Though administrators present were unconcerned by the sparse attendance at Monday night’s Town Hall meeting, The Daily finds the glaring lack of student presence and engagement over off-campus life and town-gown relations disconcerting.
Thirteen students showed up at the meeting, which was led by Dean of Students Burgwell Howard. With off-campus issues such as over-occupancy laws, poor lighting and safety concerns making headlines recently, the meeting had potential to be substantive had it been better planned and advertised.
Last January, a town hall meeting that addressed student concerns about occupancy laws drew 500 students. On Monday, the same auditorium that was once packed with students was eerily empty. Perhaps more telling than the lack of student presence was Howard’s response to the attendance. He attributed it to the fact that “people have a better understanding of where things are,” with regards to the over-occupancy laws.
Perhaps Howard is right, but the disturbing nature of recent reports of over-occupancy enforcement and the small sample size from which he drew that assertion, undermine its credibility.
In a recent meeting with The Daily, University President Morton Schapiro expressed concern about the potential displacement of off-campus students when the city begins issuing fines and potentially denying permits to landlords renting out residences which house more than three unrelated people or have other violations.
Schapiro said he believes the city’s enforcement will force landlords to improve the quality and safety of those properties issued violations.
“But I’m also a little worried (about) the number of people (displaced) … there’s a temporal problem before the upgrade, that housing stock that some people get? I’m worried about that, too,” Schapiro said.
City officials, landlords and off-campus student residents continue to give conflicting accounts of current and future enforcement of the over-occupancy laws, The situation is as unclear as it is unresolved.
Students have presented allegations of intrusive surveillance and other unprecedented tactics intended to monitor over-occupancy, while City and University officials deny knowledge of any foul play.
The Daily is not in a position to takes sides in what has become a muddled conflict of interests. But had Monday’s meeting been treated with due diligence by all parties, greater clarity, if not consensus, could have been realized.
The University failed to effectively publicize the meeting, emailing only the off-campus listserv with the announcement. Every effort should have been made to inform all Northwestern students about the quarterly meeting. Many students who currently live on-campus may have questions regarding the over-occupancy laws as they are starting to look for next school year’s off-campus housing.
Aside from poor publicity, the meeting did not have a publicized agenda. Emails to off-campus listservs described the meeting in vague terms, saying students would have the opportunity to “discuss any ideas, issues and/or concerns with my office (student affairs).”
An effective meeting starts with a concrete agenda. To establish that agenda, the office of student affairs and the Associated Student Government should reach out to students in advance regarding topics they would like to discuss. By engaging NU students and involving them in setting the agenda, these town hall meetings should enable open dialogue.
Another glaring issue with Monday’s meeting was the lack of a representative from the City of Evanston. A town hall meeting addressing off-campus issues should be well-represented on all sides.
Students should have been given the opportunity to ask city official questions regarding their concerns, whether about over-occupancy or other safety issues.
Likewise, students need to make a better effort to engage in these types of discussions. The outrage that occurred last January, while not a model of civic politeness, demonstrated the need for students to mobilize not just when they feel immediately wronged or short-changed.
Civic engagement is an on-going process. July 1, the date when landlords will begin receiving fines for over-occupancy laws, is not the time to begin discussion. The conversation should start now.
