AU students should be used to the surrounding neighborhood’s consistently contentious reactions to the Campus Plan. After several months, lawn signs reading “Oppose AU Campus Plan” now provoke little more than an eye roll. But the Advisory Neighborhood Commission 3D has just taken a step too far.
This week, our own ANC 3D announced its support for the Residential Parking Protection Act, which is now before the D.C. Council. According to its own language, this legislation would “prevent full-time students who reside within the District of Columbia boundaries from being issued or from using a reciprocity parking sticker for out-of-state vehicles.”
Essentially, students bringing cars from home would be unable to park on D.C. streets unless students reregister their vehicles to receive D.C. tags. Such a policy would have unacceptable consequences for AU students, and, in the long run, would harm the community whose parking spaces it attempts to make exclusive.
Proponents of the resolution point to the current ban on out-of-state vehicles at Georgetown University, arguing that such a policy should be applied citywide. Yet the clear differences between the Georgetown’s urban setting and AU’s residential neighborhood clearly undermines this argument.
If passed, the resolution would prevent students from parking on the streets in front of their apartments or houses anywhere in the District, in addition to the streets surrounding AU. Making it more difficult for students to use cars in a suburban setting, where public transportation is not always sufficient, is hardly prudent nor is it fair. Like the very residents supporting such a proposal, AU students should be able to park at their own home. The two should not be mutually exclusive.
This legislation is unfortunately typical of the neighborhood pathos throughout the Campus Plan proposal process — a shortsighted and emotional response that sees students only as an inconvenience to residents, instead of the economic benefit we are.
Annually, AU students inject $64.7 million dollars into the District. Besides our daily commercial impact, the estimated 7,000 AU students that live off campus create a huge demand for rental housing. Should off-campus students begin to choose only apartment complexes within walking distance to AU, the benefits of the thriving local real estate market would be drastically cut for the surrounding community.
As such, we look to Deon Jones to lead the fight against this proposal. This is exactly why our campus organized and fought through countless barriers to elect a student representative to the ANC.
Beyond our student leaders, AU should also play a role in preventing this rule from being enacted. We recognize that discouraging students from driving is the official position of our school, and we recognize its environmental merits. Yet a community that blatantly discriminates against college students would act as a detriment to AU recruitment efforts.
Recognizing this harm, administrators should seek to form a coalition with other D.C. schools, shop owners and landlords that may be adversely affected by any rule that discourages students from living in and attending school in D.C.
Unfortunately, the situation thus far looks grim. Six of the 13 members of the D.C. Council are cosponsoring this bill, with only a simple majority needed to pass. Our response to this must be strong. And it must come quick.
The officials who represent our University aren’t often given such a clear chance to advocate for the needs of students. Yet now we are faced with a policy aimed directly at discriminating against AU students.
Attention Deon Jones, Student Government President Tim McBride, President Neil Kerwin and all AU officials: this is one of those times.
edpage@theeagleonline.com
