A new clause in the Wesleyan Housing Contract, available in student e-portfolios under Room Selection, includes a ban on all pets except fish in on-campus housing. While many other universities boast a similar regulation in their housing clauses, they also offer more easily accessible off-campus housing for students.
This year, in its continual process to move all students onto campus, ResLife states that a student must be married, have children, be over 25, or have special medical or physical needs to be granted off-campus housing. Students who are dissatisfied with the housing contract have nowhere to turn if they don’t fit into one of those categories.
ResLife touts the idea that as students advance in their Wesleyan career, they move into apartments and senior houses, seemingly to learn to live independently and gain more responsibilities. But by adding clauses to a contract that a student has no choice but to accept, ResLife stifles that responsibility.
It seems common sense that students who choose to keep pets are among the most responsible students on campus; they are taking on accountability for another living thing. If ResLife truly feels that small pets will cause allergies, diseases, and destruction, the current policy should be phased out over a period of time. While the incoming Class of 2010 can be made aware of the policy and not bring pets in the first place, it will be hard for current students to find good homes for their pets before September.
Additionally, we realize that some students vandalize or disrespect the spaces in which they live, but it seems that fines ResLife created to deal with these issues has moved well beyond the level of fairness. For 2006-2007, all fines have increased: the minimum amount a student will be fined for a violation is now $100.
Under the auspices of fire inspection, University personnel enter houses and dole out increasingly severe fines for a multitude of non-fire-related issues. Any “evidence” of basement or attic entry is a $500 fine, which also happens to be the fine for breaking an exit sign. Students who want to paint their dilapidated porches are also threatened with a fine, and now small caged pets can mean fines.
Fining aside, the larger issue is that ResLife is continuing to under-inform students. For an office that sends students what seems like an unending barrage of e-mails during the housing pick process, ResLife’s e-mails contain miraculously little relevant information. While ResLife claims that it is exploring ways to make the changes in the housing contract more apparent to students, why not include that information in an e-mail, rather than bury it in a dense contract that most students will scroll through to get to the “accept” button?
Finally, if students feel uncomfortable accepting a housing contract filled with seemingly random and unreasonable fines and polices, give them the freedom to live as they choose off campus. Students living in University housing can be responsible, if ResLife would only let us.
Leave a Reply