Illustraion by Cody Angell

A record number of freshmen stormed campus last semester, ultimately revealing the flaw in the guaranteed residence housing policy. The dorms were overbooked, forcing more than 200 students out of rooms, and to live in alternative housing - study rooms, computer labs, residence hall lounges and local hotels. In response to the housing crisis, the Department of Housing and Residence Life implemented a rule limiting students to four semesters in residence halls. Beginning next year, the plan would restrict juniors and seniors to living off campus. Just recently, the Associated Students of the University of Arizona came out with an official stance - opposing that restriction. Most Residence Hall Association members feel the same.

The campus stands divided on the issue. Many feel that upperclassmen should have priority for dorm rooms, claiming that their presence enhances a quality learning environment. Others believe that all freshmen - youngsters in the real world - need to be guaranteed the opportunity and comfort of living on campus.

Four new residence halls should be ready by fall 2004 that will provide 750 more beds. But until then, is the housing cap a good idea?

Residence Life is irresponsible

Kendrick Wilson

I live in a dorm this year, and I understand the seriousness of the housing shortage. I believe in new and creative ideas for solving such problems. However, I also believe in good faith negotiations, and the housing cap put forward by Residence Life is totally unreasonable. ASUA Sen. Doug Hartz was correct in saying, "The university acted unethically in creating the housing cap."

The fact is, a housing cap that eliminates juniors and seniors is unreasonable, but a limit on the number of sophomores is equally unfair. When this year's freshmen applied for dorms, they were given last priority, and it was implied that they would receive first priority the following year, should they return to the dorms. Residence Life now plans to hit this year's freshmen with last priority once again as sophomores.

Information regarding the lack of housing on campus has been out for several years. To suddenly bring this on as a campus emergency seems irresponsible to say the least. Just as California should have been building more power plants 10 years ago, the university should have been building dorms 10 years ago. A lack of leadership on the part of the university is no excuse for punishing returning students next year.

Kendrick Wilson is a political science freshman. He can be reached at letters@wildcat.arizona.edu.

Reality check, anyone?

Caitlin Hall

Let's review: UA faces a $16 million funding cut next year - 4.56 percent of this year's budget. At the same time, there is a severe housing shortage on campus. The student body and ASUA raise hell over talks of a tuition hike but claim that a housing cap is unfair. Cry me a river.

There is, quite simply, not enough room in existing residence halls to accommodate everyone. And with no money coming into the university, there's little hope that any dorms will be built in time to alleviate the crisis.

The real problem is that UA has been so good to its students for so long. It boasts the second-lowest tuition in the country, and has waited far longer than most state universities to institute a housing cap. Something has to give, and the quickest remedy is to limit housing.

This is only the latest in a series of instances where the student population has shown how unreasonable and stubborn it can be. If students want to stop the brain drain, save their college, or live on campus, they'll have to quit whining and cough up some money. UA students are sacrificing a good education in the name of a good deal.

Caitlin Hall is a biochemistry and philosophy junior. She can be reached at letters@wildcat.arizona.edu.

Hall bums get ax

Daniel Cucher

Apparently there's a housing crisis on campus. By crisis, I mean the abundance of upperclassmen who have been overstaying their welcome in the dorms will have to start finding their own pads.

Incoming freshmen must have campus-housing priority. Integrating into college is a challenge both socially and academically. Residence halls provide freshmen with an opportunity to meet people, as well as quick accessibility to university resources.

After living in Tucson for several years, upperclassmen should be familiar with the multitude of off-campus alternatives to the residence halls. All one needs is a bike, a roommate or two and about $350 a month to live within two miles of campus in any number of quaint Tucson apartments.

Last year, the university accepted more than 6,000 freshmen, and the admissions floodgate is not likely to close any time soon. There is simply not enough room to accommodate every student who wants to live conveniently just off the UA mall.

Freshmen have the most adjusting to do and the least familiarity with the area. Thus, they should be guaranteed on-campus housing.

Upperclassmen will have to seek out blaring music and sexual deviance elsewhere.

Daniel Cucher is a creative writing senior. He can be reached at letters@wildcat.arizona.edu.

Freshmen more deserving

Mariam Durrani

Last semester I was a resident assistant to the girls who were living in the hotel. These girls were mostly freshmen from out of state who had the strangest luck. On one hand, they got to live at the Sheraton with its luxurious bed and bath as well as daily maid service.

However, they did not get the residence hall experience they applied for in spring of 2001. They were not given the advantage of living in a hall where community is built based on the fact that all the students are going through the same kind of first-year dilemmas. These girls couldn't keep their doors open for fear that an old stranger might intrude.

They didn't have a proper study room, so instead, they studied on a table at the end of second floor with a floor lamp they carried from their room. Residence Life did a lot to help them adjust to their temporary surroundings, but all the upperclassmen spaces in Yuma, La Paz and Yavapai could have easily been given to these freshmen and all the other kids in hotels or forced to live off-campus due to housing shortages. Also, the girls at the hotel could have been moved anytime, inconveniencing them while they also had to adjust to living in college and all the problems and craziness that comes with it.

In the future, this shouldn't even be an option. Limiting the number of older students in the residence halls is very appropriate. The new frosh are more deserving of the dorm opportunities.

Mariam Durrani is a systems engineering junior. She can be reached at letters@wildcat.arizona.edu.

Respect your elders

Shane Dale

What does it mean to be a college junior or senior? It means you take college somewhat seriously. It means you've survived this long, unlike a good chunk of some of your collegiate peers from two or three years ago. It means you're dedicated to fulfilling your educational opportunity.

The proposed housing cap punishes this. It says, "Clear out for the rookies." I don't like that attitude. As a junior, it offends me. You're insulting the most proven, dedicated students for those who have yet to be time tested. You're punishing success and loyalty.

I know housing shortages are a big problem right now. But as long as the UA keeps accepting more and more students each year -- and as well it should -- it will always be a problem.

While it might not be fair to tell freshmen to go find somewhere else to live if you want an education here, it's less fair to tell hard-working third and fourth year students to go fly a kite.

What we need here is a little more respect for our elders.

Shane Dale is a political science junior. He can be reached at letters@wildcat.arizona.edu.

Laura Winsky

Please repeat please repeat

It's déjá-vu all over again. This time three years ago, Yuma Hall was battleground for a war against the Department of Residence Life. Word had spread that an announcement would come telling us we would be forced to vacate our dorms at year's end. In Yuma, most everyone returned for a second year, and the news was bad.

Even before the news was official, we had a plan. No one slept. No one ate. No one went to class. Within hours of the announcement we had what would be later called "The 60 Page Proposal." Residence Life didn't have a chance. After all was said and done, anything but a surrender on their part was a breech of contract.

But that was three years ago. When they let us return, they changed the housing contract, thereby diminishing what power we had. Sorry kids, it's true. While ASUA Senator Doug Hartz's current attempt to advocate for dorm residents is admirable, little has been offered as an alternative.

Residence Life is left with a Catch-22. Freshmen should live in dorms. The experience is unmatchable. But the experience is severely reduced without upperclassmen. Seems like Residence Life should have had a plan instead of leaving the legwork up to the students.

In the spirit of your predecessors, good luck and fight for what's important to you.

Laura Winsky is a senior majoring in Spanish and political science. She can be reached at letters@wildcat.arizona.edu.