Where past presidents lived, current SIU President Ted Sanders may soon be working.

Sanders may be moving to a new office if a proposal that would transfer the University’s Institutional Advancement unit to Colyer Hall is approved.

If the proposal is not approved Institutional Advancement will likely renovate and take residence in a now vacant and filthy fraternity house.

The proposal was presented by Tom Britton, vice chancellor for Institutional Advancement, to student, faculty and administrative leaders Monday.

The proposal calls for the transfer of about 60 Institutional Advancement employees to take office in Colyer Hall, where Sanders and top SIU administrators work. Currently the employees are spread out across seven track houses, and other buildings on the west and northwest side of campus.

I have staff located in 12 different places right now, he said. I could get that down to three locations,

This would give me the ability to pull the major units together to increase teamwork and decrease duplication.

Britton said Colyer Hall has the ideal space and technology requirements Institutional Advancement needs.

Under the proposal, Sander’s office would move to the Stone Center off Douglas Drive. The building currently houses the Alumni Association. The Stone Center also has guest rooms that political leaders, large-scale donors, and SIU Board of Trustees members stay in when visiting campus. This function would continue, as the President’s office would only occupy part of the building.

Administrators are waiting for reaction from the public before making the decision because the Stone Center, which housed SIU’s top administrator since 1991 has a somewhat infamous history.

Its initial construction cost was higher then expected, and the budget was scrutinized by the media almost annually. Eventually, the legislature examined the center’s budget as well.

The center was built in 1971 and called University House after a proposal to build a hotel tower for visiting dignitaries was turned down. The center housed SIU presidents and was built by then SIU President Delyte Morris.

The $975,000 center was built without tax dollars, using overhead money from research grants and service contracts, which many people viewed as unethical.

Britton said this was inappropriate use of such money.

The Stone Center was so controversial when it was built, Britton said. It essentially cost President Morris his job, and to many people the house represents a misuse of administrative power.

It has remained controversial for almost 30 years.

The center also sparked anger because it was built during a campaign of intense publicity over skyrocketing school expenses. Chicago insurance executive W. Clement Stone rescued the project with a $1 million gift to the University to replace the controversial funding. In 1982, the house’s name was changed to the Stone house.

Because of the sensitive history of the Stone House, Britton said that Sanders left the final decision on the move to the Stone House to the constituency’s such as the Undergraduate Student Government and the Faculty Senate. Britton said he will also be discussing the move with the faculty union.

Sanders said if there is a big public outcry because of the move, then it’s not something we want to do, Britton said. We haven’t made a decision yet, and we are open to what the reaction will be.

If the move is approved, Britton estimated it will cost $25,000. The funds would come from Institutional Advancement’s budget.

Britton said he has been looking for space to consolidate Institutional Advancement since summer. He said he originally considered the Northwest Annex, which currently houses the Oracle project, but that the cost of renovating the building and getting it into ADA Compliance would be too great. Renovating the building would cost $3 million.

He said they also considered moving the unit to the Stone Center, but the space was too small. That left the old Phi Sigma Kappa house or Colyer Hall.

So we are really talking about two options that accomplish the same thing with different costs, he said. Renovating and repairing the house is just going to cost more.

Britton said House 103 on Greek Row, the old Phi Sigma Kappa house, has the space for the move but will cost much more to repair, renovate and clean up. Many of the house’s floors and ceilings are in ill repair. The fraternity’s logo is painted on numerous walls and many of the walls have holes in them. Many of the windows are also broken and glass is strewn about many of the floors.

It’s in pretty bad shape, Britton said as he pointed to a wall that had been knocked out, It would cost about three-quarters of a million dollars to bring this building up to speed. It’s a huge mess.

Britton estimated the damage to the house at $500,000, and $250,000 for technology infrastructure improvements. He said he did not know how such improvements would be funded.

He said if the building remains vacant and the proposal is approved, that his office will raise money to make it an international center, that would house all University international activities.

I can raise money for an international center, he said. But I can’t raise money for an Institutional Advancement renovation.

That’s a hard sell.

Britton said plans for such a center are in the early stages, an that he is focusing on ironing wrinkles such as job displacement out of the preliminary plans.

Pulling the units together will not result in job loss for Institutional Advancement staff, he said, but staff reductions may occur.

At this point there are no plans to force job elimination’s, he said. We will reduce staff through natural attrition like retirement.

Britton said the proposal will not be decided immediately, and that administrators will wait for feedback from constituencies.

Faculty Senate President Steve Jensen said the Colyer Hall move seems to be the most sensible.

It makes sense to have them all together so the right hand knows what the left hand is doing, he said. This option makes more sense financially than renovating the Northwest Annex or an old dormitory.

Jensen said he does not anticipate that the Stone Center’s checkered history will have any effect on the ultimate decision.

I just don’t perceive that being any problem, he said. Years have gone by, and this is something people looked at long and hard.

It is not a bad place, believe me.