URI alcohol guidelines still bring controversy

04/28/09 - When Robert L. Carothers became president of the University of Rhode Island in the summer of 1991, he had no intention of revamping the university's alcohol policy. After a few years of dealing with alcohol related sexual assaults, fights and vandalisms Carothers decided campus culture warranted change. When he looked to change the policy in 1995, there was opposition coming from several directions and there are still those that disapprove of the policy today. Changing the guidelines was not just about banning alcohol, but revamping the image of the university, Carothers said.

One of the lowest points for the university came in 1995, when Playboy Magazine and the Princeton Review named URI the No. 1 party school in the nation. Princeton Review also named the university No. 1 in 1993 and 1994. Since then, Carothers has received awards commending his progress on campus and his stand against alcohol and drug use. In 2005, Princeton Review deemed URI a "college with a conscience."

"We changed who the students were," Carothers said. "We made the degrees more valuable than just getting them from a 'party school.'"

Statistics from 1996 on, one year after the policy was implemented, showed an overall increase in alcohol related violations. Student Life has kept records of violations and the numbers show an average increase in violations over the years.

In the '96-'97 academic year, there were a total of 489 cases completed that involved alcohol. In the '00-01 academic year, that number rose to 631. Since 2000, the number has not dropped below 540 in '02-'03. Cases involving alcohol reached their peak last year when 1,313 cases were completed.

"There has been a significant improvement in quality of student life since we changed our policy," Vice President of Student Affairs Thomas Dougan said. The increased violations, Dougan said, "show that students are not having issues getting alcohol."

Despite a different reputation brought to the university, some believe it is time to revisit the policy again, especially with a new president slated for next year.

URI Student Senate President David Bedard, and Dougan think changes in policies could possibly be successful now.

Bedard believes the change should begin in the Ryan Center, where the university holds large events and basketball games. He believes that selling alcohol at the Ryan Center will help with current debt issues plaguing the arena, and that it would provide a regimented way to control new policy.

"I'd like to see changes in place by basketball season," Bedard said. "Whether that is possible or not, I'm not sure."

Bedard does not support reverting to old policies completely, and said the university must maintain some regulation over the drinking.

Dougan also believes it is time to have an open mind about policy change, but says the Ryan Center should be off limits. Although he enjoys the occasional glass of wine or beer, Dougan said he deplores the idea of being near the student section in the university while students are drinking.

"I don't think we should have it in the Ryan Center at all," Dougan said.

With an open mind, Dougan said he believes tailgating during Homecoming could be successfully monitored.

"We would have a better chance at programs being successful now than 10 to 15 years ago," Dougan said. "We have been without it so long that students would be receptive to new policies in place."

Noting a different culture, he said he believes students would react to new policy positively, and would hope alumni and those of legal drinking age would not make tailgating the centerpiece of Homecoming. The problem with tailgating, Dougan said, was that people would stay in the parking lot from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m., drinking alcohol and not actually go to the game.

A history

For the first few years of Carothers' presidency, the alcohol policy remained the same. The most immediate changes came after the 1991 commencement ceremonies. Some students would drink during the ceremonies and pop open champagne bottles at the end. The university began to confiscate alcohol from students at the entrances and filled up about four Dumpsters that year, according to Carothers.

The years leading up to policy reformation were filled with stories of students misbehaving Carothers said. He remembers having to break up fights on his front lawn when living in the President's House, and once had a blue bulls eye painted on his front door. During this time, there were four fraternities across the street from the president's house.

"The fraternities became the bars of Kingston and the university," Dougan said.

Fraternities were where the vast majority of on-campus drinking occurred prior to 1995. Dougan said that 2,000 people at once would leave the fraternities at 1 a.m. After being kept up all night, Carothers said it was a fantasy of his to take his stereo and put it in the fraternity houses the next morning. He said would have liked to play one of Beethoven's Concertos at 8 a.m. the day after a party to wake them all up.

Homecoming is one of the largest battles Carothers faced in implementing the new policy. Administrators turned a blind eye, according to Carothers, on this one day, but found that he could not ignore homecoming drinking.

"There is a certain amount of truth to Homecoming not being as fun anymore," Carothers said. "But when you weigh it against policy, and the young families coming to Homecoming, and the police and hospitals calling us hypocrites, it was an exception I couldn't justify anymore."

Three strikes and you're out

The judicial system implemented under Carothers' tenure was dubbed the "three-strike policy." Over time, the policy began to add punitive measures to deter student drinking.