With Cornell’s guarantee of housing ending after sophomore year, Allan Chu ’26 faced the challenge of finding an affordable off-campus living situation. After exploring a number of options, he found that cooperative housing offered a cost-effective solution.
“Financially, [living in a co-op] is so much cheaper. I remember my freshman year, a triple cost close to $5,000,” Chu, the president of RedBud Cooperative, said.
However, co-op leaders told The Sun that University administration has not provided enough support to maintain this living option. Neglected houses have faced caved-in roofs and collapsing floors, according to residents, while the co-op program has seen little expansion.
Cornell owns the co-ops, and they are considered a form of on-campus housing. However, the co-op residents are still responsible for certain house maintenance.
According to Remy Kageyama ’25, the president of the Watermargin co-op, the houses are facing difficulties in responding to the deteriorating nature of the aging houses.
“Our roof is collapsing and will collapse in nine years unless we raise 500,000 dollars to pay for it because Cornell won’t pay for it,” Kageyama said.
Leaderboard 2
Kageyama noted that over the past few years, four out of Cornell’s eight co-ops have had floors collapse. Residents are required to sign a contract that assumes responsibility for these damages, according to Kageyama.
“I think the main thing the co-ops are kind of upset about, regarding the University, is how our contracts are set up, where we are in charge of our own maintenance and repairs,” Kageyama said.
Another complaint across the co-ops lies within Cornell’s control of rental rates. Triphammer previously priced rental rates by room size, according to graduate student Vincent Eynon ’24, a Triphammer Cooperative resident.
Newsletter Signup
According to Eynon, the University mandated co-ops to standardize room rates both between residents in the same house and among different co-ops.
Chu shared similar sentiments by mentioning that Redbud has been facing challenges due to the University’s recent efforts to increase rents. This has become a pressing issue for many co-ops as they try to balance the costs of residency with the necessity for funding to fix problems when they arise.
Students are additionally frustrated with Cornell’s lack of efforts to expand and showcase co-ops as a housing option.
Eynon said that co-ops are “definitely against what Cornell would consider normal.”
“There’s definitely a lot of benefits to [going against what Cornell would consider normal], and we see those benefits every day with how students live in our communities,” Eynon said. “Admin sees a little bit of that, and they act like they’re proud of it. But there’s no push to have more housing communities like ours.”
Many co-op residents feel that this arrangement places an unfair burden on them, especially when issues may require immediate attention. While self-management can create a sense of community, it can also lead to frustration when resources and support from the University are limited.
Residents said that Cornell —- which owns the co-op properties — has expressed pride in the community, yet maintains a transactional relationship with it.
“Day to day, Cornell does not get involved,” Chu said. “But when it comes to more administrative measures, like billing and rent, Cornell gets involved. We can make suggestions, but at the end of the day, it is Cornell that determines prices.”
Cornell Housing wrote in a statement to The Sun that the co-op program provides participants with a dedicated staff team that oversees maintenance and building care, along with a financial advisor to assist in budgeting and forecasting.
Additionally, the Housing and Residential Life team supports various functions, including license management, bursar billing, communications, recruitment advertising and process guidance, according to the statement.
Rohith Tsundupalli and Matt Michailoff are Sun contributors and can be reached at [email protected] and [email protected].
Correction, Oct. 22, 11:33 p.m.: A previous version of this article included an incorrect description of Triphammer’s pricing model changes.