|
Dan Dixon
Asst. Politics Editor
IT IS HARDLY new to associate life in a college town college with parties. Nevertheless, as every Notre Dame student undoubtedly knows, the South Bend Common Council plans on passing a resolution September 24th in an effort to limit parties in the city, particularly the noise and behavior that is associated with them.
Originally proposed by council members Buddy Kirsits and Timothy Rouse, the terms of the ordinance are currently that the host of each party (a gathering of over 25 people) would have to register with the city five days in advance and pay a fifteen dollar fee.
This proposed ordinance has serious questions of enforceability. Would police officers be expected to sit outside and count each person before busting the party with a fine ranging from $500 to $1500 at their discretion?
Furthermore, the terms of such an agreement do not correspond with the stated goals of its proponents. In what circumstance would $15 stop a house of guys or girls from throwing a party? Evidently the noise violations that the police issue to those parties are not enough for some council members.
If the goal, as Kirsits and Rouse seem to suggest, is to prevent alcohol related hospital visits and neighborhood disturbances, it does not seem likely that the ordinance will be very effective. Notre Dame, Saint Mary’s, and Holy Cross students always have and always will drink because that is what many college students do.
In the September 10th issue of the Observer, Jenn Metz and Joe McMahon interviewed South Bend residents to get their side of the story. One such resident, John Whalen, commented: “Being a Notre Dame Avenue resident, the problem is real - drunk students urinating, defacing property and committing vandalism.”
While these events may occur, laws exist against them. While they may be hard to enforce, this proposed ordinance can only detract the attention of police from pursuing students committing such crimes. They will instead be engaging in a witch hunt to catch the host of an unregistered party when the 26th guest arrives.
Residents complain that noise levels disrupt their lives and cause them to lose sleep. Such people need to understand that they live in a college town. These complaints are like whining about living next to a railroad track. You can propose a $15 dollar tax on every train that passes by, hoping it takes an alternate route, or if it bothers you, you can choose to live elsewhere.
This is not to suggest that students are above the law. We have a responsibility to respect the neighbors who are asleep and to keep our voices down. If partiers fail to do this, they justly deserve to be punished as the law indicates.
Some South Bend residents opine that students have a sense of entitlement regarding their social gatherings. James Phillips says, “Students feel they’ve bought the right to party,” he said. “You haven’t bought that right. It can be taken away.”
Who has the ability to take away people’s (assuming they are of age, of course) right to drink and have people over? More importantly, why does it need to be bought, as this proposed ordinance suggests it should? We live in a society where governments tax our gasoline, our cigarettes, and our alcohol.
Are we to take this same logic a step further, into the realm of social gatherings? Although they will not admit as much, this is the logic Kirsits and Rouse are championing. If people want to drink and make noise, they can still do it….provided a $15 fee is included. The ordinance has no stipulation against alcohol-poisoning patients nor does it have a clause with any plan to place greater restrictions on noise levels. So what’s the point?
The only logical answer, it seems, is that this is another ploy by the South Bend government to make money off Notre Dame students. They know that students will drink and are attempting to use this as a chance to make some coin off it. As the Observer points out in its September 14th viewpoint page, other issues such as the shootings at Club 23 and increasing crime rates seem to have taken a backseat to this proposed law.
The city of South Bend was built around Notre Dame, not the other way around. No matter what laws the Common Council passes, students (both legally and illegally) will drink, they will have parties, and some will be sent to the hospital as a result of their indiscretion. No matter the fines that are assessed, this behavior will occur…because it’s college.
In a September 18th Observer article, Karen Langley cites the case of Marguerite Taylor, a local resident who claims that a student threw a beer bottle through her window. “I pay taxes,” she said. “I vote. I have a right to live in peace.” These statements are all true, and her situation is unfortunate. But a $15 tax will not change anything.
“Let’s cut to the chase,” Mr. Kirsits said. “This is about those keggers.” No, Mr. Kirsits, this is about another opportunity to profit off ND students.
Contact Dan at ddixon2@nd.edu
| 
