Common area damage in need of makeover
Issue date: 1/27/10 Section: Opinion
Common area damage in need of makeover
In late September vandalism occurred across campus. It was a one-night incident where a few windows were broken by rocks thrown at Great Hall, Johnson and Scott Residence Halls. No one was injured, but property was damaged.
What obviously happens when property is damaged or broken is that someone has to pay for its replacement. In this case, however, the wrong group of people will have to cough up the cash for these necessary repairs. As the party responsible for these attacks was not apprehended, the residents of the halls which were damaged have to pay for the repairs. The system for assessing common area damages that is currently employed is intended to be the most equitable way to collect for repairs, but in this case students should not be held responsible for repairing an attack committed against their building.
From the apparently random selection of windows that the rocks were projected at, it appears no student in particular was targeted. But two students were rudely awakened into a potentially dangerous situation when rocks sailed into their room that night. So aside from that unpleasant awakening, the displacement from their room it created during clean-up, and some shaky feelings that must have accompanied the attack, now those students and their fellow peers also have to pay for it. Something just doesn't sit right about that.
Imagine being in line at the grocery store, striking up a conversation with the person in front of you. They go up to the cashier, covertly mentions that you two are together and proceeds to walk out with the groceries leaving you to foot the bill because you were too distracted by the latest tabloid magazine to notice. You'd feel cheated, right? Now life is not always fair, but in situations of gross unfairness, when you are the victimized target, having to pay for the wrong committed against you just adds insult to injury.
The amount of money needed to repair those windows is divided by the number of residents in each building so the sum of money per student is not too hefty. However, it's principle here. Students were put in harm's way, an unsafe situation that the college should have taken upon itself to fix, at least financially. With the breakdown of the math, Scott Hall residents are being charged $5.82 each for common area damage repairs. This figure represents fees for door propping, damaged bulletin boards, and other minor incidents, but the $375 for the broken window should not even be in this category. Common area damages are the necessary and fair repayment of property that was damaged by students, who made their own choice to break policy or damage something. The students who had their window broken and the other residents of Scott Hall had nothing to do with that act. The College should be more careful in assessing what makes it on to the register of common area damages, and should ensure that victims of attacks and other uninvolved parties do not end up unfairly paying for them. The act of vandalism occurred from the outside, so it should not be considered common area damage.
To put it simply, no monetary amount should be charged to students who were frightened during the night and other residents who were in no way involved in an act of vandalism. If the college really wants to charge students, charge the entire campus, not just Scott Hall. Or they can just cover it like they do with classroom buildings.
In late September vandalism occurred across campus. It was a one-night incident where a few windows were broken by rocks thrown at Great Hall, Johnson and Scott Residence Halls. No one was injured, but property was damaged.
What obviously happens when property is damaged or broken is that someone has to pay for its replacement. In this case, however, the wrong group of people will have to cough up the cash for these necessary repairs. As the party responsible for these attacks was not apprehended, the residents of the halls which were damaged have to pay for the repairs. The system for assessing common area damages that is currently employed is intended to be the most equitable way to collect for repairs, but in this case students should not be held responsible for repairing an attack committed against their building.
From the apparently random selection of windows that the rocks were projected at, it appears no student in particular was targeted. But two students were rudely awakened into a potentially dangerous situation when rocks sailed into their room that night. So aside from that unpleasant awakening, the displacement from their room it created during clean-up, and some shaky feelings that must have accompanied the attack, now those students and their fellow peers also have to pay for it. Something just doesn't sit right about that.
Imagine being in line at the grocery store, striking up a conversation with the person in front of you. They go up to the cashier, covertly mentions that you two are together and proceeds to walk out with the groceries leaving you to foot the bill because you were too distracted by the latest tabloid magazine to notice. You'd feel cheated, right? Now life is not always fair, but in situations of gross unfairness, when you are the victimized target, having to pay for the wrong committed against you just adds insult to injury.
The amount of money needed to repair those windows is divided by the number of residents in each building so the sum of money per student is not too hefty. However, it's principle here. Students were put in harm's way, an unsafe situation that the college should have taken upon itself to fix, at least financially. With the breakdown of the math, Scott Hall residents are being charged $5.82 each for common area damage repairs. This figure represents fees for door propping, damaged bulletin boards, and other minor incidents, but the $375 for the broken window should not even be in this category. Common area damages are the necessary and fair repayment of property that was damaged by students, who made their own choice to break policy or damage something. The students who had their window broken and the other residents of Scott Hall had nothing to do with that act. The College should be more careful in assessing what makes it on to the register of common area damages, and should ensure that victims of attacks and other uninvolved parties do not end up unfairly paying for them. The act of vandalism occurred from the outside, so it should not be considered common area damage.
To put it simply, no monetary amount should be charged to students who were frightened during the night and other residents who were in no way involved in an act of vandalism. If the college really wants to charge students, charge the entire campus, not just Scott Hall. Or they can just cover it like they do with classroom buildings.
Be the first to comment on this story