hearings

will meet him at Stanton's Plaza Apparel Shop, Standale
Plaza on the hour scheduled for the review.
The hearing will be held in the Commons (Ground Floor) of the
Grand Rapids Junior College at 3:00 P. M. on February 11, 1961.

V (Marne)
Date of Review: February 9, 10:00 A. M.

Reviewers: -

M. S. Keeler II, of Grand Rapids, Michigan

Al Preston, of Grand Rapids, Michigan
Host for Review:

Jerry Hammond, Marne Business Men's Club, Marne, Michigan

Local arrangements for review:

Mr. Hammond will provide transportation over the site. The
reviewers will meet him at Hammond and Hansen Enterprises,
next to the Coopersville Bank Building in Marne, Michigan.

The hearing will be held in the Commons (Ground Floor) of the
Grand Rapids Junior College at 3:30 P. M. on February 11, 1961.

VI (O'Brien Road)
Date of Review: February 8, 10:00 A. M.

Reviewers:

Jerome D. Franklin, of Grand Rapids, Michigan

Richard Hoffman, of Saugatuck, Michigan
Host for the Review:

Mrs. E. L. Green, of Grand Rapids, Michigan
Local arrangements for Review:

The host will provide transportation over the site. The reviewers
will meet the host at 3450 O'Brien Road, S. W. , Grand Rapids, on the
hour scheduled for the review.

The hearing will be held in the Commons (Ground Floor) of the
Grand Rapids Junior College at 10:00 A. M. February 11, 1961.

V11 (Grand Haven)
Date of Review: Feburary 9, 2:00 P. M.

Reviewers:

Robert Bennett, of Grand Rapids, Michigan

M. R. Bissell III, of Grand Rapids, Michigan
Host for Review:

Claude Ver Duin, Chamber of Commerce, 'Grand Haven, Michigan.
Local arrangements for Review:

Mr. Van Duin will provide transportation over the site. The
reviewers will meet their host at the Chamber of Commerce office
in Grand Haven, which is across the street from Schuler's. ‘

287
Appendix XIV. (Continued) Plans for Site Review and Hearings

The hearing will be held in the Commons (Ground Floor) of the
Grand Rapids Junior College at 10:30 A. M. on February 11, 1961.

IX (Greenridge)
Date of Review - February 8, 2:00 P. M.

Reviewers:
R. M. Van Volkinburg, of Grand Haven, Michigan
Mrs. Robert Shaw, of Grandville, Michigan

Host for Review:
Richard De Boer, of Grand Rapids, Michigan

Local arrangements for Review:
Mr. De Boer will provide transportation over the site. The
reviewers will meet him at the Meijer's Super Market Restaurant,
West Leonard and Walker Road on the hour scheduled for the
review.

The hearing will be held in the Commons (Ground Floor) of the Grand
Rapids Junior College at 9:00 A. M. on February 11, 1961.

X and XIV (Kenowa: and Four Mile Road)
Date of Review: February 9, 9:00 A. M.

Reviewers:

Merrill S. Bailey, of Muskegon, Michigan

Robert S. Tubbs, of Grand Rapids, Michigan

Robert Van Ess, of Grand Rapids, Michigan
Hosts for the Review:

Dave Hansen, of Marne, Michigan

Gerald H. Fisher, of Grand Rapids, Michigan
Local arrangements for Reviews:

The hosts will provide transportation over the sites. The reviewers
will meet the hosts at the Walker Township Hall on the hour scheduled
for the reviews.

The hearing will be held in the Commons, (Gromd Floor) of the Grand
Rapids Junior College at 1:30 P. M. February 11, 1961.

XI (Lowell)
Date of Review: February 9, 1961, 2:00 P. M.

Reviewers:
Robert De Bruyn, of Zeeland, Michigan
David Almerigi, of Grand Rapids, Michigan
Host for Review:
B. C. Olson, of Lowell, Michigan
Local arrangements for Review:
Mr. Olson will provide transportation over the site. The reviewers

will meet him at the City Hall in Lowell on the hour scheduled for the
review.

ll.( l‘...illl|§.lllv

288

Appendix XIV. (Continued) Plans for Site Review and Hearings

The hearing will be held in the Commons (Ground Floor) of the Grand
Rapids Junior College at 11:00 A. M. February 11, 1961.

XII (Ravenna)
Date of Review: February 8, 2:00 P. M.

Reviewers:
Arthur E. Brown, of Ionia, Michigan
Stanley J. Davis, of Grand Rapids, Michigan

Host for Review:
Ira Daggett, of Muskegon, Michigan

Local arrangements for Review:
Mr. Daggett will provide transportation over the site. The reviewers
will meet the host at the Security First Bank, Ravenna on the
hour scheduled for the review. ‘

The hearing will be held in the Commons (Ground Floor) of the Grand
Rapids Junior College at 8:30 A. M. on February 11, 1961.

289

Appendix XV. Architects Supplement to Guidelines For
Site Proposal

BY
Area Architects

College Committee

Donnally Palmer, Grand Rapids
Co-Chairman

Bernard DeVries, Muskegon
Co-Chairman

John Knapp, Grand Rapids

James Nachtegall, Grand Rapids

Edgar Firant, Grand Rapids

Roger Stroop, Holland

Michael Koeteles, Grand Haven

290

Appendix XV. Architects Supplement to Guidelines For
Site Proposal

March 4, 1963
To: Site and Building Committee
of Grand Valley College

Prepared by: Area Architect's
College Committee

It is our intent to assist your committee by supplementing the work
which has already been completed. In analyzing the present and future
needs of a college in this area, we recommend that additional criteria
be considered:

1. We sincerely believe that, if at all possible, the schools within the
college, the curriculum, and the goals of the college—-present and future--
should be established before final site determination. However we continue
' on the assumption this is impractical.

"The physical plan and form should be the logical
outgrowth of thep'ograms and educational goals

and methods. " Also, the locale of the college will
become its exterior environment. (As one example,
the urban college will accept a reasonsibility for a
certain serviceability to the city that nurtures it.
The r uraI college, properly buffered, will owe its
serviceability entirely to society in general.

Either is appropriate but must be considered as it
a.ffects the resulting college. )

2. Because the curriculum is not established, the site should be appropriate
for as great a diversity of curriculums as possible. The site should not be
selected to favor any particular program or schools.

3. Seek the largest site possible within reason, other factors being
fairly equal.

If it is legally possible, retain a peripheral belt

of leased land and recrea'nn land for zoning control,
college income, and as a land bank for future
expansion.

4. Provide seemingly excessive recreation and athletic area.

Because youth is energetic, because increasing
leisure makes a worthy study program, and because
this part of the state is short recreation land, seek

a site naturally suited to the greatest diversity and

quantity of recreation and athletics.
Consider requestingfiat the States Park Department

acquire adjacent lands if arural site is selected.

291

Appendix XV. (Continued) Architects Supplement to Guidelines For
' Site Proposal

5. Attempt to locate the college in a network of major roads leading to the
eight counties and near one or more freeways.

Locating the school relative to routes of transportation
is of equal or greater importance than locating it on
or near the exact center of student population. The
school should also have a reasonable relationship to
public transportation, 1. e. , railroads, bus terminals,
and airports.

6. Give prime importance to the possibility of providing adequate utilities
including sewer and water.

It is unlikely that facilities, as existing, will be
adequate for the future needs of the school.

7. Consider availability of professional part-time instruction assistance,
labor force, student employment, fire protection, hospital services, etc. , but
the greatest effort should be made from the beginning to avoid becoming a

burden upon the institutions, traffic system and social life of an established
municipality.

8. Much consideration shoul d be given to off-hour student and faculty
social and recreational activities, entertainment and part-time employment.

9. The site should be favored by the local authorities to such a degree that
they all work with the college to set controls, zoning, traffic patterns, etc. ,
to the complete satisfaction of the college directors and planners.

10. The neighboring community should have a satisfactory background and
future. .

11. Consider the site, as it exists, for natural beauty, mobility and
"buildability. "

A site that requires major contour changes for pedestrian
and auto traffic or for "buildability" may lose its

natural beauty. Steep slopes, although attractive, are
problems to mobility and construction while gentle

slopes can be an asset. (As an example, a gentle slope
may permit exit from two building levels making multi-
story construction without elevators possible.) Also, a
site with building areas of varying levels of plateaus

can result in a greater feeling of openness, spaciousness,
and beauty.

12.“ Consider the possibility of using "buildable" land in more than one area
on the same site. ‘

292

Appendix XV. (Continued) Architects Supplement to Guidelines For
Site Proposal

(For example, the sewage treatment, the laundry and
utilities, or athletics should be divided from the class
areas by a ravine or an "unbuildable" soil condition.)

13. Consider the living part of the landscape in terms of the seasons; in terms

of today and ten years hence; and according to appropriateness to beauty, shelter,
shade, maintenance, durability, and building locations.

As one example, consider the difference between maple
(shade, color), elm (diseased), cottonwoods (nuisance),
and pine trees (evergreen).

14. In conclusion, envision the site in its entirety in all dimensions including
total plan and in its completed state.

Envision the site after proper clearing and trimming with
open vistas, planting screens, lawns, buildings, screened
parking, nature reserves, streams and pools, recreation
areas, and natural (if available) athletic bowls. In this
light, judge its potential.

293

Appendix XVI. Report By Executive Group of Site Selection Committee
of Citizens' Council

To the Board of Control of Grand Valley College:

The work of this committee developed in accordance with the general
criteria for site selection which were endorsed in principle by the board, of
control at its meeting of January 13, 1961. The committee expanded the
material and developed a document entitled, "Guidelines for Site Proposals",
which was first distributed January 26th to all known groups or individuals
interested in presenting site proposals. A total of sixteen proposals were
filed with the committee in response to the suggestions contained therein.

The committee developed a four-step process by which it hoped to carry
out its function. The steps were predicated on the following principles:

1. The ultimate goal is to find the best site available, consistent with the
8-county-areawide objectives of the college.

2. All site proposals ofiered should be heard in a public hearing.

3. Every possible effort should be made to obtain all relevant information
and evaluate it in an objective manner.

Based on these principles the committee evaluated the sites by means
of the following process:

1. Two or more committee members visited each site proposed and pre-
pared a personal evaluation in accordance with a site check-list.

2. Public hearings were held on February 11th and 22nd for all proposals.
The hearings were before the entire site committee, and each member then sub-
mitted an evaluation of the proposals.

3. The executive group reviewed the evaluations of the committee members
and identified those sites which seemed mos: closely to meet the stipulations
of the guidelines and which received favorable endorsement by the committee
members. Data on all sites were reviewed with a group of six professional
consultants, and seven of the sites were referred to such consultants for
detailed study.

4. The professional consultants applied the general conditions set forth
in the above-mentioned "Guidelines for Site Proposals." In addition, they
studied the sites in accordance with generally accepted criteria for site
selection, and they presented the committee with a confidential report.

This report has been prepared by the executive group of the site
committee and is based on all of the information obtained from the process
noted above. Also, committee members completed preferential site ballots
which will be filed with the board.

 

aliilllllr All...
2‘...- I'! . .‘Ilulllll\ll III-ii ll' Ill! .

294

Appendix XVI. (Continued) Report By Executive Group of Site Selection Committee
of Citizens' Council

Following is a description of the sites investigated which in the opinion
of the executive group of the committee have priority over all the others.
These sites have been divided into two categories. Category "A" contains
the two sites which are closest to the projected population center of the 8-
county area an! which are readily accessible, with no substantial differences
in distances, to residents of Muskegon, Grand Haven, Holland, and Grand
Rapids. Category "B" contains three sites which are at the perimeter of
the 8-county area or away from the projected population center and which
are not equally accessible to residents of the largest communities in the ser-
vice area of the college.

Category "A"

Allendale Site - approximately 980 acres, bounded
on the east by the Grand River, on the north by highway M-50,
on the west by 48th Street, and on the south by Pierce Street.

Marne Site - approximately 1, 387 acres, bounded on
the north by old highway U. S. 16, on the west by 32nd Street,
on the south by Johnson Street, and on the east by 24th Avenue.

Category I'BH

Grand Haven Site — approximately 800 acres with a
1500-foot frontage on Lake Michigan, bounded on the east by
180th Avenue and partly on the north by Hickory Street.

Muskegon Site - approximately 800 acres bounded on '
the north by the Muskegon River, on the west by highway U. S.
31, on the south by Marquette Avenue and on the east by
Sheridan Drive.

Rockford Site — approximately 900 acres, bounded on
the north by .ll-mile Road, on the east by Shaner Avenue, on
the South by 10-mile Road, and on the west by Courtland
Drive.

It is the opinion of the executive group that, based on all factors, a site in
Category"'A " should be given primary consideration by the board, and
that a site in Category "B" should be considered only if the board regards
initial costcr other special factors as controlling.

Based on the foregoing, the executive group of the committee makes
the following recommendations to the board:

1. That the board shall select as a site for the college either the
proposed Allendale site or the proposed Marne site, provided that, if neither
of such sites shall satisfy the board as to the conditions specified below, a
further investigation shall be made to find a site which is suitable.

 

' .i‘lrlllllll i1.i, it i
i

295

Appendix XVI. (Continued) Report By Executive Group of Site Selection Committee
of Citizens' Council

2. That the board before making any selectionshall satisfy itself:

(a) That all parcels within the selected site are under
legally binding options in recordable form for sufficient periods
from persons capable of conveying goOd and marketable title in
fee to the respective parcels free of objectionable easements or
public rights-of-way.

(b) That the respective options will lend themselves to
a program of buying initially less than the full site, but one adequate
to meet the requirements of a suitable site as contemplated by the
legislature in the act establishing the college, and the balance at
a later time to assure room for future development of the college
to its maximum needs.

(c) That the total cost to.the board of acquiring the selected
site, or an adequate initial part of it, is within its financial capabilities,
having due regard for the time within which legislative requirements to
qualify for appropriations should be met, and that this cost represents
a fair price consistent with the public interest.

(d) That use and development of the areas around and near-
by the site will be so controlled as to provide an environment which
is consistent with the character of the site use by the college, and
which serves the best interests of the college faculty, staff, and
student body.

After the initial vote an acceptance of this report was passed by a majority
of the executive group, the adoption of the report was made unanimous.

Submitted March 10, 1961.

Richard M. Gillett of Grand Rapids - Co-Chairman

Hon. Fred N. Searl of Grand Rapids - Co-Chairman

M. R. Bissell III of Walker Township (absent at date of adoption)
Alman W. McCall of Grand Haven

T. A. Saunders of Muskegon

Robert Van Ess of Grand Rapids (absent at date of adoption)

Hon. Robert Visscher of Holland

 

{till

ii. 1.)" Illa-III.
III I! III...) I III.)

296
Appendix XVII. Seidman's Letter Asking For Final Site Proposals

C GRAND VALLEY STATE COLLEGE
O 28 Pearl Street, N. W.
P Grand Rapids 2, Michigan

GL 1-1588 - Ext. 250
March 26, 1960

The board of control has now received several petitions by sponsors of
proposed sites for the college requesting further consideration of their sites by
the board or by its special committee appointed to implement the recommendations
of the executive group of the site selection committee of the citizens' council.

The sites proposed have already gone through an extensive review process
which was set forth in the report by the executive group of the site selection
committee. This process included (i) examination and evaluation of each
site by two or more members of the committee, (ii) public hearings on each
site by two or more members of the committee, (iii) studies and evaluations
by the executive group and (iv) studies and evaluations by professional con—
sultants. The board also conferred with the professional consultants and
reviewed the preferential ballots and comments made by members of the site
committee and other information furnished to the board.

The board had as early as January 13, 1961 adopted certain criteria pro-
posed by its educational consultants which included the physical characteristics
to provide a buildable site, and a protected area of not less than 600 acres; an
environment which is clean, quiet, attractive and otherwise favorable to a
college atmosphere; accessibility which meets the tests of nearness to the
projected population center of the 8-county area and safety and convenience of
approach; availability of services; and costs.

The board carefully balanced all factors and arrived at an unanimous decision
to endorse the recommendations made to it by the executive group of the site
selection committee, which had the effect of reducing to two the sites lmder
present consideration by the board's special committee for investigating
whether such sites can meet satisfactorily certain conditions specified in the
report.

The final decision by the board on the site selection remains to be made,
and before action is taken the board will give thorough consideration to your
petition. In order that this consideration will be given with all material facts
before the board, I suggest that you prepare and submit in support of your
petition: (1) Any material bearing on the merits of your site which you believe
has not been presented to the, board to date. (2) Any material which you believe
tends to show how your site meets all the various criteria adopted by the board
which may not have been already furnished through the review process, (3)
Detailed analysis of any financial proposal conditioned on the selection of your

 

 

 

 

Appendix XVII. (Continued) Seidman's Letter Asking For Final Site
Proposals

-2-
site. This material should be submitted in writing by April 3, with enough
copies to permit my sending one to each of the 10 board members.

Your interest and helpful cooperation in aiding the board to reach a
decision which will serve the best interests and areawide objectives of
the college will be much appreciated.

Sincerely yours,
/8/ L. Wm. Seidman

L. Wm. Seidman
Chairman of the Board of Control

 

 

 

.. .11!) i
I1 ri.tl i.’

it“ I. I. .I« II. I '0 I'll.

298

Appendix XVIJIa. Arguments Presented Before Legislature Hearings
' on Site

TO THE HONORABLE MEMBERS OF
THE CAPITAL OUTLAY COMMITTEE
MICHIGAN STATE LEGISLATURE
LANSING, MICHIGAN

We greatly appreciate this opportunity to present to your Committee,
our views on the problem of selecting an appropriate site for Grand Valley
College and on certain financial and economic aspects of this matter as
they will effect the State of Michigan, now and in future years.

For the record, it should be pointed out that a nine-member College
Board of Control (as yet imconfirmed by the Senate) appointed a Citizens
Council of approximately 100 members from which was chosen a "Site
Selection Committee" of 36 members to consider and evaluate proposed
college sites in the light of standards and criteria established by a professional
consultant designated by the Board. Seven sites deemed worthy of further
consideration were examined by a staff of six disinterested experts which
reported privately to a so-called Executive Group consisting of seven members
of the Site Selection Committee. At this point, all restrictions were apparently
lifted and a report was prepared by the Executive Group recommending that
the Board of Control choose between two sites, known as the Marne and
Allendale Sites. Both are situated a few miles West of Grand Rapids. We
feel these sites had previously failed to qualify in relation to established
standards and criteria. A second category of three sites,including the
University Park Site at Muskegon, apparently had met all tests except
prdximity to Grand Rapids. These sites were included in the report of the
Executive Group for consideration only if neither Marne nor Allendale was
obtainable, or in the event that initial cost was deemed to be an important
factor.

At a. meeting of the full Site Selection Committee on March 10, 1961, the
staff of experts gave brief verbal reports on thei r examination of sites and,
following a short question and answer period, mimeographed copies of the
Executive Group's report recommending the Marne and Allendale sites, were
distributed among the site committee members present, along with printed
ballots hating the names of the seven sites ostensibly under consideration.
When objections were raised concerning the contents of the Executive Group's
Report, the meeting was summarily adjourned and members were instructed
to hand in their ballots and clear the room. No opportunity was afforded
for possible amendment of the Executive Group's report and it was submitted
to the College Board of Control, at a public meeting, later the same day.

Because of the sequence of events just related it seems important to
inquire into the validity of certain assumptions on which future decisions,
with respect to Grand Valley College, may be predicated.

1. That a lack of state-supported facilities for higher education eidsts in
Western Michigan, as compared to the facilities available elsewhere in the

299

Appendix XVIJIa. (Continued) Arguments Presented Before Legislature Hear-
ings on Site

lower pem insula, is readily apparent. The question of whether or not the
establishement of a four-year college in this area, at this time, is appropriate,
appears to have been answered by the Grand Valley Act of 1960.

2. That the College's service area should be the eight counties of Allegan,
Barry, Ionia, Kent, Ottawa, Montcalm, Muskegon and Newaygo, can be
seriously questioned. Large portions of Kent County, as well as most of the
area embraced in the five counties adjoining it on the North, East and South
are well within the normal service areas of existing, state-supported, four-
year colleges, while Oceana, Mason and Manistee counties, like Muskegon
and Ottawa counties, are operating largely in a vacuum in so far as higher
education facilities are concerned.

3. It is logical of course for this College to start as a commuter college.
It is important for it to continue as suchif large capital outlays for student
housing and other facilities, as well as increased operating costs, are to be
avoided. This, in turn, necessitates locating it in the area of greatest need
of higher education facilities, both presently and prospectively, and at a point
readily accessible by principal highways.

4. Locating Grand Valley College at, or near, the present center of popu-
lation in its prescribed service area, means locating it in or near the City of
Grand Rapids where it would greatly infringe upon the service areas of exist-
ing state—supported, four-year institutions now located in Grand Rapids thereby
inhibiting the highly desirable growth and expansion of these colleges.

Furthermore, the Grand Rapids oriented sites at Allendale and Marne, con-
sist of raw land far removed from all required municipal facilities and ser-
vices and are not readily accessible to residents in the Western Michigan area
most in need of college facilities. Large expenditures of State funds would
be required to qualify either site for the use proposed and subsequent costs
for maintenance and essential services would be unreasonably high. Addi-
tional access highways would become necessary.

It is predicted by experts on population trends that, over the longer term,
population in the Western Michigan counties bordering on Lake Michigan will
expand at a rapid rate while inland counties remain static or decline. The
increasing importance of an adequate water supply and low-cost water
transportation, together with a more equiable climate and the availability
of year-around recreation facflities, assure the growth of the area adjacent
to Lake Michigan with an inevitable shift in the population center and an ever-
increasing need for higher education facilities in what is now incorrectly
considered the peripheral area.

It has been indicated that Grand Valley College should be situated in an
area already endowed with a high degree of culture. The cultural advantages
of Muskegon are well known and compare favorably with those of most Michigan

 

Appendix )C

communities
established a
ing more the
Civic Them
The Marne 2
are lacking

5. It w
from those
facilities a
adVantages

The re
the comm:
believe th
“POD file 5

6. Tl
sideratiow.
throughm

the great.

7. St
detalkid 1

 

300

Appendix XVIIIa. (Continued) Arguments Presented Before Legislature Hear-
. ings on Site

communities. The Hackley Art Gallery and Hackley Auditorium are long-
established and famous institutions. The new L. C. Walker Center, accomodat-
ing more than 7500 people, adds to the attraction of West Shore Symphony and
Civic Theatre. An excellent public library and a museum are located here.

The Marne and Allendale communities, each with a population of less than 300,
are lacking in cultural advantages.

5. It would be fallacious to expect broad and enthusiastic financial support
from those communities which will not have ready access to Grand Valley College
facilities and which will not share in the economic benefits and other fringe
advantages accruing to the community in which the college will be located.

The required initial financial support will inevitably come principally from
the comm1mity closest to the college site. There are impelling reasons to
believe that a high percentage of the fund pledges made to date are conditioned
upon the selection of a site satisfactory to the donors.

6. The proposition that site development costs are not an important con-
sideration in site selection overlooks the fact that tax monies being collected
throughout the state are to be spent to benefit a particular area and that to
the greatest extend possible the area benefited should carry the financial burden.

7. Sociologists are the first to admit that conclusions which they reach after
detailed surveys and studies are in large measure predicated on informed
guesses. Clearly, theirs is not an exact science. Therefore there appears
to be nothing sacred or awe-inspiring about the frequently mentioned reports
which have served as the basis for Grand Valley College decisions up to the
present time. Continued reliances on' the conclusions in these reports in the
establishment of Grand Valley College could prove to be a costly mistake
and a great disservice to the people of our State.

It is readily conceded that initial site development cost is but one of a
number of important considerations in selecting a site for Grand Valley
College. Therefore we" have subjected the University Park site at Muskegon
to critical analysis from every standpoint. We believe that it is the ideal
site for Grand Valley College for tinfollowing reasons:

It is strategically situated to serve the area in greatest need of four-year
college facilities at the present time.

The need for higher education facilities in this area will increase rapidly
as population expands in the immediate vicinity and in nearby counties border-
ing on Lake Michigan.

The site is located at the point of convergence of main highways, traversing
all parts of the service area.

The factors mentioned will insure the college continuing as a commuter
colege for a prolonged period.

The service area will not overlap the service areas of existing state-
supported, four-year colleges and the college will not compete with private

301

Appendix XVIIIa. (Continued) Arguments Presented Before Legislature
Hearings on Site

four-year schools which in the absence of competition will undoubtedly become
increasingly important factors in the field of higher education.

The surrounding area provides the utmost in recreational facilities for
faculty and administrative staff as well as ideal living conditions. Proximity
to Lake Michigan and to inland lakes and state parks permits maximum enjoy-
ment of boating, bathing, fishing, picnicking, camping, skiing, etc. Excellent
golf courses and a modern airport are nearby.

Proximity to Muskegon provides the maximum in cultural advantages as
well as adequate churches, hospitals and other important requirements.

All of the advantages of a metropolitan community may be enjoyed by
faculty and staff while residing within easy access of the campus in accordance
with custom.

The availability, at the site, of all needed facilities and services will serve
to keep operational and maintenance costs at an absolute minimum, a highly
important consideration from the standpoint of taxpayers.

After reviewing the numerous advantages of the Muskegon site it is our
conclusion that it is the logical location for the college in any event. When
due consideration is given to the fact that acceptance of this site, on the terms
proposed, will save the State of Michigan millions of dollars in initial capital
outlay as well as permit important operating economies in the years ahead,
we believe that it .must inevitably be chosen.

Respectfully submitted,

MUSKEGON GRAND VALLEY
COLLEGE COMMITTEE

March 29 , 1961

 

it'll-II ti.

 

302

Appendix XVIIIb. Arguments Presented Before Legislature Hearings On Site — -
Resume: Need and Location of Grand Valley
State College

I. The Need

a. General: The establishment of the need for a new degree-granting institution
in this area is based on considerations of (1) population increase, (2) increase in
the number of college-age, (3) increase in the percentage of the college-age
who will seek education beyond the high school, (4) increasing percentage of
parents who have plans and desires to send their children to college and post-
high school education, (5) increasing social demands and the recognition of the
good of such demands for additional education beyond the high school, both in
technical terminal programs as well as in degree programs, (6) the recognition
- that present facilities, even with planned expansion, will not provide all of the
needed facilities, (7) the recognition that if educational opportunity is to be made
available to our youth, the colleges must be located throughout the state so that
programs, especially undergraduate, will be readily available to them.

1. The population of the eight-county area is estimated to move from
786,000 in 1957 to about 900, 000 in 1965, and to over 1,000,000 by
1970. '

2. One of the major contributing factors to this population increase
will be the rising or at least continuing high birth rate.

3. The high birth rate of the past 15 years brings with it sharp increases
in the college—age (18-21) from a level of about 37, 000 in 1957 to
about 55, 000 in 1965.

4. One important point to keep in mind is that these increases are occurring
throughout the state of Michigan.

5. The impact of the high birth rate of the past 15 years is already evi-
dent in the elementary and high school. The 12th grade enrollments
in the eight-county area are expected to move from 7,900 in 1958 to
over 9,000 in 1965 and almost 12,000 in 1970. One basis for this
estimate lies in the fact that kindergarten enrollments rose, in the
8—county area, from 10, 000 in 1950 to over 17,000 in 1958.

b. The Immediacy of the Need

1. The immediacy of the need and the reality of it may be surmised from
a consideration of the expressed certainty of 10th and 12th grade
students and their parents toward college attendance. Table A-8,
page 145, shows that of the 10th and 12th grade students surveyed,
18% look toward some post-high school technical and terminal
education, 43% are looking to college work with at least the under-

graduate de ee. This is about 61% of the 10th and 12th grade
students. ese data are substantiated by the responses of their

parents. Of the parents, 21% expect their children to go on to

303

Appendix XVIIIb. (Continued) Arguments Presented Before Legislature Hear-

ings On Site-—Resume: Need and Location of
Grand Valley State College

technical-terminal programs, while 54% of them expect their
children to go on to at least the undergraduate degree.

The implications of these data for the establishment of Grand
Valley State College are further underscored when these high
percentages of aspiration are compared with the relatively low
percentages of actual attendance from the 8-county area. In
the 8-county area, the college enrollments are about 24% of
the college age; for the state as a whole, it is about 30%. For
Barry county it is 15%; for Kent county it is 29% and for Muskegon
county it is about 22%. These percentages compare with a 46%
for the 7 counties which have a state-controlled institution in
their area, and with a 33% for the counties which have any type
of college in their borders. The point is, if the eight-county
area wishes to fulfill the expectations of its youth and their
parents at the indicated level, it will have to provide the
facilities.

The question may be asked: Will the 10th and 12th grade stu-
dents of the 8-county area attend a college if one is established
in this area? The answer was very clearly in the affirmative'.
Of the 8, 000. students surveyed, slightly over 30% said that they
were "very certain" or "probably" to attend a new four-year,
state supported college if one were established in this area, and
only 13% said that they would "definitely" not attend.

Responses of parents to the same question gives support to the
conclusions one must draw from the above. About 49% of the
parentsmid that their children would attend a new college if it
were established inthis area'. , Only 2% said that they were
certain that their children would not attend'. Such evidence
cannot be ignored'.

The immediacy of the formal establishment of the college is
urgent from another point of view. It is evident, pne would
assume, that the citizens will make a genuine effort to have

the college established. The point must be made that, if this

is to be done and the college is to be in operation by 1964 or
1965, the committment and planning must be a reality now.

It is very important to note that the building .of a new college,
if it is to serve our society adequately, is not simply a matter
of replicating some present facility. The building of a new
college involves, or should involve, very careful program
developments, staff procurements, and physical plant construc-
tion. Experience in other instances would indicate that a period
of three to four years is required to develop a significant
educational institution.

Appendix XVIIIb. (Continued) Arguments Presented Before Legislature Hear-
ings On Site-~Resume: Need and Location of
Grand Valley State College

I]. The Site

a. The fundamental principle in the selection of a site must be
that the maximum number of potential college enrollees will
be served most readily. Simply put, this means that the college
must be located so that the greatestnumber .of the youth of the
area will have access to the institution with minimum time and
distance of travel. In addition, the site should provide for and
meet some basic criteria of a good building location.

b. Figure 2 has been developed to showthe theoretical location so
that the distance and time are a minimum for the maximum number
of college enrollees. The letter - "D" locates the simple center
of gravity using straight lines for distances between points and £91;
taking into account the length of time it would take to travel the
distances depending on the roads. The letters "D-T" locate the
distance—time center of gravity. This takes into account not only
distance but also the time it would take to travel on the present
highway system. The latter point is located just northwest of the
city, near the site.

III. Miscl.

Table 33, page 79, shows a calculation of projected enrollments for
1965 and the comparison ofthese projections with the projected levels of
service with all institutions in Michigan- The calculation shows an excess
of about 6, 000 by 1965.

The question may be raised asto why the existing institutions cannot
absorb this excess. At their present level of planning, which includes
almost doublipg theirenrollments by 1965-70, and the increasing numbers
and percentages of college-age youth wanting to attend, the doubling of
enrollments in the existing college is not enough. Furthermore, there is the
need to provide educational opportunity on a geographically distributed basis.

Figure 1 indicates that between 1955 and 1961, one large university
in the state has not changed substantially the percentage that its enrollment
comes from the 8-county area. The calculations of page 79 were based on
the assumption that there would be little change in the percentage by 1965-70.
This figure tends to lend support to that assumption.

305

Appendix XVlllc. Arguments Presented Before Legislature Hearings On Site

 

(3) 360L574 (Kent Populatiop) = 's 3
607, 886 (3 County Population) E

Therefore, if it were to be a 5-man site committee, 3 should be from
Kent County; but since they wanted a 7 -man executive committee,
obviously Kent is entitled to .at least 4 memberships, because 4/7ths
is less than 3/5ths to which they are entitled. (i. e. 3/5ths is 60%,
but 477ths is only 57%Q

 

 

Question: Why are 20 of 36-man Site Committee from Kent County and only 7
from Muskegon and 6 from Ottawa?

1. We had about 110 people in the Citizens Council and asked them which
of 4 committees they preferred. A very large group picked the Site Committee,
so that it was impossible to use them all and leave enough for other committee
work.

2. The Site Committee was formed with major emphasis on having
qualified people serve, and giving preference to their first choices wherever
possible, and very little attention was given to the question of what exact %'s
each county were "entitled to. " Since Muskegon has raised this question,
however, the figures below bear out the fairness of the area representation.

3. Muskegon has 150, 000 of the 800,000 people involved, or 3/16ths,
and with a 36-man site committee, 3/16 x 36 = 7; and Muskegon has 7 people
on Site Committee.

4. Ottawa has 100,000 of the 800, 000 people involved, or 1/8ths, and
with a 36-man site committee, 1/ 8 x 36 - 4-1/2; and Ottawa has 6 people
on Site Committee.

5. Kent County has 360, 000 of the 800, 000 people involved or 9/20ths,
and with a 36-man site committee, 9/ 20 x 36- 16; and Kent has 20 people
on Site Committee.

However: Only 1 first choice to be on this committee was indicated
by the members from Montcalm, Ionia, and Barry, and since they are East
of Grand Rapids, their interests would be represented by . [Grand Rapids. So
Kent, Montcalm, Barry and Ionia Counties have 470, 391 out of 800, 000
people involved, or 3/5ths; and with a 36-man site committee, 3/ 5 x 36 = 21;
and Kent, Montcalm, Ionia and Barry Counties have 21 on Site Committee.

Conclusions:

(1) Muskegon had their exact full share of membership on 36-man site
committee-they were entitled to 7, and they had 7. '

(2) Kent, with Ionia, Barry and Montcalm, had their exact full share
of membership on 36-man site committee-they were entitled to 21 and they
had 21.

306

Appendix XVIIIa. Arguments Presented Before Legislature Hearings On Site--

1960 Census Figures: - 8 County Area

 

 

 

Kent County 360, 574
Muskegon County 148,950
Ottawa County 98, 362
3—County Total 607, 886
Kent, Muskegon 81 Ottawa Countie 607, 886
Allegan County - 57, 406
Ionia County 42, 849
Montcalm County 35, 380
Barry County 31, 588
N ewaygo County 23, 941
8-County Total 799 , 050
Statistics:

 

(1) 76% of all people in 8-County area live in Kent, Muskegon, and
Ottawa Counties.

(2) 19% of all people in 8—Coupty area live in Muskegon County.
Statistics covering 3 largest Counties (Kent, Muskegon 81 Ottawa):

(1) 24% of all people in these 3 counties live in Muskegon Conny.

(2) 16% of all people in these 3 counties live in Ottawa County.

I

(3) 60% of all people in these 3 counties live in Kent County.

 

Question: Why are 4 of 7 on Site Executive Committee from Kent County?

(1) Mr. Seidman and others felt a group of 7 was as large as
would be workable.

(2) Since 76% of all people in 8 counties live in Kent, Ottawa, and
Muskegon, and since no other one county had anywhere near 1/ 7th
of the 799, 050 total population, the 7—man Site Executive Committee
was chosen from only Kent, Muskegon and Ottawa Counties (i. e.

1/ 7th of 799, 000 is 114, 000, and next largest is Allegan with only
57 , 0000 people.)

307

Appendix XD{. Muskegon Site Proposal

Muskegon Grand Valley College Committee

LETTER DATED APRIL 3, 1961
and

ADDITIONAL SITE INFORMATION

308

Appendix XIX (Continued) Muskegon Site PrOposal

Y March 2, 1961

Dr. Raymond Hatch, Coordinating Consultant
Grand Valley College

% Old Kent Bank and Trust Company

Grand Rapids, Michigan

Dear Dr. Hatch:

On behalf of the Muskegon Grand Valley College Committee I should

like to express appreciation for your including University Park as a site
for technical review.

In addition to the oral representations made at the time of the site
review and at other times, we wish to state that we are quite sure that
there is no flaw in the University Park site which we cannot take care of
to your complete satisfaction. In the event that details covering these
points are needed in your determination, please do not hesitate to refer
to the following:

John R. Achterhoff, Chairman Pro Tem, Muskegon Grand
Valley College Committee (PA-2667 5)

George F. Liddle, Muskegon Cary Manager (PO-63111)

William P. Wilson, Development Coordinator (PR-33204)

' Very cordially yours .

William P. Wilson, Director
Department of Urban Renewal ,

cc: Don Le 11

Wm. Johnson

Walter McVicker

Ralph Seeley

Douglas Sherman

Ted Williams

Dick Gillett

Bill Seidman

John Achterhoff
George Liddle

309

Appendix XIX. (Continued) Muskegon Site Proposal

P MUSKEGON GRAND VALLEY COLLEGE COMMITTEE
Y Muskegon, Michigan

April 3, 1961

Board of Control

Grand Valley State College
28 Pearl Street,N. W.
Grand Rapids 2, Michigan

Gentlemen:

We are in receipt of your letter of March 27, 1961 which apparently
is your reply to our petition, dated March 13, 1961, to be interviewed by
the Board's special three-man committee on Site selection.

We again petition your body to be included in Category "A," in
order that we may be interviewed by the three Grand Rapids Special
Committeemen, Mr. Frey, Mr. Gillette and Attorney Ghukin.

With respect to additiOnal material bearing on the merits of the
Muskegon University Park Site , we would like to emphasize that up until
now we have not yet been heard or interviewed at any time by the entire
Board of Control. With the extreme importance the four-year college has
to Western Michigan and the substantial financial expenditure this develop-
ment will ultimately cost the entire State of Michigan, we believe your Board
should make a special effort to examine thoroughly the brochure we previously
sent each of you and then grant us the privilege to personally appear before
the entire Board of Control for the first time to further explain our exceptional
financial and physical package. We sincerely believe you owe this to your-
selves as well as to the taxpayers of the State of Michigan as a whole, not
just the Eight County Area.

We believe that an honest appraisal by your Site Committee has indicated
that according to the prescribed Guidelines and Point System recommended by
your Dr. Hatch, in charge of Consultants' reports, the Muskegon site already
shows the highest number of apoints allotted to any site proposed to date.

This information was verified as evidence in a public hearing before the
Capitol Outlays Committee of the Legislature in Lansing, March 29, 1961.
Mr. Languis' conservative appraisal, even though he admitted he had never
seen Muskegon's site and didn't realize it was rolling ground and was bounded
by Muskegon River, gave our site twenty more points than Marne, Michigan.

The Muskegon Planning Commission's impartial appraisal of our site,
according to the point system, arrived at a much higher figure than did Mr.
Languis, probably because Mr. Languis and two of the six Consultants never
got around to visiting the Muskegon site to see its real beauty and advantages.

 

 

 

 

310

Appendix XIX. (Continued) Muskegon Site Proposal

Board of Control
April 3, 1961
Page -2-

It is also our opinion, based on real facts, that the Consultants'
methods for arriving at an equal number of points for the Allendale site
should be made public. We feel that credit was given to Allendale for
sewer and water availability, with sixty points, by mistake, because it
is public information that it is not now available at all and that Allendale
has, as recently as this past week, made applications to the City of
Grand Rapids for this service and was not granted the privilege, and
that the City of Grand Rapids has estimated that cost to be around three
and one -half million dollars.

Allendale has also asked the Ottawa Road Commission for a County
system of sewer and water, which if granted would cost the College and
State millions of dollars by use of a Revenue Bond issue that would have
to be paid by the users (the College) in excessive service rates.

On March 2, 1961, our Mr. Wilson wrote a letter to Dr. Hatch and
his consultants suggesting that anything the Muskegon site lacked could be
remedied and made to meet your requirements to full satisfaction. A copy
of this letter is enclosed. To date no answer has been received to the March
2, 1961 letter, which would appear to mean that our site meets all your
requirements as the best site. It is noted that at the meeting of March 10,
1961, three adverse factors were cited as relevant to University Park.
These were: (1) a slight noise, (2) many buildings which would have to
be removed, and (3) that regrading would be necessary to eliminate a land
fill area. You are reminded accordingly that the latter two items are
definitely a part of the on-site improvement proposal. Regarding the sur-
roundings of the site , any misconception regarding industrial infringements
should be dispelled. Except for the plant cited below, there is no industrial
zoning within a mile of the site in any direction and a good deal farther in most
directions. The Continental Motors plant a mile away on Getty Avenue is
the only existing industry. This will be separated from the site by a limited
access highway.

We are also attaching a copy of the currently published sewer and
water rates for the City of Muskegon who would furnish these services.
The College, no doubt, will eventually qualify for maximum use of ser-
vices as a single customer, which will give them the minimum rates shown.

Enclosed please find copy of letter with attached schedule detailing
cost of building and operating a fire station, which will not be necessary
to be spent on the Muskegon site, only because it already is available.

. III- ‘l-IAIII. l :Pllu

311

Appendix XIX. (Continued) Muskegon Site Proposal

Board of Control
April 3, 1961
Page ~3-

The financial package Muskegon is offering is now well known but
bears repeating for your seriour consideration.

Entire Site (acquisition cost) $1, 500, 000
(no cost to College or State.
Funds provided by Local business,
professional, service, and manufacturing
contributions - No Local or State taxes
involved. )

On-Site Improvement Package 1, 000, 000
(to be furnished by City of
Muskegon according to schedule
attached hereto, with approximate
distribution figures subject to your
College Campus Planners' approval)

In addition to the above financial package, the Muskegon Committee can
assure your Board of Control that they will make up any shrinkage of ftmds
necessary to develop the one million dollar Charter Qualifying Fund in case
some of the existing pledges should default because of the site being in
Muskegon rather than in or just outside Grand Rapids. This will expedite
the' Board of Control's efforts to get the college program off the gromd
immediately.

By choosing the Muskegon site, the physical reality of a four-year
college in Western Michigan can be realized at least twelve months sooner
than any of the other sites yet submitted.

The Muskegon site will save the taxpayers of Michigan several millions
of dollars and allow students to enroll at the lowest possible cost at the
earliest possible date.

MUSKEGON GRAND VALLEY COLLEGE
COMMITTEE

312

Appendix XIX. (Continued) Muskegon Site Proposal

CITY OF MUSKEGON
SEWER RATE SCHEDULE

The Commission may classify the users of the system according to the
quantity of water used and charge such rates to users of each class as

it may deem reasonable. Such class of rates may be hereby fixed
as follows:

Quarterly charges:

A-Readiness to serve charges:

 

Charges A and B shall be added together.

The minimum till shall be $2. 78 Gross - $2. 50 Net.
Charges shall be gross with 10% discount if paid by
‘the 15th of the month.

Size of Meter Gross Net
5/8" Meter $ 1. 11 $ 1. 00
3/4" 1. 39 1. 25
1" 1. 67 1. 50
1 -1/4" 2. 22 2. 00
1-1/2" 3. 33 3. 00
2" 5. 55 5. 00
3" 9. 99 9. 00
4" 16. 66 15. 00
6" 27:77 25.00
8" 38. 88 35. 00
10" 50. 00 45. 00
12" 61. 11 55. 00
Where sewage guagings are made, the Commission shall
determine the equivalent size meter to base the charge.
B-Usage charge - Gross
First 50, 000 cubic feet 9. 0¢ per 100 cubic feet
Next 50, 000 cubic feet 7. 5‘} per 100 cubic feet
Next 50, 000 cubic feet 6. Or} per 100 cubic feet
Over 150, 000 cubic feet 4. 55': per 100 cubic feet

313

Appendix XIX. (Continued) Muskegon Site Proposal

CITY OF MUSKEGON WATER RATES ADOPTED DEC. 18, 1945
The rates for services furnished by said system shall be levied upon each
lot or parcel of land, building, or premises within the corporate limits
of the City of Muskegon having any connection with said system, on the
basis of the quantity of water used thereon or therein as the same is
measured by the city water meter there in use. The City Commission
may classify the users of water according to the quantity of water used
and charge such rates to users of each'class as it may deem advisable.
Such class of rates may be hereby fixed as follows:
For the first 50, 000 cubic feet used quarterly, 18¢ per 100 cubic feet used.
For the second 50, 000 cubic feet used quarterly, 15¢ per 100 cubic feet used.
For the third 50, 000 cubic feet used quarterly, 12¢ per 100 cubic feet used.
For the next 150, 000 cubic feet used quarterly, 993 per 100 cubic feet used.
For the next 200, 000 cubic feet used quarterly, 8¢ per 100 cubic feet used.
For all over 500, 000 cubic feet used quarterly, 793 per 100 cubic feet used.

Usage allowance, gross minimum bills, discounts and net minimum bills
based on the size of water meter used are as follows:

 

Meter Size Cu. Ft. Gross Discounts Net
Allowance Min. Bill Min. Bill

5/8' "‘ 1, 850 3. 33 .33 3. 00
3/4" 2, 280 4. 11 . 41 3. 70
.1" 3, 090 5. 56 . 56 5. 00
1-1/4" 4, 630 8. 34 . 84 7. 50
1-1/2" 6, 170 11. 10 1. 10 10‘. 00
2" 9 , 250 16. 65 1. 65 15. 00
3" 15, 430 27. 78 2. 78 25. 00
4" 25, 920 46. 66 4. 66 42. 00
6" 46, 300 83. 34 8. 34 75. 00
8" 55,200 97. 78 9. 78 88.00

1 0" ' 64, 060 111. 11 11. 11 100. 00
12" 83, 260 139. 90 13. 90 126. 00

314

Appendix XIX. (Continued) Muskegon Site Proposal

C March 6, 1961
O
P
Y

Grand Valley College Technical Committee
% Dr. Raymond Hatch

28 Pearl Street

Grand Rapids, Michigan

Gentlemen:

Re: Cost of Construction and Operation
of Fire Service

Attached hereto is tabulation of estimated cost of
constructing and equipping a new fire station ($135, 000 minimum) and
of operation ($100, 000 annually). The latter figure includes $7, 000
annually for hydrant rental which assumes that the water supply under
pressure is available at the scene of the fire.

This information was obtained to ascertain how far
from the City the Muskegon site for Grand Valley College could economi-
cally be located. It is felt, however, that such information is relevant

in connection with the choosing of a site where urban services are not
available.

If there is any other information of a technical nature
which we can furnish you, please do not hesitate to call.

Very cordially yours,

William P. Wilson, Director
Department of Urban Renewal

gn
Enclosure

cc: Board of Control

315

Appendix XIX. (Continued) Muskegon Site Proposal

UNIVERSITY PARK
Muskegon, Michigan

On-Site Improvements
(A Part of the $2, 500, 000 Package Proposal)

All figures below are estimates, and are presented here to suggest the
allocation of site improvement funds. Actual expenditures must comply with
an actual campus development plan prepared by Planners under the instruc-
tions of the Board of Control. As a basis of estimation, construction
specifications of the City of Muskegon are assumed. In the following
schedule, all sanitary sewer and water line estimates provide for individual
building service laterals to the property line.

Clearance

Structures $15, 000

Grading 65, 000 $ 80, 000
Sanitary Sewer Intercepter 100, 000

(1-1/ 4 mile, with individual service connections)
(Inside site boundaries)

Other Site Improvements

Sanitary laterals 80, 000
(1/2 mile of 12" plus 7/8 mile of 10")

Water laterals 45, 000
(2-1/ 2 miles of 12" line plus ten hydrants)

Storm drains 40, 000
(2-1/2 miles, with inlets and manholes)

Street paving _ 350, 000
(2 miles 24' plus 2/3 mile 48' plus 1360 paved
parking spaces)
Campus Walkways (2-2/3 miles)

 

Street trees (1, 000 trees) 50, 000
Fire alarm system 5, 000
Planning, Engineering and Contingencies 250,000

Total $ 1 ,000, 000

April 3, 1961

Appendix XIX (Continued)

316

Muskegon Site Proposal

C_OST OF CONSTRUCTION AND EQUIPMENT

CLASS 6 CITY - CHIEF IN CHARGE OF DEPARTMENT

 

 

Fire Station $ 55, 000
Land 6, 000
2 Pumpers

(35 foot ladders) 45, 000
Hose - 6000 feet 8,000
Hose, small equipment 2,000
Alarm System

(25 boxes at $600 ea.) 15,000
Chief's car 2, 000
Radio Equipment for

all Units 2, 000

Initial cost $135, 000
COST OF OPERATION
BUDGET ALTERNATE BUDGET

Chief‘s Salary
23 Full time men

(63 hour work week)
Insurance
Lights
Water
Gas
Hydrant Rental
Latmdry
Professional Conferences

and Training
Fire Prevention Bureau
Telephone
Bedding and Uniforms
Hose '
Oil and Gas
Misc. Supplies
Minor Equipment
Building Maintenance
Equipment Maintenance
Alarm System

Total Budget

$

6, 300

115 , 000
150

400

75

700

7 , 000
200

250
150
600
500
500
400
600

1, 000
500
750

1, 000

$136, 075

 

Chief's Salary $ 6, 300
11 Full time men 55, 000
5 Sleepers 4, 000
10 Volunteers 1, 000
Insurance 150
Lights 400
Water 75
Gas 700
Hydrant Rental 7 , 000
Laundry 200
Professional Conferences

and Training 250
Fire Prevention Bureau 150
Telephone 600
Bedding and Uniforms 500
Hose 500
Oil and Gas 400
Misc. ‘ Supplies 600
Minor Equipment 1, 000
Building Maintenance 500
Equipment Maintenance 750
Alarm System 1, 000

Total Budget $81,075

317

Appendix XX. Dutcher's Letter Presenting Board of Control Position
on Site Selection

March 29 , 1961

MEMO TO: Mr. Edward J. Frey
Mr. Philip Buchen

Dear Ed. 8; Phil:

For many months my wife and I have planned a New Orleans vacation ~
and our reservations are for March 31st through April 9th. Therefore I
am putting down in writing certain ideas which I had to-night (March 29)
following Achterhoff's arguments at the Capitol today.

These ideas are set forth with a heavy heart, after seating this attack
upon the unselfish work donated by so many good citizens of our 8 county area.
They are of course my personal ideas and observations and are not those of
the CitiZens' Council.

THE MAIN ATTACK SEEMS To BE (COST TO THE STATE)

The main road block in the legislature would looktfln this: either
the Marne or Allendale site will cost the State considerably more money to
develope than Muskegon, and the Committees in the House and the Senate
are concerned with finance. Achterhoff has been meeting privately with
these individual legislators (he confirmed this to me after the meeting)
and has been selling them on his cost advantages. Achterhoff claims that
he can save the State $2, 500, 000. 00 over "costs" to the State involved
at the Marne site, and more at Allendale.

What should be done?

First, The scope of the inquiry by the 3 man special committee of the
Board of Control should be expanded, it seems to me, to solutions in this
field. (or perhaps another group should be appointed to assist). Perhaps
the consultants should be brought back into the picture to give work and
time to this question. Their reports did not consider the question of cost
but left the question of cost to the Board of Control, as you know. This
fact is found on the first page: of their confidential report.

In addition, this committee, or another committee, will have to "verify"
all the claims being made for the Muskegon site. I suggest this because the
Board's original vehicle for such inquiry (the Site Committee and its
executive group) have submitted their report, and the only current operat-
ing group is this 3 man group. As a public body, your counsel should
advise you whether special authorization for this expanded activity is
needed from the Board of Control.

Second, here are a few "cost" ideas and arguments that may prove of
assistance to you, which have occurred to me this evening:

J
l
l I
41“. 12.8' ‘ L
,
U
I
, .
‘ - t.
‘ .

“__1
g

318

Appendix XX. (Continued) Dutcher's Letter Presenting Board of Control
Position on Site Selection

(a) No. 120 of the Public Acts of 1960 states:

"The Board of Control shall be responsible for the selection
and acquisition of a suitable site. . . " '

Ask counsel whether this delegation of authority could be revoked as a practical
matter b y the Legislature's refusing to authorize funds until the site they
thought "suitable " had been picked.

(b) Even if it does cost the Legislature an extra two and one-half million
to put the site here instead of in Muskegon, haven't the Legislators committed
themselves to serve the 8 county area (which the Muskegon admittedly fails
to do)? Section 1 of Act 120 specifically states that it shall be located in one
of these 8 counties. The intent of the Legislature was to serve the three-
quarters of a million people in all 8 counties by this college. This was
emphasized by the legislators as well as the citizens at every Legislative
[13am last year, and in all the material furnished to the legislature by
the citizens. The legislation followed Dr. J amrich's report to the Legisla-
tive Committee, and J amrich's studies and condlusions were all based on
serving the 8 county area.

Obviously the J amrich and Russell conclusions would not have called
for a college here at all had there only been 350, 000 rather than 800, 000
people involved. Yet, this .is about all the commuting area that a Muskegon .
site would serve. The Saginaw-Bay City-Midland triangle no doubt exceeds
350, 000 population and wouli have received the nod as to the next college,
if one was awarded at all.

(c) Assume that all students outside the 30 mile practical commuting radius
moved into dormitories and lived on the campus, necessitating expensive
dormitories, athletic plants and other improvements. (1 say "assume"
because obviously they will not-as their folks have been unable and will con—
tinue to be unable to furnish that extra $1,000. 00 per year per student to give
them a college education: since its too far to commute, they lose out.) How
much extra per student served will that cost the State? (have J amrich answer
this if he can) -

((1) Assume that all students from the 8 county area will drive to Muskegon
each day to college (which studies showed they would not-how much extra does.
that cost the family?

(e) Placing it in Muskegon would mean that in 19 65 students
in Kent, Ionia, Barry and Greenville Counties would be missmg a cOllege
education, who would have gotten it if centrally located. Try to measure
the cost of this mistake against Muskegon's allegedly two and one-half
million dollar additional saving to the State (have J a.mrich supply accurate
figure here).

 

 

—-- _w

 

.4

319

Appendix XX (Continued) Dutcher's Letter Presenting Board of Control
Position on Site Selection

(1) We have a mandate from the legislature to find a college site that would
serve all 8 counties so that most could get a college education at the least cost.
Studies place this 8 miles from a large city, namely Grand Rapids. To obtain
this objective-which was to save the State money in the long run-we can't move
a major city out there and save the "installation cost" of which Achterhoff so
proudly boasts. We pay a little more at the beginning and save the State
millions of dollars in the long run. Let's not be penny wise and pound
fodlish here.

(g) Assume Muskegon's site actually saves the State two and one-half
million dollars. What kind of a "bargain" is this at the loss of thousands of
college educations in the 8 county area? We already have these "bargains"!
Too far north at Ferris, too far south at Western Michigan, too far east at
Lansing. Kent County has 360, 000 .of the 800, 000 involved, or nearly one-
half. Muskegon has 150, 000 or only 20%. Lets serve all 8 counties and not
just two or three of them. Lets give our children throughout the 8 counties
a fair shake. _

GENERAL OBSERVATIONS.

1. Achterhoff admits owning most of a corporation which has 150 acres
across from the proposed Muskegon site with 2, 550 feet frontage right across
the street. The value of his land, if the site went there, would increase
tremendously, no doubt. (an appraisal from a realtor could give you an
accurate figure here if wished). Therefore, as public servants we have been
' put on notice that his claims must be viewed skeptically and most carefully
for accuracy. The public interest of all people in the 8 counties area is
at stake.

2. The legislature delegated authority to the Board of Control to pick a
"suitable site". The Board of Control called on the expert talent from
all the State Universities, and many of the leading citizens from the 8 County
area, including Muskegon. The selection was made with care and after all
15 proponents were given a fair hearing. Thousands of hours were used,
and resort was made to the exhaustive State supported and impartial Russell
and J amrich studies of higher education.

Now a real estate promoter rallies only a segment of his community to
make their own study which conflicts with the result of all the above. He
indicates that his study is more thorough, more knowledgable, and has the
people's interest more at heart.

This is the choice ofiered the Legislature at this time. Quite a contract.‘

3. When, you present this to the legislative committees, I suggest the
following:

First, request your University consultants and J amrich to agree, after
study, as to a number of miles that is the practical commuting distance
as. shown by experience here in the State of Michigan today. This would be
somewhere between 20 and 35 miles from the college. These figures are

 

   

320

Appendix XX. (Continued) Dutcher's Letter Presenting Board of Control
Position on Site Selection

available at each University I am sure. Then draw circles with this as the
radius around both the Muskegon site and the Allendale-Marne sites, and
see what portion of the 8 county area is included in each circle. You will
see that 45% of the Muskegon circle includes Lake Michigan and as
representative Boyer said, he has never seen a college student come out
of the lake as yet.

4. It is as simple as this: Marne and Allendale sites serve the Muskegon
students, as well as the rest of the 8 counties. The Muskegon site serves
Muskegon County, part of Ottawa County, and the students at Marne and
Allendale, and but a few sparsely populated areas north of Muskegon, and
east of Muskegon, and leaves all the rest of the 8 county area without a
college.

5. For the first time in the history of Michigan a thoroughly impartial
study was made of higher education by the legislature of Michigan. No real
estate promotors made this study, experts from outside the State of Michigan
came in and hundreds of thousands of dollars were spent to do an adequate
job. These studies reflected this 8 county area needing the next 4 year college
because three-quarters of a million people live here and there was no State
supported 4 year college here. Now, at the last minute before the ftmds are
given the college to commence operations, arises a new report from a special
interest group in opposition to the impartial reports. The Achterhoff group
without studying higher education at all, having made no studies that would
even begin to hold a candle to the depth and extent of studies going on since
1955, states that these studies are not "sacred" and proceeds to tell the
legislature that their "studies" should be relied upon.

6. For a highly questionable "two and one half million dollar saving:'
is Muskegon going to be permitted to buy this site at the expense of the loss
of college educations to thousands of our young students in this 8 county
area?

7. There are no doubt some sites far superior to the Muskegon site
that could offer equally as much as what they are offering. Traverse City,
the Upper Peninsula, and Petoskey would be beautiful places for colleges
and no doubt the cities involved could provide the same funds that are being
offeredByMuskegon to "buy" the site. The only trouble is the students'
can't quite get there to school to commute, and they can't get to Muskegon
either. I guess it narrows down to whether we are trying to educate
children who previously have had no chance to go to college or are we try-
12g to find a site where it would be the cheapest for the State to erect its
10th 4 year State supported school.

8. I wonder how the legislative committees would like to be a "super-
site committee' and hear the complete presentations of the other 14 areas
involved. They gave their time to Muskegon and to be completely fair they
should hear the other 14 presentations also. Our good legislators might

realize how ludicrous it was for them to spend their time listening to this

321

Appendix XX. (Continued) Dutcher's Letter Presenting Board of Control
Position on Site Selection

glowing presentation of advantages if they receive 14 additional requests
for them to listen to 14 more glowing presentations.

9. Why is it urgent that the legislature not postpone action on this
request for one year ? Obviously it will be impossible to start the college
in the fall of 1963, but will at least delay it until the fall of 1964. This
will cost a college education to be somewhere around 1000 students who
this afternoon are working on their programs in their school rooms in the
10th grade throughout this 8 comty area. If Dr. J amrich were given some
time to make further studies of the figures, he could arrive at approximately
how many children this would be. If you wish this information, you should of
course contact him so he may study same.

What possible steps could be of value in addition? (I list these only to
provoke further thought by those who will be making the decisions as to
what to do next)

1. Give Muskegon a verbal hearing by the Board of Control as well as a
written hearing (this would further indicate to the legislature that the Board
of Control had given every consideration to Muskegon to which it was
entitled).

' 2. Present our rebuttal to Muskegon in person to all these legislators
involved and perhaps in writing in advance of the hearings: Achterhoff has
been contacting them in person and by writing.

3. See if the Marne or Allendale proposals cannot be made to match the
Muskegon proposal in the on-site improvement offers, either by having
Grand Haven, Grand Rapids and Holland offer to split the cost of these?m-
s;i_te improvements, thereby matching Muskegon'sfiffér or having anyone
or a number of such cities offer to go it alone. Mayor Davis was quoted in
the Press on March 29th as saying that he did not think Muskegon's challenge
was too serious, therefore the Grand Rapids City Commission delayed
action in offering to supply water in Allendale. In my opinion, this matter
is most urgent if we intend to get any legislation this spring.

 

4. Have the university consultants on site meet and supply some of the
answers and arguments referred to above and give other advice to the Board
of Control on this cost problem. Expand their assignments so that theyf
have to answer cost questions, so we have that plus what Gus Langim will
be reporting on from the State buildings division direct to the legislative
committees.

. 5. Robert Howlett and Richard VanderVeen have accepted responsibility
for working in the contacts with the legislators' field as to this college, and
they are both quite well informed on the subject. Perhaps they could be of
help in the weeks ahead. Both are on the Citizens Committee.

322

Appendix XX. (Continued) Dutcher's Letter Presenting Board of Control
Position on Site Selection

Rebuttal to Achterhoff and Wilkinson's statements and legislature

I personally feel that these two gentlemen were responsible for many easily
refutable statements in their extensive presentation to the Legislative Committee.
These legislators are more or less "cold" to the entire history and background
of the true facts as they have been developing, and therefore these statements
must be corrected. Thesekey legislators have a great deal of information
which they must assimilate each year, and they can only spend so much time
on any one thing. They gave their time to listen to the Achterhoff presentation,
and have assimilated this information and no doubt think it is correct unless
we combat it with facts. I think these statements could be refuted.

Error No. 1: Achterhoff can't see why it makes any difference whether the
college is at Muskegon or Marne because it takes students from Marne no longer
to drive to Muskegon than it does for students from Muskegon to drive to
Marne. This remarkable piece of logic is a classic and gives a real insight
into the man's lack of desire to educate all of our qualified young people.

The obvious answer is that there are no students at Marne: The students
live anywhere from 6 to 40 miles east of Marne so "their commuting'ttrip to
Muskegon would have to be extended from 40 to 75 mfles and obviously most
cannot and will not drive that distance, so they lose their college education
(which this college was created to provide).

Error No. 2. He calls Muskegon the most starved 4 year college area
in the State. Drawing our 30 mile commuting circle, I would agree that the
half of it that extends out into Lake Michigan is starved but it deserves to'
be so. Regarding the half that is on dry land, Muskegon County has 148, 000
residents and the 30 mile circle will put up a little piece of Ottawa County
and a few other small counties but very few living students are actually
included, comparatively. Kent County has 360, 000 people without a State
supported college and with only two parocial schools, with half of the students
at Calvin coming out of the state, and I am not sure how many from Aquinas
coming out of the State. These students in the numbers desired could not go
to these parochial schools even if they wanted to. When we say college
starved area, we are talking about number of students, not just a piece of
real estate. The college starved area is the 8 county area, centering just
west of Grand Rapids, in terms of thousands and thousands of students.

Error No. 3. Achterhoff implies that giving a million and a half dollars
worth of land to the State is a financial benefit that budget conscious legislators
should not easily pass up. First of all, we have no substantiation of the land
being worth this amount. But even if the land were worth twenty million
dollars, the legislature should still refuse a gift without blinking an eye if
the land is located so that young people of this 8 county area cannot be educated
there. Let them accept the gift and put a mental institution there, if needed,
or a wild life of refuge there, if needed, but certainly not a 4 year institution
of higher education that will not serve the young people.

323

Appendix XX. (Continued) Dutcher's Letter Presenting Board of Control
Position on Site Selection

Error No. 4. Wilkinson said that large portions of Kent County are well
within the service areas of existing State supported colleges and locating
it herewould greatly infringe upon the existing service areas of those
existing State supported colleges. The answer can be obtained to this
statement simply by requesting figures from Western, Michigan State, and
Ferris Institute as to how-few students from Kent County commute to those
schools each day. These figures should be made available inasmuch as this
argument has been made and this argument must be refuted.

Error No. 5. Wilkinson stated that locating this 4 year State supported
school near Grand Rapids would inhibit the growth of our existing private
two parochial colleges. Statements from the Presidents of these institutions,
past and present, should explode this.

Error No. 6. Wilkinson stated there was nothing sacred about the
Russell and J amrich reports. , To my knowledge, no one yet has shown where
either report was in error in any material fact, and the legislature has bene-
fited tremendously over the past few years from the information gathered in
those reports. If some private interest disagrees with a thorough and im-
partial report, there is no doubt nothing "sacred" about the report insofar
as that private interest is concerned. But as far as the interest of the State
of Michigan and the interest of this 8 County area is concerned, there is
something very "sacred" about these reports. They are the first impartial

reports on higher education in Michigan in its history, in a period extending
over 130 years.

Error No. 7. Wilkinson claims that the Muskegon area is strategically
located to service some area without being too definite what area. No doubt

it is strategically located to service the Muskegon people, but I know not
what else.

In closing, if you feel that my presence is required here on college
matters during this 10 day period that I will be on vacation, I will consider
cancelling my reservations. No other hearings have been scheduled during
this period that I know of, and no one has requested me to be present at any
meetings. I have spent about 5 hours putting together my thoughts on this
subject as reflected to you above so that it would perhaps stimulate some
thinking in a way that I could not do even if present. I could always fly
back to Grand Rapids if you felt it necessary.

Very truly yours,

 

DEDzef David E. Dutcher
cc: L. William Seidman
cc: Richard Gillett Note: The facts and figures underlined in

red are my estimates and should
. < be substantiated before using.

324

Appendix XXIa. Correspondence between T. A. Saunders and Seidman
On Cost Factors

P GENERAL
Y TELEPHONE COMPANY OF ' AMERICA

860 Terrace St. , Muskegon, Michigan

OFFICE or THE PRESIDENT . ..
To A. SAUNDERS

April 3, 1961

Mr. William Seidman
Seidman &. Seidman

28 Pearl Avenue, N. W
Grand Rapids, Michigan

Dear Mr. Seidman:

At the final meeting of the Executive Committee, Site Selection for the
Grand Valley College, our instructions were that costs were not be con-
sidered in our recommendation. It was further stated that the Board of
Control would evaluate cost factors in making the final selection.

The members of the Executive Committee were not given the point scale
ratings of the sites, but were advised that the scales no longer applied.
The Consultants further advised us that cost of water and sewer facilities
were estimated to be about the same, whether the facilities had to be
developed on the site or were furnished by a municipality. This was com-
pletely contradictory to previous advice that the availability of these ser-
vices was an important factor in site selection.

I am sure you agree that the conflicting statements currently being made
public with regard to these services raise serious doubt about the validity
of the information given to the Executive Committee at the time its final
report was prepared. If the information was not valid, my position would
possibly have been different.

I feel that a frank statement from you is in order to clarify this issue and
would be helpful to the public and, particularly, to those members of the
site committee who attempted to serve in an objective manner. As you
know, I have not identified myself with the group who have sponsored the
proposed Muskegon site. However, it is still my strong opinion that the

325

Appendix XXla. (Continued) Correspondence between T. A. Saunders
and Seidman On Cost Factors

Mr. William Seidman -2- April 3, 1961

Board of Control, in its final decision, should give primary consideration
to all cost factors and especially to water and sewer availability.

Copies of this letter are being made available to Muskegon news media.
Sincerely,

/S/ T. A. Saunders

T. A. Saunders
Executive Committee
Site Selection

Grand Valley College

TAS:emb

323

Appendix XXIb. Correspondence between T. A. Saunders and Seidman
On Cost Factors

C April 6, 1961
O
P
Y

Mr. T. A. Saunders, President
General Telephone Company
860 Terrace Street

Muskegon, Michigan

Dear Mr. Saunders:

This is to ..acknowledge your letter of April 3, 1961, and to express
my appreciation for your thoughtfulness in bringing this information to our
schedule. It is quite obvious that the conflicting reports which have been
circulated throughout the area tend to place the executive group of the Site
committee in a rather uncomfortable position. This is unfortunate, and I
therefore welcome the opportunity to put the record straight relative to
your assignment, the information which you were furnished, and the
report which you prepared. Permit me to do this in a categorical manner.

1. The Board of Control made a special effort to designate the
executive group of the Site Committee as the group to prepare a report
to the Board of Control based on the best information available.

2. The Site Selection Committee and the executive group were not
expected to give consideration to the cost factor since this is a matter that
the Board of Control must determine in relationship to all factors. The Board
expected your group to evaluate the other considerations and in light of
these suggest the most appropriate site.

3. The professional consultants reported to your group and to the
Board of Control that the long-range cost to provide a water supply and
sewage treatment on any site is not Significantly more titan furnished by
a municipality.

4. The rating scale that was used by the committee members as a
general guide was not intended to be used as some have claimed. The form
was prepared by the Division of Building, Michigan Department of Administra-
tion, and it was their suggestion that the factor weight be used only as a
general guide. The Board did not expect the committee to submit a report,
which in any way would reflect the numerical evaluation based on a general
rating scale. The Board itself determined that the factor of location near
the center of population in the eight-county area should be a large factor
in its determination.

327

Appendix XXIb. (Continued) Correspondence between T. A. Saunders
and Seidman On Cost Factors

Mr. T. A. Saunders -2- April 6, 1961

It is our hope that this letter may be made available to the Muskegon
news media since it is grossly unfair to‘ have any reflection cast on the out-
standing work of the executive group of the Site Selection Committee. The
statesmanship of this group in treating all proposals in a fair and equitable
manner will be remembered and appreciated long after the flush of dis—
appointment and accusation has died away. We of the Board of Control
sincerely appreciate what you have done for the welfare of our youth in the
years ahead. Thanks'

Sincerely,

L. Wm. Seidman, Chairman
Board of Control
Grand Valley College

328

Appendix XXII. Board Action On Site Selection

RESOLVED,

1) The board recognizes and affirms its responsibility under act No.
120 of the Public Acts of 1960 to select and acquire a suitable site for the
location of Grand Valley College;

2) The board takes cognizance of the intent and objectives of the legis-
lature from the terms of the act calling for a college in the designated 8-
comty area and from the reports which led to the adoption by the legislature
of the act, namely:

(a) The Final Report of the Survey of Higher Education
In Michi an submitted by John Dale Russell to the legislature in
1958 which states in part: " -A superficial review of the situation
leads to the conclusion that the most likely location for another
state-controlled college is Grand Rapids. Grand Rapids is
sufficiently distant from other state institutions, so there would
be no objectionable overlapping of services in the new area if a
new state college were located there. "

 

 

(b) The Report to the Legislative and Citizens Committees
on the Eight-County Study of Higher Education Needs in Allegan,
Barry, Ionia, Kent, Montcalm, Muskegon, Newaygo and Ottawa
Counties by John X. J amrich, dated December, 1959, which states
in part: "It is the recommendation of the study that the new college
be located so that it will provide the needed services to a maximum
number of youth and adult. It is recommended that the new college
be located just west of the city of Grand Rapids. "

3) The board believes that a full and fair investigation of the site proposals
submitted has been made according to the principles endorsed by this board
on January 13, 1961, according to procedures followed by the executive
group of the site selection committee of the citizens' council as set forth
in its report accepted and endorsed by this board on March 19, 1961, and
on the basis of information subsequently submitted to this board by propo-
nents of various sites, by the board's special committee on site selection,
and by its professional consultants and on the basis of information obtained
through certain site-reviews made by a majority of the members of tlis
board.

4) The board finds from such investigation that the site to be known as
the Grand River side which is located in Allendale Township, Ottawa County,
Michigan, about eight miles west of the Grand Rapids city limits, and ‘
which is bounded on the north by highway M-50, on the west by a line going
south from highway M-50 along the west one-eighth line of section 30,
town 7 north, range 13 west, 2, 640 feet to the east and west one—quarter
line of said section, thence west 300 feet, and thence south 2, 640 feet
to the south section line of said section; and bounded on the south by

329

Appendix XXII. (Continued) Board Action On Site Selection

Pierce Street and by the line of such street extended east to Grand River,
also being the south section lines of sections 29 and 30, both in town 7
north, range 13 west and bounded on the east by the west bank of the
Grand River; and which site contains approximately 740. 5 acres,

(a) is ideally situated to serve the maximum number of
number of persons withinthe 8-county area who live outside the
commuting-distance service area of other state institutions of
higher education.

(b) is in all respects suitable asa site for the college
and reasonably satisfies the conditions previously specified by
the board and does satisfy such conditions to a greater extent
and in a better manner than does the other centrally located site.

5) The board selects the above-described site as the location for the
college established by said act of the legislature and authorizes the acquisition
thereof for an aggregate price of not more than $300, 000, and such acquisition
shall be made from available funds which are in excess of $1, 000, 000 in funds,
property, and pledges or subscriptions raised by a method other than taxation.

6) The board authorizes the chairman and treasurer or secretary of the
board to carry out this resolution in accordance with applicable legal
requirements and subject to such conditions as any two of such officers
may in their discretion determine shall be met, including further confirma-
tion in the report for the capital outlays joint committee of the legislature
by the director of the building division of the department of administration
as to the suitability of the selected site.

   

330

o _ _ _r0 _5‘
A“ en*'* WITT 7‘1,“'"‘.’.:'.:"r" Div1313n Co; arisen O;
‘ .4 -_ . .L-s v—--- , -

*‘. ii

A COMPARISON OF THE SITES AT ALLENDALE, MARNE
AND MUSKEGON FOR A 10,000 STUDENT COLLEGE

G R A N D V A L L E Y C O L L E G E

Department of Administration
BUILDING DIVISION

A. N. Langius, Director
.April 24, 1961

331

A COMPARISON OF THE SITES AT ALLENDALE, MARNE, AND'MUSKEOON
FOR A 10,000 STUDENT COLLEGE _- ’

This is a report of a study made by the Building Division, Department of
Administration, of the estimated on-site construction and cost of utilities
and grounds fer a 640 acre - 10,000 student campus. The directive which
caused this study to be made was proposed by Representative Carroll C.
Newton on‘wednesday, March 29, 1961, at a joint Senate Finance and House
ways and Means Committees hearing of the method used by the Board of Control
in selecting the sites which were then under consideration for the proposed
Grand Valley'College in West Central Michigan. Although a 33-man Site
Committee and the Board had considered many sites, it is understood that
the intent of the directive was to compile for the joint committee a com-'
parison of the construction and cost of on—site utilities and grounds at
only three locations - Allendale, Marne, and Muskegon. The study made it
necessary for the Building Division to:

1) Visit each site.

2) Assume the kind and area of the buildings and other structures
required for the prOposed college.

3) Establish a diagrammatic site plan for the assumed institution on
an Optimum site.

4) Compare the estimated construction and cost at the Optimum site
with those at the three locations under consideration.

5) Verify the original ratings by the Building Division of the
ESSENTIAL and DESIRABLE features of each site.

1) A visual inspection of each site was made on April 3, 1961. Each was
viewed particularly from the standpoint of two essential features (Topography
and Soil Characteristics) because the joint hearing on March 29 revealed
Official assurance by Ottawa County and verbal assurance by Muskegon that the
two other essential features (Hater Supply and Sewage Disposal) would be met
at no cost. The visual inspection was followed by an examination of the .
pertinent aerial photographs and topographic information. The inspection and
examinations of pertinent information, which of necessity had to be cursory
because of the limited time, indicated that a 10,000 student college could be
constructed on any of the sites.- It was found, however, that certain features
-at one site would result in higher and certain lower in construction and
maintenance costs than at the Optimum or other sites. These differences in
estimated costs for items of on-site construction are shown in the tabulation _
under Item 4. . '

2) It is assumed for the purpose of comparison that the prOposed college will
have an enrollment of 10,000 Full Time Equivalent students, and that the
curriculum.and Operation, for all practical purposes, will be the same and
require similar facilities as other State colleges. If an average square feet
of gross building area per student is applied to the student population proposed
for the Grand valley College, approximately 2,100,000 square feet of gross
building area will be required. The average used was from a recent study by
the Building Division of existing State educational institutions. It includes
only those buildings required for the fulfillment of the primary purpose of
the institution consisting of instructional buildings, library, auditorium,
administration, heating plant, shOps, etc. Another 1,900,000 square feet will
be required for housing, food service, intercollegiate athletics, etc.

332

-There follows a list of the buildings and other structures and the estimated
' areas which would constitute a physical plant for a college of 10,000 F.T.E.
students.

 

 

Building or Structure Gross Square Feet
Auditorium and Theater . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150,000
Library 0 O O O O O O O O O O O 0 O O O O O O O O O 200 , OOO
union Building 0 O O I O O O O O O I O I O O O O O I 150 ,000

Home Management House . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,000
g Classrooms, Laboratories and Faculty Offices . . . . 1,200,000

Administration Building . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70,000
Married Student Apartments . . . . . . . . . . . . . 480,000
President's Residence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,000
Health Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25,000
Men's and WOmen's Residence Halls . . . . . . 1,440,000
Heating Plant . . . . . . . . . . . . 15,000

ShOps and Storage . . . .
Laboratory School . . . . . . . .
Research Laboratory . . . . . . .
Chapel . . . . . . . . . . . ... .
Faculty, Student and Visitor Parking . .
Intercollegiate Athletics . . . . . . . . . . . . . --

TOta-J- O O O O 0 O I I O O O O O I O O O O O C O O 0 4,000,000

. . . 90,000
. . . 100,000
. . . . . 60,000
. . . . . 10,000

0 O O O O O O O
O O
O O

O O O C O
O

3) Attached (Appendix A) is a cOpy of a diagrammatic site plan for the assumed
ultimate physical plant. The entire development requires 640 acres, approximately
160 acres of which is devoted to the 2,100,000 square feet of buildings required
for the fulfillment of the primary purpose of the institution. The remainder is
for housing, food service, intercollegiate athletics, etc. The plan indicates
diagrammatically also the 5 miles of roads, 10 miles of curbs, 10 miles of walks
and 6,600 parking spaces which will be required for the ultimate development.

It is estimated in addition that the buildings and the site construction will be
served by approximately 5 miles of heating and electrical distribution lines,

6 miles of water mains for both domestic use and fire protection and 10 miles of
sanitary and storm sewers. The total estimated cost of such a physical plant is
$75,000,000, much of which could be constructed with funds obtained from gifts,
grants or self-liquidating bonds. The location of the buildings and structures
and the estimate of the required utilities will vary somewhat depending on the
local conditions of the selected site.

4) In order to compare the on-site costs at the three sites - Allendale, Marne,
and.Muskegon - it is necessary to consider the differences in tOpography, soil,
natural drainage, etc., which will affect the construction of utilities and
grounds. A brief description of each site, from this standpoint, follows:

Allendale - Located in Ottawa County along the west bank of the Grand River,
south of MrSO about 8 miles west of Grand Rapids. The site rises about 75 feet
above the river to a gently sloping area which is broken by two ravines. The
site is drained either into the river by way of the ravines, or to the northwest
into Ottawa Creek. Storm drains will be relatively small and short because of
natural drainage extending into building area. Clay loam soil will require the
use of underdrains for roads, and a sand cushion for walks but will lessen cost
of lawn and planting construction and maintenance. Gradual lepes should result
in minimum.size sanitary sewers with little or no pumping required. Most
excavations will not require shoring.

.Marne - Located in Ottawa County, west of the Village of Marne, south of
expressway I-96, about 6 miles west of Grand Rapids. Site is rolling with
drainage in all directions. Several pockets could result in extra cost for
sewage pumping. As at Allendale, clay loam soil will require the use of
underdrains for roads, and a sand cushion for walks but will lessen cost of
lawn and planting construction and maintenance.

Muskegon - Located in Muskegon County, at east boundary of City of Muskegon
along US-3l and south of the Muskegon River. The north 200 acres of the site
is in the swamp flats of the Muskegon River. The southerly 600 acres is
separated from the flats by a steep bank. The area is relatively flat with
gentle slopes to Four Mile Creek which flows west through the site and would
serve as the outlet for storm sewers from most of the buildable area. Soil
is all sand which will eliminate need for underdrains for roads but will
require extensive and expensive conditioning and irrigation to develOp and
maintain lawns and plantings. Excavations for utilities, especially the
deeper ones, will require sheet piling or handling additional earth because
of caving sides.

There follows a tabulation which lists the 10 major items of on-site utilities
and grounds construction required for a 10,000 F.T.E. student campus and com-
parative costs at an Optimum site and at Allendale, Marne and Muskegon.

 

Item Optimum Allendale Marne Muskeggn

1) Heating Distribution . . . $2,000,000 $2,100,000 $2,100,000 $2,000,000
2) water Distribution . . . . 375,000 375,000 375,000 300,000
3) Sanitary Sewers . . . . . . 250,000 250,000 300,000 275,000
4) Storm Sewers . . . . . . . 750,000 600,000 650,000 800,000
5) Electrical Distribution . . 650,000 700,000 700,000 650,000
6) Sidewalks . . . . . . . . . 150,000 170,000 170,000 150,000
7) Roads and Parking . . . . . 675,000 750,000 725,000 675,000
8) Soil Conditioning . . . . . -O- -0- -0- 675,000
9) Planting and Seeding. . . . 225,000 300,000 275,000 345,000
10) Site Irrigation . . . . . . -O- -O- -0- 230,000

 

Total Estimated Cost. . . $5,075,000 $5,245,000 $5,295,000 $6,100,000

It should be noted that no site plan has been prepared for any particular site

since time would not permit, but that construction required was established for
the Optimum site and equal amounts of each item have been assumed for the three
sites with costs adjusted up or down because of tOpography, drainage, soil, etc.

The total cost of on-site utilities and grounds construction at the Optimum site
is estimated at $5,075,000. This is exceeded at Allendale by $170,000, at Marne
by $220,000, and at Muskegon by$l,025,000.

Analysis of cost comparison will reveal only minor cost differences between the
various sites on all items except numbers 8 and 10 (Soil Conditioning and Site
Irrigation) which are required at Muskegon since the soil is all sand. The
State has had previous experience at institutions with sandy soil, and we have
learned, at considerable expense, that only proper soil conditioning and irri-
gation will produce satisfactory lawns and plantings.

-3-

334

5) The most universally used method for comparison is to evaluate the actual
characteristics against an optimum by use of a rating chart. Such rating
charts have been prepared and used by the Building Division for evaluating
sites for several new State institutions. A similar rating chart (Appendix B)
was prepared by the Division for use by members Of the Site Committee appointed
by the Board of Control to assist in evaluating the proposed sites for the
Grand Valley College. The chart presents two groups of features for analysis.
The total Of the Optimum values for each group is 100.

The first group Of twelve features are DESIRABLE and are important if the
college is tO function economically and serve completely the purposes for
which it is founded. Some, such as size and shape of the site, distances to
trunk line highway and center of service population and natural beauty are.
very important. Others, such as condition Of access roads and distances to
fire station and electric power are of lesser importance because they can
generally be corrected and are so valued. The second group consists of four
features all Of which are ESSENTIAL and a site totally lacking any one of
these should not be considered. These features are (l) adequate water supply,
(2) satisfactory sewage disposal, (3) tOpography that will permit economical
building construction and promote surface water drainage and (4) soil condi-
tions favorable for building foundations, lawns, and planting.

There follows a compilation of the ratings of the three sites covered by this
report.

 

 

 

 

 

Optimum Allen- Muske-
Desirable Features Value dale Marne gon
1. Size of site available . . . . . . . . 18 18 l8 l8
2. Least dimension Of site. . . . . . . . 15 15 l3 l5
3. Distance to trunk line highway. . . . . 12 12 9 12
4. Distance to population center . . . . . 12 10 10 0
5. Natural beauty of site . . . . . . . ll 11 9 8
6. Safety of approach from main highway. . 6 6 6 6
7. Condition of present road to site . . . 6 6 6 6
8. Distance from nearest fire station. . . 5 3 4 5
9. Freedom of site from nuisances. . . . . 5 5 5 3
10. Character of surroundings . . . . . . 5 5 4 4
11. Distance to fuel gas main . . . . . 3 2 2 3
12. Distance to electric power. . . . . . . 2 2 2 2
Totals for DESIRABLE FEATURES. . . . 100 95 88 82
Essential Features
1. water supply . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3O 3O 30: 30
2. Sewage disposal . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 30* 30* 30
3. TOpography . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 18 20 16
4. Soil characteristics. . . . . . . . . . 20 20 20 15
...
Totals for ESSENTIAL FEATURES. . . . 100 98Y - lOO ”~91

 

TOTAL RATINGS . . . . . . . . . . . 200 193 188 173

*Original Rating 10

335

The original ratings by the Building Division totaled 173 for Allendale
and Muskegon and 148 for Marne. A subsequent resolution by Ottawa County
to provide water and sewer service to the sites in that county increased
the rating for the Allendale site by 20 and the Marne site by 40.

Although each of the sites is excellent and possesses all of the essential
features to an acceptable degree and most of the desirable ones, the Allen—
dale site with a rating of 193 is the nearest to the Optimum, The Marne
site is less desirable, principally because of its access to the trunk line
highway and because it is less than a mile in width. Muskegon rates the
lowest for two principal reasons: Its distance to the center of populatiOn
to be served and its extremely sandy soil.

Department of Administration
Building Division

A. N. Langius, Director
April 24, 1961

 

5210'

 

 

 

 

 

 

I’mume .300 float/cry
4ND SlA ICl Snu-

 

   
   
 

JOOO-Feo'r 04 I04!) we
”ALA/us Dunn ru.

 

  
 

 

 

4500-1‘007 as IS-Mmurl .
”ALA/NO DIAHITEA lll‘

gag; 00m

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

5250’

 

 

 

 

 

 

I AUDITOKIUM .wo Tfiuru H.500 mu 500 Sears) /50,000 Gum Sew" fur
2 LIMA" {/0 IV” Sewn fur Pu. .S‘ruuwr) 200.000
3 ”HIGH auxin/Me (7’22 IVJr Sewn; Fear Pan Sruuwr) /50000
4 Ilene. Maumueflr Ileana 5,000
i (assume, Luau run: «In ’A‘ULPY One/cc: /,200,000
(60 AI" Sewn Fur Pu Swan/r)
6 loamy/1714710” Juneau (3 In 'A/tr Sewn fur Pu Swan/r) 70.000
CHAIIL I0,000
’4“:me Rte-mule: £000
ӣ41.74! SIAWCI 2.63000
7 Mat 4N0 ”aunt's Anton/cc HALL: 4440,000
(60 PM Car at ‘000 4r 240 Gun 59mm: Fur fun)
I Rum/0 fiuu nu hinge/ensue; Ar/Iunc:
9 INmAcousemre Armlr/c:
I0 Hun/vs PM”? /5,000
3d»: 44m 51'0““ (4W: I/cr Sewn Fur Pu Swan/r) 70,000
I / Lilla/I470." Salem. xoaaoo
I2 Ranger 44:“..er 60.000
I! Mus/u Sruoulr Annuity" 430,000
(I In CIA” 0A :00 47 600 640:: Saw“ Fur E4011)
Tom 4,000,000 640” Sam: Fear
Duaaruuvr or Aenzmerannou 0......“ 4'00 . :30 Fur Dueuuumc SIT. Pun Ma. 4 Cause:
DUILD/NG DIVISION or In 000 £71. Smurf:
ADAIAN N. LAUGH/t, DIAICTOR IPA/L /96/ L 64.0w VALLtv COLLI‘R

 

 

337

Appendix XXIV. Recommendations Regarding Citizens Council to the Board
of Control as Suggested by Educational Consultants
(February 8 and 9, 1961)

GRAND VALLEY COLLEGE
TO: ‘ The Board Of Control, Grand Valley College
FROM: Committee of Consultants (as listed below)

REGARDING: Role of Citizens Council to the Board of Control
in Planning for the Grand Valley College

The Committee of Consultants, in response to your invitation, met in Grand
Rapids Wednesday and Thursday, February 8 and 9, 1961, to discuss the role
of the Citizens Council in planning for the Grand Valley College.

The Committee of Consultants believes that a Citizens Council can perform
important services helpful to the Board of Control. The Committee is there-
bre pleased to present for your consideration these recommendations.

PART I - GENERAL PURPOSES OF CITIZENS COUNCIL

The Consultants recommend the following general purposes for the Citizens
Council:

1. To advise the Board of Control with respect to the desires of the
community in regard to the college.

2. To advise and counsel the Board of Control with respect to matters
specifically referred by the Board.

3. To become informed on preliminary planning of the college so that
they can serve as a source of information for people of the community.

PART II - COMMITTEE ORGANIZATIONS WITHIN CITIZENS COUNCIL

The Consultants recommend that the committees listed below be established,
that the Board of Control appoint a chairman of each, that each committee
select its own vice-chairman and secretary, and that the Board of Control
name at least one of its members to serve as member ex-Officio of each
such committee.

A. SITE SELECTION COMMITTEE:

The Site Selection Committee shall offer advice and counsel to the Board
of Control with respect to:

1. General nature of the site to be selected.

338

Appendix XXIV. (Continued) Recommendations Regarding Citizens Council

to the Board Of Control as Suggested by Educational
Consultants (February 8 and 9, 1961)

2. Committee members' evaluations on proffered sites.

3. Community articulation.

4. Concepts Of site development.

B. INTER-INSTITUTIONAL RELATIONSHIPS COMMITTEE:

The Inter-institutional Relationships Committee shall offer advice and counsel
to the Board of Control with respect to maintaining liasion and achieving co-
operation with:

C.

De

Area community colleges.

" Area non-public colleges.

Area public school districts, such as coordination of counseling ser-
vices, surveying resources available to the college, coordination of
programs, and dissemination of facts re expected large flow of students.

4. Other colleges and state universities (with special reference to graduate

and professional ftmctions).

STUDENT AID COMMITTEE:

The Student Aid Committee shall Offer advice and counsel to the Board of
Control with respect to:

i.

2.

Locally supported student loan, aid and work programs.

Housing for non-commuting students.

GOVERNMENTAL RELATIONSHIPS COMMITTEE:

The Governmental Relationships Committee shall offer advice and calmsel
to the Board of Control with respect to:

Zoning and land use problems in the area of campus.

Health problems in the area of the campus, including research on available
health services, sewage, drainage and water supply provisions.

Security problems of the campus, including research on available law
protection agencies.

Fire protection problems of the campus, including research as to fire
and other emergency services available.

339

Appendix XXIV. (Continued) Recommendations Regarding Citizens Council

E.

F.

G.

H.

to the Board of Control as Suggested by' Educational
Consultants (February 8 and 9, 1961)

5. Access and closure problems of the campus, including research on
present and future roads and highways and their maintenance.
EDUCATIONAL NEEDS COMMITTEE:

The Educational Needs Committee shall offer advice and counsel to the
Board of Control with respect to future area needs for:

1. Professions legal, medical, nursing, ministry, etc.)

2. Industrial management personnel.

3. Distributive and service personnel.

4. Scientific and technical personnel.

5. Additional specialized personnel.

AREA STUDIES COMMITTEE:

The Area Studies Committee shall Offer advice and conmsel to the Board
of Control with respect to amplification and updating of existing area

studies as follows:

1. Verification of expressed responses of high school students to go to
college. See J amrich Report.

2. Verification of response of high school students re education (vocational)
goals.

3. Determination of need for future studies.
ARCHIVES COMMITTEE:

The Archives Committee shall offer services, advice and counsel to the
Board of Control with respect to:

1. Recommendations as to format and content of records of the develop-
ment of this college.

2. Services to prepare and preserve records of college developments to
date, and services to keep the same current.

COLLEGE INTERPRETATION COMMITTEE:

The College Interpretation Committee shall provide communications for
the Board of Control as follows:

340

Appendix XIGV. (Continued) Recommendations Regarding Citizens Council

to the Board of Control as Suggested by Educational
Consultants (February 8 and 9, 1961)

Contacts with area service clubs, church groups, women's organizations,
and professional organizations.

Contacts with any community discussion groups planning progr ams involving
this college.

PART III - PROCEDURES FOR COMMITTEES OF CITIZENS COUNCIL

The Consultants recommend the following procedures for the committees of the
Citizens Council:

That each appointed committee choose a vice-chairman and a secretary.
That each committee keep a written record of its prOceedings.

That committee meetings be held at the call of the chairman or on
direction of the Board of Control.

That each committee submit its report or reports through the chairman,
directly to the Board of Control.

That written progress reports be furnished to the Board of Control at the
request of such Board or at the request of the Chairman of the Citizens'
Council. .

PART IV - TERMS OF COUNCIL, ITS COMMITTEES, AND COMMITTEE OFFICERS

The Consultants recommend that the terms of all council members, committee
members, and officers of committees shall automatically expire on December 31,
1961, except as renewed by the Board of Control, and that their respective functions
shall terminate on December 31, 1961; further, it is recommended that any such
committees and such renewal appointments shall automatically terminate as of

the end 'of the next succeeding calendar year, tmless again so renewed.

COMMITTEE OF CONSULTANTS (Participating)

Chris A. De Young - Grand Valley College
Harold M. Dorr - University of Michigan
Harlan L Hagman - Wayne State University
Raymond N. Hatch - Michigan State University
John E. Visser - GrandBapids Junior College
Clayton J. Maus - Western Michigan University
Herbert H. Wood - University of Michigan

341

Appendix XXV. Citizens' Council Program Plans

GRAND VALLEY COLLEGE
C 28 Pearl Street, N. W.
0 Grand Rapids 2, Michigan

Y January 21, 1961

In re: Citizens' Council :tO
Board Of Control

Dear Citizens' Council Member:

We have scheduled an important meeting Of the entire Citizens' Council of the
Grand Valley College for Thursday, February 16, 1961. The meeting will
be in the Continental Room of the Pantlind Hotel in Grand Rapids and wfll
commence at 8 P. M. Refreshments will be served.

The program will include the following:

(1) Up-to-date report from the new planning Administration
Staff of the Grand Valley College by Chris De Young.
(Preliminary studies were completed just a few days ago.)

(2) Resume of the November, December, January and February
meetings of Grand Valley's Board of Control.

(3) Progress report on Fund Drive from Mr. Richard Gillett.
(4) Report on Site and Buildings' Committee's steps to date.

(5) Remarks by L. William Seidman (Chairman of Board of
Control) on "What's ahead for the college".

As you know, the Finance Committee of the Citizens Council has been active for
some time, and the Site and Bufldings Committee thereof is now commencing its
functions. However, the majority of our Citizens' Council (whose membership
now consists of 109 persons) have not yet been appointed to specific committees.
We are awaiting recommendations from the newly appointed Planning Administra-
tion Staff to the Board of Control as to what additional areas could be usefully
served by our Citizens' Council members in this advisory capacity. It is hoped
that these recommendations will be completed in time for Board action at

their February 10 meeting. If same occurs, these suggested committee areas
will be discussed at our forthcoming meeting on February 16.

I am enclosing herewith a roster of our Citizens' Council and Board of Control
for your permanent reference purposes.

We hope that you will be able to attend this first meeting of the entire Citizens'
Council.

Best wishes,
/s/ David E. Dutcher
216 Federal Square Bldg. David E. Dutcher
Grand Rapids, Michigan Chairman Citizens' Council

 

 

tt‘f“."l l [I A. .I' t I III.
II (III. I I I .I «Iii II
II I II. {I‘ll ' lull-l

 

 

342

Appendix XXVIa. Educational Materials Used to Solicit Funds
NEW COLLEGE HIGHLIGHTS

You probably have heard of the establishment of a new state college in
Western Michigan. This is an exciting new development which provides
great benefit to the area and also presents a challenge. I thought you would
like to know some of its history and future plans. The new college was
created by the Michigan Legislature by the signing of a bill on April 26, 1960.

The college is the outgrowth of the first long-range planning for higher
education in the State of Michigan. The Michigan Legislative Study Committee
on Higher Education, sponsored by the Michigan Legislature and the Kellogg
Foundation, published its findings, prepared under the direction of Dr. John
D. Russell, director of the survey, in 1958.

In connection with planning for future development of higher education,
these important conclusions were reached:

1. The state had need for a new four-year degree-granting college.

2. Such college should be independent of other schools in the state.

3. It would be more economical to establish a new school than to
continue to try to enlarge most of the emsting institutions.

4. The most likely place for establishing such new college would be
in the eight-county area with Kent as a center. ,.

Subsequently, in House Concurrent Resolution 28, passed in June 1959,
the Legislature created a Study Committee to follow up on the Russell Report.
This committee appointed Dr. John X. J amrich, Director of the Center for
Higher Education at Michigan State University, to make a detailed study of
the need and type of education necessary in the area. Dr. J amrich's nport
approved by the Study Committee, presented these main conclusions:

1. There is an unquestioned need for a new four-year degree-
granting college in this eight-county area.
2. The college should be developed with a strong undergraduate
Liberal Arts emphasis.
3. It is recommended that the college acquire at least 400 acres of land.
4. It is recommended that the new college be located in an area some-
where just west of the City Of Grand Rapids.

Based on these recommendations, the Michigan Legislature passed a bill
in its 1959 session providing the charter for the new school, contingent however,
on the communities raising from non—tax sources $1, 000, 000, and providing a
site for the new school. The Legislative debate reveals that the purpose of
this provision was to make sure that the area itself felt strongly enough about
the need for this school to provide initial capital funds to get it under way.

The need to provide better educational opportunities for children in the
area is unquestioned. Dr. J amrich's report reveals, "By 1965 there may be

343

Appendix XXVIa. (Continued) Educational Materials Used to Solicit Funds

NEW COLLEGE HIGHLIGHTS

6, 000 young people in the eight-county area seeking a higher education, from
whom there will notbe a facility available. "

His report shows estimated enrollments for the new college will be 2, 500'
for 1965, 5,000 in 1970, and 8, 000 to 10,000 by 1975. Reports also have
shown that the percentage of youth now attending college from the eight-
county area is approximately 15% less than for the state as a whole, and
30% less than the Detroit area. This is obviously the result of the lack of
facilities available here. Further, this need can be fulfilled more economically
through the creation of a new school here than in any other way.

Beyond this, what will the new school mean to the area?

It will mean highly-talented young people will be brought into the community
to participate both as citizens and as experts in their particular fields. It will
provide a source for industry, both for facilities, brains, and trained man-
power, which has clearly not been available to the extent necessary in this
area. One has only to look at industrial developments around other educational
centers to see the attractiveness of this type of facility to business.) In the
new world of computers, wonder drugs, and rockets, this trend has barely
begun.

This new institution will bring to the economy of our area a "new business'
with tremendous economic, social, and cultural benefits. It is doubtful that
any new business established in the community in the next ten years will
bring the amount Of spending power to the area which will ultimately be repre-
sented by this institution. Every type of business will be benefited.

A college of the type envisioned also brings with it many cultural benefits,
including music, art, lectures, athletics, and other attractions that will
make the whole area a better place to live. One industry has already commented
that such a new college will go "a long way toward meeting our problem Of
attracting people from some of the more glamorous areas to live in West
Michigan. "

What kind of college will develop?

This will depend largely upon the people of the community, and the care
and support which they give its growth.

The college has a number Of substantial advantages to begin with. Unlike
all other colleges in the area, it will have an independent charter similar to
that given to Wayne State University, Michigan State University, and the
University of Michigan. It will not be under the Department of Public Instruc-
tion as are all other state institutions.

Further, its Board is appointed by the Governor, with the consent of the
Senate, rather than elected. Board members are appointed for a six-year term.

it

 

344

Appendix XXVIa. (Continued) Educational Materials Used to Solicit Funds

NEW COLLEGE HIGHLIGHTS

This should help to keep the college out of "partisan politics. " The present
Board of Control has indicated their desire to build a college of which all
the people can be proud because of its standards and service to the area, of
which it will be an integral part.

All of the benefits of this new college will be possible only if the communi-
ties get together to raise the $1, 250, 000 necessary to provide the capital
funds and the new site. Incidentally, it has been predicted that by the time
this college attains its full status, most of this eight-county area will actually
be integrated into one economic community.

This is an unusual Fund Drive:

1. It is a one—time requirement: Raising this amount will get the new
college underway. These are capital funds only.

2. It must reach its goal in order to create the college.

3. It must succeed rapidly - by the end of March 1961 at the latest -
in order that the college may go to tie 1961 session of the Legislature
in order to obtain operating funds for planning for the next year. In
other words, if the flmds are not raised in time, the. whole year is
lost. .

Certainly, in no other campaign for funds in the area could it ever be said
that so many benefits can be gained by putting the campaign over swiftly, as
there is in this unusual situation.

All of the funds raised will be used for capital improvements or endowments.

A volunteer will call on you in the near future to discuss the new college
with you. We sincerely hope you give this matter full consideration and your
whole-hearted support“.

Sincerely,

L. Wm. Seidman, Chairman
Board of Control

LI Ill «I'll: I II 1| 1 I l II! I f
. l ili: II .' l: lul‘lllillllllll 1' ‘I'
II‘ III I I."

 

345

Appendix mIb. Educational Material Used to Solicit Funds

Grand Rapids and Western Michigan will have its own four—year state
college, ready for students in 1963.

As a result of hard work by interested citizens of an eight-county area -
Muskegon, Newaygo, Montcalm, Ottawa, Kent, Ionia, Allegan and Barry -
and their state legislators, a bill was passed by the legislature and signed
by Governor Williams on April 26, 1960, authorizing the establishment of a
new college in the West Michigan area.

Now the work begins. The bill of authorization stipulated that the new
college would become a reality only when a proper site and $1, 000, 000 were
raised by the area itself. The fund drive that is under way is a most unusual
one. It is a one-time proposition. The money raised, to be used for capital
improvements and endowments, is necessary to get the college started. And
the drive must reach its goal. In this case, 98% of the amount will not build
98% of a college. Furthermore, it must be raised by March of 1961 in order
that the college can go to the spring session of the legislature to obtain operat-
ing funds for the next year.

If you wonder why the legislature decided on this do-it-yourself approach
to the financing of the college, its purpose is revealed in the debate concerning
the bill. It wanted to make sure that the area involved felt strongly enough
about the need for the college to provide initial funds to get it under way.

Of course, the benefits to the area are apparent. Not only would a college
bring in a large and steady new business, but also it would bring talented
people to West Michigan as a source for industry, for facilities, brains,
and trained manpower.

The need for a new four-year college was established as a result of a
survey published in 19 58 by the Michigan Legislative Study Committee on
Higher. Education, sponsored by the Michigan Legislature and the Kellogg
Foundation, prepared by Dr. John D. Russell, director of the survey.
Four main recommendations were made: The state had need for a new,
four-year degree-granting college, such cdlge should be independent of
other educational institutions in the state, it would be more economical to
establish a new school then to enlarge the existing ones, and the most likely
place for such a college would be in the eight-county area with Grand Rapids
as a center. .

After the Russell Report was made public, a citizens' committee was
organized in the area to discuss its implications. In March, 1959, a
$7, 500 grant was made by the Grand Rapids Foundation to finance a furtler
study of the educational needs of this part of the state. This report prepared
by Dr. John X. J amrich recognized that there will be a rapidly increasing
population of college age in the next decades, and that the existing state
colleges and universities would be physically unable to accommodate them.
It also noted that a greater percentage of eligible students would go on to
college if there were one near enough to their homes so that they could
commute to classes and save living expenses by continuing to live at home.

346

Appendix XXVIb. (Continued) Educational Material Used to Solicit Funds

The College recommended by the survey would be a liberal arts college, with
adult and graduate programs provided by extension services of the University
of Michigan and of Michigan State University.

In'due time the legislature passed the bill establishing the college, and a
Board of Control was named by Governor Williams on October 5.

Members of the board are:

L. William Seidman, Chairman. Mr. Seidman is a partner in the accounting
firm of Seidman & Seidman, and a member of the Committee on Federal
Taxation of the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. He was
chairman of the Citizens Advisory Committee which assisted the Michigan
Legislative Committee in its study of the need for a college in this area.

He is a graduate of Dartmouth College (A. B. ), Harvard Law School (L. L. B. ),
and the University of Michigan (M. B. A.)

Edward J. Frey, President of the Union Bank and Trust Company, and of the
Greater Grand Rapids Chamber of Commerce. He is also a director of the
United States Chamber of Commerce, and a member of the Executive Council
of the American Bankers Association. Mr. Frey is a graduate of the
University of Michigan, and of the School of Banking of Rutgers University.

Dale Stafford, publisher of the Greenville Daily News, and former editor of
the Detroit Free Press. He was the Republican candidate for Michigan State
University Board of Trustees four years ago, and is currently the incoming
president of the Inland News Association. Mr. Stafford is a graduate of
Michigan State University.

Mrs. John J. Kistler of Grand Haven, who was secretary of the Citizens
Advisory Committee. She is a past officer of the Michigan State Federation
of Women's Clubs, Ottawa County Red Cross, and Grand Haven PTA Associ-
ation, and was recently chairman of the Michigan Council of Women's State
Organizations. She is a graduate of the University of Kansas (A. B. -
Journalism) and Columbia University (M. A. - English).

Mr. William A. Kirkpatrick, President and Treasurer of the Kalamazoo Paper
Box Company. Mr._ Kirkpatrick is Vice-Chairman of the Industry Advisory
Board of the School of Paper Technology at Western Michigan University, and
has served as a member of the board of directors of Goodwill Industries, Inc. ,
of Southwestern Michigan. He is a graduate of Massachusetts Institute of
Technology (Chemical Eng.)

Mr. James Copeland of Greenville. Mr. Copeland is President and Director
of the Wyoming State Bank and of Security National Bank of Manistee. He is
Chairman of the Board of Equity Financial Corporation, and a graduate of
Albion College.

Dr. Arnold C. Ott of Muskegon, President of Ott Chemical Company. Dr. Ott
received his Ph. D. in Chemistry from Michigan State University, and holds
authorship on 50 domestic and foreign patents and technical publications.

347

Appendix XXVIb. (Continued) . Educational Material Used to Solicit Funds

Mr. Kenneth Robinson of Grand Rapids, Director of Region I-D (out-state
Michigan area) of the International Union, United Auto Workers, and a member
of the Education Committee of the International Executive Board of UAW.
Served on Grand Rapids Community Chest Board for a number of years and

is presently a member of the National Budget Committee of the National
Community Chest and Councils. Mr. Robinson recently served as a member
of the Michigan Tax Study Citizens Advisory Committee.

Dr. Icie Macy Hoobler, research chemist of Ann Arbor; presently Consultant
for The Merrill-Palmer Institute of Detroit. Dr. Hoobler is a graduate of
Central College for Women (A. B. ); University of Chicago (B. S. ); University
of Colorado (M. A.); and Yale University (Ph. D.)

In its first meetings the board named Seidman as its chairman, appointed
Frey as chairman of the finance committee, with Ott and Stafford as members,
and expressed dissatisfaction with the name "Grand Valley College, " which
has been the informal title of the new college. Stafford was named to conduct
a contest for a raw name in which students in the area would suggest names,
and the winner, selected by the board, would be offered a year's tuition or a
cash prize.

The board of control also approved a plan to name a loo-member Citizens
Council from the eight-county area to advise the board with respect to the
desires of the community in regard to the college; to aid the Board of Control
with respect to planning and action in the following fields: site, building and
name, administrative, curriculum, finance, and other fields as the need
develops, and to become informed on the activities of the college so that
they can serve as a source of information for people of the community.

One of the major decisions to be made in the next few months is the

' location of the college. The survey recommended that a 400—acre site should
be provided. So far, at least six parcels of land have been suggested or
ofiered. City-owned Aman Park, in Ottawa County 10 miles west of Grand
Rapids, was first mentioned. This is a 325-acre park given to the city 34 .
years ago by Jacob Aman as a wilderness park, but which has its main use
now as a camp site for physically handicapped children. The camp occupies
only three acres of the wooded land, and the rest is undeveloped and unused,
“ with the exception of a small tract which the city uses as a tree nursery.

The most controversial idea - and all of the proposed sites have their
advocates and detractors - was put forward by Kenneth Welch, local architect,
who advanced the idea of constructing a "skyscraper college" on the north-
east side of the 40-acre area in downtown Grand Rapids which is to be
razed in a massive urban renewal project, and which will contain a new city
hall, county building, and other governmental buildings. The Tower of Learning
planned by Welch would be patterned after the University of Pittsburgh, and
would include three parking levels, a central 13-story building which would

later be expanded to 18 stories, and three above-ground-level decks, with the
top one to 1nclude a swimming pool, gardens and recreational facilities.

__‘“

 

 

348

Appendix XXVIb. (Continued) Educational Material Used to Solicit Funds

Two groups of men in Allendale have optioned a 400-acre tract of land
along the Grand River, just ten miles from Capau Square. This land is rolling

woodland, with a sizeable section of flat farmland on a bluff overlooking the
river.

A group of Marne community leaders have optioned the highest land in
Ottawa County, two farms, twelve or thirteen miles from downtown Grand
Rapids, and offered it to the college as a site. Both the Allendale and Marne
properties would have a price tag on them, the former $91, 000 and the latter
$150, 000, although part of the money would be raised by the two communities.

Another possibility is the tract at the corner of Leonard and East Beltline,

N. E. , owned by J asonHonigman of Detroit, and once the proposed "Homestyle
Center" location. .

The city of Grand Haven has offered to make available a large section of
duneland north of the channel connecting Grand River with Lake Michigan and

including choice property on the big lake. The advantages for at least the
summer session are easily seen.

Enthusiasm for the four-year college in the whole eight-county section
is heartfelt. Once the money is raised and the site and name chosen, work can
begin on the construction, and by 1963 classes will begin. To the 6, 000 or so
young people in the area who have no other facilities available, the new college
will be of the greatest importance. To Grand Rapids and West Michigan the
opportunity to have a college of its own is of almost equal importance. Not
only will it being many cultural benefits, such as music, art, lectures and
athletics, but it will make the whole area a better place to live.

All of the money raised will be used for capital improvements or endowments,
and contributions will be deductible for federal income tax purposes. It is
expected that the fund drive will receive full consideration and the whole-
hearted support of the community.

10

349

Appendix XXVII. Names Proposed For the New College

A

Abikmmo College

Algonkian College

Algonquin College

All County College

Alnewgo College

Alvin C. York College
Amandale College
Ambassador College
American Youth College
Amon Western College

Annex College

Apex College

Apollo College

Apple Blossum College
Aqualand College

Arlington College

Arrow College

Arthur H. Vandenberg College
Arthur Vandenberg Memorial College
Athena College

B

Ball Valley College
Bamiko College
Bankomm College
Banokimm College
Beautivalley College
Beaver College
Beacon College
Beltline College
Bestaround College
Big Lake College
Bikmanon College
Bimmokan College
Binammonk College
Binokam College
Bi-State College
Blendon Mounds
Blendon Valley
Bokammin College
Bokmain College
Bonakimm College
Bonamik College
Bonammik College

I

2

Bon Mikam College
Briarwood College
Bridge College

Bright Future College
Brightmoro College
Bright Purpose College
Bright Tomorrow College
Brit-R-Vri College
Bykemi College

Byron Grand College
Byron Kent College
Blendon Mounds
Blendon Valley

C

Cadillac College
Campaubella College
Campau College

Candid College

Carving Dale College

Cass College

Centennial College

Central Countries College
Central Grand College
Central Great Lakes College
Central Michigan College
Central Region College
Central Valley College
Central Western College
Central West Michigan College
Cherry Capital State College
Child College

Chippewa College

Chippewa State College
Civic Center College

Clover Leaf College

Cog‘to College

Colleague College

College by the Lake

College of Eastern Lake Michigan
College of Grand Valley
College of Lakes

College of Learning

College of Old North West
College of Opportunity
College of Progressive Education
College of the Dunes

College of the Grand

The numeral indicates the number of times this name was suggested if more than once.

 

I I II“ .[II‘I 4"" ‘l‘l.l".|| l.‘ l IF.’I|‘IiII’nIl-‘lltr I II III...
{it Ill”,

350

Appendix XXVII. (Continued) Names Proposed For the New College

College of the Grand Valley
College of the Great Lakes
College of the Lakes

College of the New Frontier
College of the Peninsula

College of the Water-Wonderland
College Toward Better Living
College of Western Michigan
College of West Michigan
Comimban College

Cbmimban College

Comituin College

Community College

Community Grandour College
Comstock College

Concord College

Concord State College
Co-operative Communities College
County College

County Eight College _
County Octet Grand Valley Michigan College
County West College

Cresent College

Culter College

D

Damascen College

Dawn College

Delphian College

Denison College

Desamus College

Dexter College

Dikewood College

Downside College

Dream Fulfilled College
Dune College

Dimes Area College

Dunes College

Dunes State College
Dwiftwood College

Dwight College .
Dwight D. Eisenhower State College
Dwight Institute

E

Easel Ford College
Eastern Grand College

East Shore State College
Egypt Valley College
Eight County College
Eisenhower College
Eisenhower State College
Electa College
Elmhurst State College
Elmic College

Elucdate College
Enterprise College
Erasmus College
Eureka College .
Evergreen College
Explorer College

F

Fairview College

Faith College

Fertile Valley College
Ford College

Forest Hills College
Fortress of Learning College
Fountain College
Freedom College

Fruit Belt College
Fruitland Center College
Fruitland College

Fruit Ridge College

' Furniture City College

Furnwood College

Future College

Future Halls of Michigan College
Fields College

G

Gerald Ford College
Gramich College
Gramuskand College
Granbimomcouege
Grand Acres College
Grandale College ,

3 Grand Central College
2 Grand College

Grandell College
Grand Hopewell
Grandley College
Grand Heights College

2 Grand Kent College

-i.(fi‘il{‘!“ [- I
‘1 . ll- I,‘
l (Ill-I'll. I... ll. Ii! I!
I ' ‘l'l'l
} .
.J i. . A

19

4

Appendix XXVII. (Continued) Names Proposed For the New College

Grandland College

Grand Letterman College
Grand Lodge College
Grand Michigan College
Grand Northern College

Grand Opportunity College

Grandridge College

Grand Rapids Campeau College
Grand Rapids Civic Center College
Grand Rapids College

Grand Rapids Scholars Pride College
Grand Rapids State College
Grand Rapids United

Grand Rapids Western

Grand River Area College
Grand River College

Grand River State College
Grand River Valley College
Grand Seaway College

Grand State College

Grand Trinity College

Grandue College

Grand University

Grandview College

Grandview Heights College
Grand Western College
Grandwood College

Grand Val College

Grand Vale College

Grand Valle College

Grand Valley College

Grand Valley College for Advanced Studies 3

Grand Valley Community College
Grand Valley Cultural Center
Grand Valley Institute of Learning
Grand Valley Investment College
Grand Valley Senior College
Grand Valley State College
Grand Valley United College
Grand View College

Grand View Community College
Grandville State College

Granvue College

Grand Rapids Hall of Learning
Great Lakes College

Great Lakes College of Michigan
Great Lakes Province College
Great Lakes State College

Green Acres

Green Pastures College

Greenridge College
Green Vale College
Green _Valley College
Greenville College
Greenville State College

H

Hallmark College
Harmony College
Havenwood College

Heart of Michigan College
Hearld College

Henry Ford College
Heritage State College
Hiawatha College
Hiawatha State College
Hillmount Heights College
Hillsdale College
Hillwood College

Holmes College
HomeAcres State College
Hopewell College
Hopewell Heights
Hopewell Mounds

I

Ikonibim College
Imperial College

Indian Hills State College
Indian Trails College
Indian Trails State College
Intercity State College
Inter-County College
Interlake College
Inter-Lakes College
Inter-State College
Iuebor State College

J

Jefferson Memorial College
Jerry Ford's City College

K

Kabimmon College

2 Kammbion College

Kammiban College

13

14

352

Appendix )OCVII.

Kamobin College
Kanibomin

Kanoic College

Kanowa College
Kentawa College
Kenailgo College
Kengonoawa College
Ken-Ike College
Kennedy College
Kennsington College
Kenolakes

Kenowa College

Kenowa Shores College
Ken-Ta-Wa-Gon College
Kent College .

Kent College of Art‘
Kent Community College
Kent County Institute of Liberal Arts
Kentegon College

Kent Hills State College
Kentigan College
Kentley College
Kentmeadow College
Kentmontowa College
Kent Mounds

Kenttawa College

Kent State College
Kentway College

Kent Wood College

Kenwillson College
Keomeban College

Keystone College

Key Streams College
Kim-Ban-O-College
Kimboman College
Kim-Bo-Man State College
Kimmoban College
Kimmonab State College
Knickerbocker College
Komabmin College
Koman College
Kombanim College
Kombimna College
Ko-mi-ban College
Komikan College
Kommbani College

' Kom-mi-ban College-

Kommina College

Kommitbo
Komobian College

16

10

(Continued) Names Proposed For the New College

L

Lafayette College

La Grande College

Lakecrest State College
Lakeland College

Lakeland State College

Lake Michigan College

Lake Michigan Seaway College
Lake Michigan Shires College
Lake Michigan State College
Lake Region College

Lake Shore College

Lake Shore of Michigan College
Lakeshores College

Lake State College

Lakeview State College
Lakewood College

Lamont College

Lamont Valley College
Lamound College

Land of Lakes College

Land O' Lakes College
Laureldale College

Learning for Life College
Liberty College

Liberal Arts College

Lotus College

Louis Campau College
Lowell State College

Lower Central College
Lower Michigan College
Lower Michigan Peninsula College
Lower Peninsula College

M

Mackinac Bridge State College
Mackinac State College
Mankibom College

Marquette Circle College
Marquette College

Maytanno College

Memory College

Memory Lakes College
Metropolis College
Michigama College

Michigan Campau College
Michigan Grandeur College
Michigan Grand State College

 

 

 

353

; Appendix XXVII. (Continued) Names Proposed For the New College

Michigan Grand Valley South West College
Michigan Grand Valley State College

North Central College
Northfield College

Nit-#01

Michigan Hills College
Michigan Hyphenate College
Michigan Institute of Technology
Michigan Kommiban College
Michigan Lakeland College
Michigan Mounds College
Michigan Normal College
Michigan Pines College
Michigan State College
Michigan West Central College
Michigan Woodland College
Michigauma State College
Michigram College
Michi-grand College
Michigrand State College
Michi-Grand Valley College
Michocta County College

Mid Michigan College
Mid-State College

Midwest College

Midwest counties College
Mid-Western Michigan College
Midwestern of Michigan College
Midwestern State College
Midwest Michigan College
Midwest Shore College of Michigan
Midwest State College
Milestone College

Monkimba College

Mok' Minaba College
Montcalm College

Montcalm State College
Montkentowa College

Morsac College

N

Namanayok College
N ewbarry College

N ewcalm College
Newcome College
New Era College
New Frontier College
New Grand College
Nicolet College
Nimkoba College
Nobleaim College

North Calley College
North Western College
N owledge College

0

OBin Kam College
Octa County College
Octa County Valley College
Octad County Academy
Octagon College
Octagon County College
Octako College
Octakounti College
Octandria College
Octavalent College
Octavia College
Octavia State College
Octavia County College
Octavia Valley
Octavian College
Octavian County College
Octavis College
Octavo College

Octet College

Octoco College

Octo College

Octo Conte College
Octo County College
Octogen State College
Octonary College
Octuple College
Ommibank College
Orbit College

Osborn College

Ottawa College

Ottawa Kent College
Ottawa State College
O-Wash-To-Nong

P

Pallas Athene College
Paradise Gates College
Paul Bunyan State College
Peace College

Peacevale College

Appendix XXVII. (Continued)

Peave Valley College
Peninsula College
Peninsula State College
Peninsular College
Peninsular Haven College ,
Peninsular State College
Penisulum Amoenam College
Pennacle College
Picturesque Halls College
Pines College

Pineoak College

Pine State College

Pine Tree College

Pinne Hills College
Pioneer College

Pleasant Valley College
Polaris College
Pottowatomi College
Prince-Madonna College

, Progress College

3

Q
Quin Lakes College

B

Ramona College
Rampart College
Rapid River College
Rapidstate College
Rapids Eight County Valley College
Rapids Grove College
Rapids State College
Rapidsville College
Rapid Valley College
Regality College
Resortland College
Ridgeview College
River Bend College
Riverdale College
Rivers Lakes College
River Valley College
River View College
Roben State College
Robin College
Robinson College

S

Samuel Rayburn College
Scholars Valley College

354

10

Names Proposed For the New College

Scenic Portal College

Scenic Rapids Educational College
Scenic View College

Seaway College ' '

Seaway State College

Seidman Achievement College
Seidman College

Shawnessee College
Shawnessee Valley College
Shemnecon College

South Central College

Southern College

Southern‘ Michigan College ~
South Western College
Southwestern College of Michigan
Southwestern Michigan College
Southwestern Michigan State College
Southwestern State College
South West Lake Shore College
Sparta State College
Sportsland College

Spren Valley College

Stafford Valley College
Standale College

Stannyoma College

State College of Grand River
State College of Grand Valley
State College of Michigan
State College of the Dunes
Statesman College

Stator College

Sterling Price College

Summit College

Sun Sat College

T

Tanmayno College
Tanomyan College
Tanyamon College

The Circle College

The Pines College
Theta College

The Wonderland College
Thornapple State College
Thousand Lakes College
Timber Lane College
Titan College

Tranquil Acres College
Tri-County College
Trinity College

355

Appendix XXVII.

2 Tri-River College

QM

Tri CValley College
U

Unico College

Union College

Union Valley College

United College

United College of Grand Valley, Michigan
United Counties College

United Grand Valley College

United Grand Valley College of Michigan
United State College

Unity College

Unity Michigan College

Utopia College.

V

Vade Mecum College

Vale Vista College
Valendale College

Valhall College

Valley Central College
Valley College

Valley Grand College
Valley Grandeu College
Valley Haven College
Valley Hills College
Valleyland College

Valley Lee college

Valley Occidental College
Valley College , ,
Valley of The Grand COllege
Valley Rapids College .,
Valley State College ’
Valley-View College
Vandenburg-Brown College
Vandenberg College
Vandenburg Institute of Progress
Vandenburg Memorial College
Vandenberg State College
Vanguard College

Van Wast College

Vari, Lands College

Ventage College

' Ventura College

Vera Cruz College
Veritas College

omw

(Continued) Names Proposed For the New College

Village Green College

Visser College

Vista College

Vista Vale College

Washtenong College

Wastwood College

Water Front College

Waterland College

Waterland State College

Water Wonderland College

Water Wonderland State College
Weldwood College

Wemco College

Wemeico College

West Berlin College

Westburg College .

West Central College

West Central College of Michigan
West Central State ' -College
West Central Community College
West Central Michigan College
West Coast Of Michigan College
Westdale College

W esteight College

Western Bammokin College
Western College of Michigan
Western Counties College
Western Grand College

Western Lake College

Western Michigan Bommanik College

10" Western Michigan College

Western Michigan Grand College
Western Rapids College
Western Reformed College
Western Reserve College
Western Shore College

Western State College

Western Valley College
Western Wolverine College
Western Woodland College
Westgrand College

West Grand College of Michigan
West Grandeur College
Westgrand State College

West Grand State College

West Grand Valley College
West Haven College

West Lake Central College
West Michigan Co-Ed College

6 West Michigan College

N $10!?-

31

59

356

Appendix XXVlI. (Continued) Names Proposed For the New College

West Michigan Community College Woodland Central College

West Michigan State College
West Michigan University
West Michigrand College
West. Mittenland College
West Covecounty College
West Peninsula College

West Penninsular College
West Port College

West Sands College

West Shore College

Westate College ‘

West State College

West Stone State College
Westvale College

West Vale College of Michigan
West Valley College

West Valley of Michigan College
Westward Grand College
West Wolverine State College
West Wonderland College
West Wood College
Whispering Pines College
White Pines State College
White Pines University
White Rose College

Whitesan College

Wilkenson College

Williams College

Williams State College
Willow Lane College

Winter Wonderland College
Wolverine Central College
Wolverine College

Wolverine Institute
Wolverine State College
Wolverine State University
Wolverine Valley College
Wolverine Wonderland College

23 Wonderland College
3 Wonderland State College

Wonderland Temple College

2 Wonderland Valley College

Wondervale College

Wonder Waters College

Wood Haven College

Wood Institute 'of Grand Rapids
Woodland Area College
Woodland Center College

23 Woodland College
Woodland's Grand Valley State College
3 Woodland State College
2 Woodland Valley College
2 Woodland Western College
Woodside College

X—Y—Z

Yanamont College
Yuma College

"_5

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

n

«5.5:.

"Illltltlttt'llllT