KCRag Forum

shinatoo wrote: ↑Wed Sep 05, 2018 9:03 am Moving Rockhurst out of the area won't add 10k students to UMKC. Those kids won't transfer because Rockhust moved.

beautyfromashes wrote: ↑Wed Sep 05, 2018 9:29 am

shinatoo wrote: ↑Wed Sep 05, 2018 9:03 am Moving Rockhurst out of the area won't add 10k students to UMKC. Those kids won't transfer because Rockhust moved.

Correct. I looked up the Rockhurst enrollment. They only have about 3k students. So, wouldn’t increase UMKC numbers even if everyone transferred. It would provide additional facilities, including sports fields not provided at UMKC currently and would give room for expansion. I guess the question is which would provide more benefit to the campus and city if the funding costs were the same: spending millions on a Conservatory at the old Westport HS location or the purchasing of existing university facilities that are part of the Rockhurst campus. Of course, this is under the caveat that they would be willing to sell. I can’t imagine a college with only a few thousand students could be highly successful financially.

I’d love to see the largest KC university be similar to Louisville or Cindy.

beautyfromashes wrote: ↑Wed Sep 05, 2018 9:29 am

shinatoo wrote: ↑Wed Sep 05, 2018 9:03 am Moving Rockhurst out of the area won't add 10k students to UMKC. Those kids won't transfer because Rockhust moved.

Correct. I looked up the Rockhurst enrollment. They only have about 3k students. So, wouldn’t increase UMKC numbers even if everyone transferred. It would provide additional facilities, including sports fields not provided at UMKC currently and would give room for expansion. I guess the question is which would provide more benefit to the campus and city if the funding costs were the same: spending millions on a Conservatory at the old Westport HS location or the purchasing of existing university facilities that are part of the Rockhurst campus. Of course, this is under the caveat that they would be willing to sell. I can’t imagine a college with only a few thousand students could be highly successful financially.

TrolliKC wrote: ↑Wed Sep 05, 2018 9:51 am

beautyfromashes wrote: ↑Wed Sep 05, 2018 9:29 am

shinatoo wrote: ↑Wed Sep 05, 2018 9:03 am Moving Rockhurst out of the area won't add 10k students to UMKC. Those kids won't transfer because Rockhust moved.

Correct. I looked up the Rockhurst enrollment. They only have about 3k students. So, wouldn’t increase UMKC numbers even if everyone transferred. It would provide additional facilities, including sports fields not provided at UMKC currently and would give room for expansion. I guess the question is which would provide more benefit to the campus and city if the funding costs were the same: spending millions on a Conservatory at the old Westport HS location or the purchasing of existing university facilities that are part of the Rockhurst campus. Of course, this is under the caveat that they would be willing to sell. I can’t imagine a college with only a few thousand students could be highly successful financially.

I know you said highly financially successful, which I am not sure about for private, not-for-profit colleges. I do know that many colleges have only a few thousand students, even in the KC area. For example Avila has enrollment of 1,676, Benedictine has 2,249, Baker has 1,144 and William Jewell has 992. All these are affiliated with a religious organization of some kind so I imagine they measure success in many different ways. Rockhurst continues to invest in their campus including building a couple of small row student housing on Forest Ave this year, so I cannot imagine they would even consider a sale.

TrolliKC wrote: ↑Wed Sep 05, 2018 9:51 am I know you said highly financially successful, which I am not sure about for private, not-for-profit colleges. I do know that many colleges have only a few thousand students, even in the KC area. For example Avila has enrollment of 1,676, Benedictine has 2,249, Baker has 1,144 and William Jewell has 992. All these are affiliated with a religious organization of some kind so I imagine they measure success in many different ways. Rockhurst continues to invest in their campus including building a couple of small row student housing on Forest Ave this year, so I cannot imagine they would even consider a sale.

kcjak wrote: ↑Wed Sep 05, 2018 9:55 am Why would a small, private school sell land to UMKC when they (Rockhurst) are also burdened with the same lack of available land? Small private colleges like Rockhurst typically have significant endowments and operating budgets and higher tuition than larger public universities. That doesn't mean they aren't highly successful financially, even if they are not-for-profit. Ever hear of Duke, Rice, Gonzaga, Tulane, etc.?

GRID wrote: ↑Wed Sep 05, 2018 12:16 pm I never quite understood the push to move the conservatory downtown.

GRID wrote: ↑Wed Sep 05, 2018 12:16 pm I never quite understood the push to move the conservatory downtown. KC desperately needs a large, thriving urban university campus/district. Build it at the UMKC campus and stop building suburban low rise apartment buildings for housing and go up higher with more density instead. Build out UMKC.

flyingember wrote: ↑Wed Sep 05, 2018 2:22 pmThe idea was to utilize existing downtown theaters for the school rather than need to build this kind of space.

anonkcmo wrote: ↑Wed Sep 05, 2018 4:29 pm This whole debacle reminds me of how UMKC School of Law once had a plan to buy and convert the old Federal Courthouse (811 Grand) that had all of the lush courtrooms, research library and study rooms and move the school there. They eventually abandoned the plan.