As part of an ongoing administrative effort to reduce the number of fines and fees that have traditionally been imposed on Tufts students, the Dean of Students Office has rescinded all universal fines for vandalism and other damage in residence halls.
The new policy employs the carrot in place of the stick, offering "a $250 reward for students who provide information that leads to the responsible party being identified and held accountable for the damage or vandalism," according to the Residential Life website.
"[Doing away with the fines] was one of my campaign platforms for the job," said Dean of Students Bruce Reitman, who was promoted from acting dean last spring, and spoke on behalf of Res Life. "The dorm-wide fines when no vandal was found, whether for fire or life safety... were the source of more discomfort and low morale than anything I could find on campus last year," he said.
The change in vandalism policy comes as part of a broad shift in University regulations in which monetary fines are replaced by more traditional forms of disciplinary action. Many students have complained that wealthy violators brush off vandalism fines while others must dig deep into limited budgets.
Though Reitman favors "throwing the book" at individuals found to be responsible for vandalism in the residence halls rather than fining the entire dorm, he was critical of Res Life's reward approach.
"I do not like the idea of a reward system. I don't like the ethics of giving [a reward] for telling on somebody," he said. "I'd rather keep the money and encourage students to walk down the hall and say 'Hey, cut it out.'"
Always on the administrative radar, the need to address dorm-wide fines took on a sense of immediacy last fall, when over $6,000 in fines were imposed on Wren residents after a flurry of vandalism incidents; a pinball machine was thrown off the bridge leading to the dorm, a fire extinguisher was discharged as a prank, and door handles were stolen off of all suite doors.
"As a resident of Wren, I was pretty mad because I got charged practically every week with a fine," said sophomore Kevin Lewis. "Half the time, it wasn't even people in the building who did the vandalism, so the policy was unfair."
At a forum on the subject last spring, over 50 angry students filled the Zamparelli room in the campus center to voice their objections to the policy. They suggested a number of ways to increase security measures on campus, including using security cameras, hiring door guards for dorms, and bolting furniture to the floor in common areas. Many local colleges employ such features, including Boston University.
"If the University is not going to take responsibility for the things it leaves in public areas, then I for one will not be held accountable and pay for their replacement," said junior Manijeh Azmoodeh. "If the University would impose such fines on its students if things like the pinball machine and the ping pong table were stolen, why didn't they have the common sense to chain them down or bolt them to the floor?"
Azmoodeh, was so outraged at the fines that she actually moved out of Wren Hall.
"I'm thrilled to hear that the fines were lifted," she said. "I think it's really good because now innocent students who haven't done anything wrong won't be forced to pay for things that they didn't do. It was horrific that all these fines were being imposed without even putting in video cameras or anything, and I felt unsafe living there."
The former policy equally divided the repair costs of non-attributed vandalism in dorm common areas among the dorm's residents, in addition to a blanket $10 fine for each violation.
"I didn't think they were educational or a deterrent, they just got people angry... so we did away with them. I imposed that," Reitman said.
