University of Vermont students caught on campus with drugs and alcohol this year are paying a price. With advice from a national group of schools, Vermont’s largest university is implementing new fines for students caught doing drugs, and upping the fines for those with too much booze on hand. And since UVM is a dry-halls campus, they apply even for students 21 and older.
Annie Stevens, vice provost for student affairs at UVM, says the new fines are intended to serve as a deterrent, not to make a mint for the university — though they’re likely to do both.
According to Stevens, UVM signed onto the National College Health Improvement Program two years ago. Founded in 2011 by then-president of Dartmouth College Jim Kim, the program includes 32 member schools collaborating to reduce high-risk drinking. UVM’s decision to implement its new fines, says Stevens, was based on that program.
So, what are the fines? $250 for possessing a “common source” of alcohol — that’s 12 servings or more; $150 for empties found during routine Health and Safety inspections of dorm rooms; $150 for a student’s first drug offense; and $250 for the second drug offense. The common source fine went up this year from $150, and all the other fines are new this year, Stevens says.
Got something to say?
Send a letter to the editor and we'll publish your feedback in print!
It is true that certain staff are not held to Reslife policies as they pertain to students. However, all university staff are held to university policies. The UVM drinking policy for staff and faculty quite clearly limits staff to only being allowed to consume alcohol at university functions with prior approval. Living in a dorm is not a function. Thus alcohol is banned for even the faculty within their living quarters according to university policy.
Furthermore, every ARD is a student of the university and thus must comply with student alcohol policies. However, ResLife policies as they apply to ARDs are in direct violations of UVM policies which clearly state “no person, regardless of age, is permitted to possess or consume alcohol within the on-campus residential areas of the University.”
We’ll agree on this point. And then the pendulum will swing again.
” The time has come for someone to put his foot down. And that foot is me.”
-Dean Wormer
I would venture those consequences are in fact intended. No one could be so oblivious as to not realize that’s what will happen.
“If you don’t want it to apply to students, then work to change it.
Pointing out that staff don’t have the same policies as students is,
probably, an ineffective way to change that policy.”
Also, pointing out that a policy is bad or ineffective is not the same thing as wanting to or trying to change it. Just an FYI.
The unintended consequence of these draconian policies is to drive the hardest partying students into Burlington neighborhoods. How has that worked out for everybody?
“If you don’t like it, don’t become a student.”
You’ve mentioned this several times now. Frankly, it’s an invalid argument. UVM is a state university funded in part by the taxpayers of the State of Vermont to create an institution whose mission was to educate vermonters (and others). Many VTer’s go to UVM because its cheaper then going somewhere out of state, because its the only in state college to provide their choice of major, as well as other reasons.
Again … quite simply … staff members are not held to the Code of Student Rights and Responsibilities. Nor should they be. It’s student policy. If you don’t like it, don’t become a student. I’m not suggesting it’s good policy, just that there are options beyond whining about why they don’t apply to staff members. They just don’t … it’s a student policy. If you don’t want it to apply to students, then work to change it. Pointing out that staff don’t have the same policies as students is, probably, an ineffective way to change that policy.
Live-in res life staff can have pets, too.
Make a few calls. You’ll realize that a non-traditionally aged student has options other than living on campus.
Well if students are being held to a high standard, then why not the RDs that supervise them? Shouldn’t they be setting a good example for student conduct, or better yet, adhering to the actual university policy? As for professors or other non-ResLife University employees living in the dorms, nothing requires them to live there. They could easily rent their own apartments downtown. Same as students who are 21.
At UVM there are hundreds of 21 year old students living within the dorms. Just because they are a small percentage is no reason to deny them a right to drink within what is their own home. Less then a decade ago 21 year old students were allowed to drink within their dorm rooms. The university changed policy in order to reduce the amount of drinking on campus. However, the recent statistics only show a rise in alcohol usage, drug usage, and student damage to the residential halls. Thus, the plan of improving the quality of life by not allowing 21 year olds to drink has backfired.