On October 23, The Polytechnic ran the article “Neighbors try to increase Institute interest” on the front page regarding students and their effects on the community. The same residents that are complaining of living next to students that throw parties are the very ones who received the five thousand-dollar grants from the school. Personally, I feel it is just as laughable to move into a college community and expect total peace and quiet as it is to move next to a hog farm and not expect a little stink. With few exceptions, I believe that the Pi Kappa Alpha fraternity has been there longer than most of the residents in that area. A college neighborhood should be louder than a suburban one. These parties are a breath of life for students on this campus. The thousands of students that attend late-night parties obviously have a good time if they repeatedly attend these parties all around campus. Most gatherings of young adults are loud, fun affairs, even if they do not involve alcohol. A few weeks prior The Poly ran an article on student unhappiness. Perhaps a few connections could be drawn between the two. Too harsh? Lets find out: In the article Delair mentions, “The police are more active in enforcing the law now,” and the writer says, “…the Troy police have been working to enforce ordinances.”

The reason I say that Troy wants to oppress students, and in particular fraternities, is Article XI of Chapter 19 of the Troy Code of Ordinances. To give a brief overview, this ordinance allows Troy to close buildings and evict residents without the defendants ever entering a courtroom or meeting their accusers. The level of evidence required is minimal. Critics may now think that I am exaggerating. However, let’s see what the ordinance has to say: “…a conviction for an offense in a court of competent jurisdiction shall not be required to establish that a specified violation of law has occurred.” You can say goodbye to your day in court to prove your innocence. Even if you could challenge a conviction, the level of evidence required to ‘prove’ a violation is “a preponderance of the evidence”—the legal equivalent of a magic eight ball. It means that 51% of the evidence needs to show that the infraction occurred.

The law allows the mayor, or a designee, to close a building to cease the nuisance once twelve points have been accumulated in a period of six months, or eighteen points in a period of a year. Now, the next question would be, what violations are deemed worthy of issuing points to a property? Some that may be of interest to students include possession of controlled substances, criminal possession of stolen property, and violations of the alcoholic beverage control law are all six-point offenses. Property maintenance and excess of occupancy limits are four-point offenses. Noise, permitting the premises to become disorderly, including or permitting fighting, or lewdness are three-point offenses. The biggest insult is not in the law, but its enforcement. A cop has been going around to campus, looking for infractions on properties where students live. At one fraternity, he measured the grass, which was slightly taller than allowable so he could search the inside of the house in order to search for higher-point infractions. Now, one may say, “Well, it serves them right, they were violating the law.” But, I ask you to think if cops would ticket city hall if students filled it beyond occupancy as a form of protest. Would the mayor close city hall if it happened three times?

What is the administration going to do about this law to protect student rights? Will it use its clout to have it repealed? Troy could use this law to close residence halls. All they need to do is smell what could be marijuana, or hear someone’s radio playing outside during the middle of the day on a couple of occasions. Troy could close the hall and evict every single student. Nah, Troy wouldn’t do that to RPI. It is having a good enough time screwing students along with the RPI administration.

Kevin Pepperl