Rolling around St. Peter, distinctly visible are a plethora of houses that once stood swelling with college vitality but will soon rest uninhabited and dreary. This vibe of vacancy is directly related to the controversial off-campus housing situation.

With the school making a stand on keeping all of their on-campus beds full, they are consequently keeping their hands deep in our pockets. But what good is it doing? While I understand that there is an ever-present need for more funding in every department, our escalating tuition rates and institution-imposed taxations equate to a inflated bottom line that seems to be quite a considerable debt anyway.

At this point in our lives, there is much to be said about living independently and being responsible for one’s own household. Currently, there are limited opportunities to feel such a domestic sovereignty while living on campus, especially liberties you don’t have to pay extra for, such as kitchenettes. In comparison, there are 20 legitimate housing vacancies posted on the bulletin board across from the P.A. office, averaging between four and six people apiece, with more known rental opportunities still left unadvertised. Ultimately, we are paying more to get less; less space, less freedoms—all for the benefit of the bottom line.

Another factor playing into this situation comes from the question of substance abuse—an issue that has featured heavily in the headlines this past school year. The Gustavus community is disgustingly aware of the growing pressures placed upon the school to keep their students from participating in social eyesores such as excessive alcohol consumption, illegal drug use or unappreciated sexual advances. But do the powers that be really believe that simply keeping their students confined to the hill will hinder such behaviors should those responsible choose to participate?

Those individuals will find a way to do what they want to, by whatever means or consequences that are necessary, and it is rather unrealistic to think the contrary.

This past school year has seen the highest levels of Detox-level intoxication in history at Gustavus, shattering the previous year’s record in the early part of the spring. If next year is intended to lower such levels, there are important factors to consider. First of all, there aren’t nearly enough sleeping quarters in the upperclass dorms to house everyone enrolled. That leaves the door wide open for the first-years and sophomores to be housed in closer proximity to the upperclassmen, providing a higher probability of underage consumption as an easier avenue for minors to be supplied with alcohol.

Whatever the rationale may be for keeping these upperclassmen stranded on campus, it has undoubtedly made the student population disgruntled. Perhaps we’ve been spoiled to the point that hearts become set on continuing the legacies of certain houses and reputations, but there is a tremendous amount of dismay at the way the current system has dealt the upcoming school year’s residential cards. Whether you agree or not is quite irrelevant; the fact of the matter is that the school is simply guaranteeing itself an increase in problems, while leaving the small town they call home awash with dilapidated rental properties and seemingly unsellable houses. Simply, my question still stands: for what benefit is this potential ugliness being paid?