Tonight, Berkeley City Council will consider changing ordinances to address problems often associated with the student population, even though the city has not, thus far, done much to include them in the conversation. The council must not vote in favor of this legislation as it stands.
The proposed changes would amend the city’s municipal code and ordinances to deal with the impacts of “mini-dorms” — houses that contain more residents, usually students, than they were built to accommodate. But the content of these changes — which include an extension of the second warning period for loud and unruly disturbances from 120 to 180 days and impose operating standards for buildings classified as mini-dorms — only add unnecessary penalties and are antagonistic toward Berkeley’s student population.
In outlining this legislation, the city states that public testimony reflected Berkeley’s inability to deal with problems relating to certain group living situations and helped prompt the council’s interest in making fixes. The so-called mini-dorms “tend to impair the quiet enjoyment of the surrounding neighborhoods” resulting from “an excessive number of loud parties, excess parking demand and increased litter and trash,” according to the agenda item detailing the would-be laws.
Still, a student perspective remains absent from the proposal, and the city has not provided any real evidence to indicate the ordinances are ineffective as they currently stand.
Overall, the wide-ranging changes would do little to solve the myriad problems they aim to tackle. Indeed, the only unifying theme shared by this legislation is that it targets the student population in Berkeley. The city’s student population will be a part of the community as long as UC Berkeley offers degrees. These changes do little more than add an undue burden to the already restrictive reality of student life.
Students, however, should not consider themselves above criticism. Though the city of Berkeley may have grown around our campus, we share it today with residents who have no connection to UC Berkeley. We must strive to represent all of the shining qualities our university’s name evokes and show our neighbors that we create solutions, not problems.
A fair, reasonable and just law can only come after input from everybody impacted by what it would change. The city of Berkeley has not afforded that opportunity to all members of its community.
While tonight’s council meeting presents an excellent opportunity for our city’s lawmakers to engage with members of the community — both students and residents unaffiliated with the campus — it should only serve as a starting point for future developments. In the coming weeks, the council should hold public, publicized meetings about the proposed changes, allow all perspectives a place at the table and work toward legislation that strives for a solution that benefits all residents.
Comment Policy
Comments should remain on topic, concerning the article or blog post to which they are connected. Brevity is encouraged. Posting under a pseudonym is discouraged, but permitted. The Daily Cal encourages readers to voice their opinions respectfully in regard to the readers, writers and contributors of The Daily Californian. Comments are not pre-moderated, but may be removed if deemed to be in violation of this policy. Click here to read the full comment policy.