I am a Student Union Senator who voted for the recent resolution against Residential Life’s new room rental fees. I would like to offer my reasoning for the way I voted as well as respond to my fellow senator, Joseph Marcus, who does not support the resolution. He argues that SU should not attack the eight students that work as Event Assistants in exchange for free housing, and that these fees only follow the trend of other departments that have compensated for smaller budgets by passing on some cost to students. He states that unlike printing and transcripts costs, which actually require spending more money, the room rental fees only change how the Student Activities Fee, money we already spend, is allocated.

In response to Marcus’ first point, I completely agree that we should not attack the eight student Event Assistants. They have done nothing wrong in pursuing a leadership opportunity on campus. It is the exorbitant compensation for this position from an already strained ResLife budget that is the problem. No one should be attacking students for taking a well-paying job that gives them valuable leadership experience.

Regarding other fees on campus, Marcus is correct that there are new, less-contested fees that have been implemented in the last few years for services that were once free, such as increased printing charges and the new five dollar fee for each official transcript. Printing and transcript fees are not analogous to fees for Residential Life premier spaces, however.

Unlike printing an official transcript, which only benefits the individual student, the use of premier spaces is mutually beneficial to the groups that put on events, the other students who attend and the university administration. When students are able to have large, visible events in Residential Life spaces, it enriches the community as a whole. This not only makes students’ lives better, but also makes Wash. U. a much more attractive university, something that the administration should value. This is the crucial concept that Residential Life has failed to understand. These spaces aren’t just a service to make students happy; they help define the Wash. U. experience.

Marcus’s second argument is also problematic because it assumes that SU would directly subsidize the cost of room rentals for student groups or Treasury would fund all appeals to pay for the room fees. It would cost about $32,000 a year for student groups to use the ResLife spaces they had used for free in years past. It’s doubtful there’s room in the SU budget for a $32,000 direct subsidy to make the rooms free for students, and it’s equally doubtful that Treasury would fund all room rental requests from the appeals budget. The end result would, indeed, be no new money. Instead, cash-strapped student groups would be forced to change the location of events to spaces that are less prominent and less attractive. Such a move would almost certainly have negative consequences on the success of these events, the well being of the groups and our community as a whole.

Marcus’ argument is also flawed because it assumes that the only affected parties are SU student groups. Although student groups are the predominant users of these spaces, other organizations have already been affected by the fees. Furthermore, these organizations would see no relief from an SU-funded remedy to the fees. As Marcus correctly stated in his defense of the eight students who work as Event Assistants, SU Senators represent ALL students. This includes those in organizations not affiliated with SU. Greek organizations, specifically fraternities, are one group that have been negatively affected by the fees. Many chapters hold recruitment events in Ursa’s or elsewhere on the South 40 as part of their recruitment schedule. This location is ideal because it is so visible to freshmen on the 40. These fees put a strain on chapters’ recruitment budgets, which unlike most other chapter spending, benefit students outside of the chapters. Recruitment begins with open events, which are completely free for all Wash. U. males and give them the opportunity to see what the Greek community has to offer. The new Residential Life fees are a problem that extend beyond just SU and its student groups.

Hopefully, this resolution will serve as an impetus for effective dialogue between Residential Life and students in which both sides can negotiate a solution to this problem. While I am against the fees, I would certainly prefer a cost structure that better meets students’ needs than a continuation of the highly flawed system currently in place.