Staff Editorial |ResLife should not outsource investigations to students

At a small residential college like Vassar, students are expected to be respectful of their residence houses. After all, the dorms are where Vassar students live, work, and play. This, however, is not always the case; vandalism and destruction of property show disrespect to where we live and with whom we share that space. These offenses translate into unnecessary repair costs, often divided among an entire dormitory or hallway, when only one or a handful of individuals are responsible for the damages. Charges are usually fairly minor when divided between well over 100 residents, but two exceptional incidents this year—the $23,000 broken elevator in Jewett House and the $1,000 water fountain thrown out of a window in Main Building—bring the issue of dorm charges to the forefront.

According to the Residential Life Handbook, when dorm damage occurs, the House Advisor and the House Secretary “assess damages that occur in the residence hall.” In practice, they are supposed to determine who is responsible for the damages and find out who should pay up. Ideally, the people responsible will be found and fined for the full cost of repairs. Issues arise when the culprits are unknown, and sometimes the entire dorm must pay for the damage.

In current procedure, however, the burden lies primarily on the House Secretary to gather evidence and find the individuals responsible. Needless to say, this can create a hostile environment in the dorms, since House Secretaries have the power to—and are required to—turn in their neighbors or friends. This approach is antithetical to the rest of Vassar’s residential life system, which prides itself on fostering trust amongst students with the understanding that we do not discipline each other.

In addition, this duty seems poorly explained to students filling the secretary role. Main House Secretary Emily Vail ’09 said, “We’ve had a lot of problems with communication. I'm still not entirely sure how much we paid for damages last semester.” This type of confusion formed a general trend among House Secretaries asked about the way in which dorm damages are handled. If House Secretaries are unsure of their responsibilities regarding dorm damage, they are far less likely to correctly identify the student or students responsible. This causes the entire dormitory to be penalized for the work of a few individuals. The current procedures for correctly identifying the perpetrators of dorm damage are ineffective and should be changed; responsibility for conducting investigations should not be under the purview of the House Secretary, but an employee from Residential Life.

While Vassar’s policy on dorm damage is consistent with many of our peer institutions, it is not without its flaws. One common problem is that the College assumes that students within an individual dorm are responsible for the damage in their dorm if no clear perpetrator is found. This might not always be the case as students from a different dorm or campus visitors might also cause damages for which they often go unpenalized.

In an e-mailed message, Director of Residential Life Luis Inoa explained the logic behind the current system: “When we have a sense of who might be responsible we have an obligation to follow through. When we don’t know who was involved we have an obligation to communicate to the community that vandalism and other forms of destructive behaviors do not have a place here. That communication comes via the common area damage bill.” Inoa said that he has considered other ways of handling damage costs such as charging an initial security deposit. He remains cautious, however, of anything that might send the message that destruction of College property is permissible. Inoa has said that he is willing to consider changes to current policy, “but the end product would still need to be about communal responsibility.”

Certainly, there is no reason to condone any acts of vandalism or destruction of College property. Students must be responsible for their behavior and understand that their actions carry larger consequences. At the same time, however, determining guilty residents or guests should not be a student’s job; it should instead be placed in the hands of a professional member of the Residential Life staff.

By removing students from the center of collecting evidence and naming names, dorm damage fines could be administered without conflict of interest. More effective investigations would subsequently decrease the number of unfair fines to large groups of students. It is important for the community to develop and implement a system for dealing with dorm damages that is fair to students in house teams as well as their constituents.

The Staff Editorial represents at least a two-thirds majority of the 20-member Editorial Board.