By
Jeremy Duda
Arizona Daily Wildcat
Res Life unwilling to change policy, director says fees are a good deterrent
As the school year comes to an end, many UA residents are concerned with one of the downsides of communal dorm life - and it's not the bathrooms.
Over the past several weeks, many students have been surprised by additional fees for damages committed by unknown perpetrators.
"I found out the other day it was on my bursar's account," said computer engineering freshman T.J. Finnessy. "They don't even tell you you're being charged."
Finnessy, who lives at Kaibab-Huachuca Residence Hall, was informed by his resident assistant that the university had included extra fees on residents' bursar's accounts. He decided to check for himself and discovered about $10 in fees for damages caused by others.
"I've never personally damaged anything," he said.
Similarly, residents at Manzanita-Mohave Residence Hall were equally charged after none of the residents claimed responsibility for a beer bottle found in a toilet, which violated dorm policies involving outside garbage in bathrooms.
"It's unfair. Half of the hall wasn't even there that night," said pre-pharmacy freshman Victoria Simm.
Stories like this can be heard at dorms on or off campus. At Sky View Apartments, which are operated by the university, residents are being charged for false fire alarms and damaged ceiling panels.
"It's ridiculous how people are charged. I've never broken a panel or pulled a fire alarm before," said nursing freshman Jennifer Brandenburg, a Sky View resident.
"There's definitely a select group that does it. It sucks because we get penalized for their stupidity," she said.
The charges range from $9 to $65, but students say the money is not nearly as important as the principle - they don't think they should be charged for other people's actions.
However, James Van Arsdel, director of Residence Life, said responsibility can only be assigned to so many people.
"Who else would you charge?" he asked. "All damages should be the responsibility of the residents of the building."
Since Residence Life is a self-supporting department, all funding comes from the residents' room and board fees, Van Arsdel said.
The only other sources of income are very small, he added, including revenue from dorm washing machines.
If damages can be attributed to one person or a group of people, they will be charged in full, Van Arsdel said. When a particular person or group can't be found responsible, Residence Life policy aims to hold the smallest group possible accountable, such as specific wings or floors.
In Manzanita-Mohave, a resident who vomited on the floor of a bathroom stall was charged $25 for cleaning services. In the beer bottle incident described by Simm, responsibility was localized to a specific hall, which shares a bathroom.
Simm said it's entirely possible the beer bottle was from someone who doesn't even live in her dorm.
"Random people can just come in and use our bathrooms," she said.
But Van Arsdel contends that this is not so. Dorm residents are responsible not only for their own actions, he said, but for those of their guests. According to Residence Life policy, any non-resident in a dorm should be escorted by a resident at all times.
"We will try as much as we can to control outside access to residence halls," Van Arsdel said.
The accountability of residents over guests extends to people who gain access to dorms by "coattailing" - waiting near an entrance and going inside once someone else comes out.
"That requires the conscious decision of a resident to allow that to occur," Van Arsdel said.
If nothing else, communally charging dorm residents for damages diminishes the likelihood of such damage occurring, Van Arsdel said. Since the university implemented this policy more than 10 years ago, the incidence of such damage has noticeably decreased, he added.
Also taken into consideration is that residents may be more likely to point out offenders if they are being billed for repairs.
Despite the objections of dorm residents, Residence Life has no plans to discontinue this practice. The university would be unwilling to cover the costs of such damages, and eliminating the share-the-blame system would encourage negative behavior by removing visible consequences, Van Arsdel said.
"When there is a cost that must be paid, it must be paid."
