In September 2006, Councilman Jim Madaffer held a Town Hall meeting for residents to discuss the phenomenon of a large number of college students renting a home together (labeled ‘mini-dorms’). Currently the city council is drafting ordinances dealing with the issue to bring to the Land Use and Development Committee this February. Nothing has been finalized as of yet, but the word on everyone’s lips seems to be ‘ban.’

The argument over mini-dorms is simple. On one side are the neighbors of mini-dorms, who complain that college students are noisy, messy and pave over their lawns for added parking, and therefore must be outlawed. On the other are college students who generally live on a budget and like loud music and parties, but are acting completely within their legal rights by renting a house together.

It appears the answer for the mini-dorm neighbors facing this dilemma was obvious to them: Make a new law. The only problem is, the potential new law won’t have much legitimacy.

Students choose this renting situation because it’s really the only option when faced with expensive San Diego housing and a lack of on-campus opportunities, and mini-dorms are currently completely legal — as they should be. There is nothing inherently wrong with a group of friends renting a house together. But neighbors complain that these students, by default, bring noise and mess. One of these residents told the San Diego Union Tribune in September that her neighborhood’s biggest fear was seeing a ‘for sale’ sign go up, because it meant the possibility of a mini-dorm moving in.

So what do these residents have against the mini-dorms? The main complaints seem to be that having a mini-dorm in your neighborhood diminishes your quality of life, because college students are loud, messy and pave over their lawns to park cars. While these complaints are valid, attacking students in general is no way to solve these problems.

There is definitely a level of basic courtesy and respect that all residents deserve. Music should not be blasting late into the night, trash should not litter the sidewalks, and a neighboring lawn full of trucks can be an eyesore. But not all students are like this, and each of these things is easily addressed with already existing laws. What residents should rally for instead is better enforcement of current laws. Not all students cause these problems, so why should everyone pay the cost for a few people’s actions?

If a neighbor is unreasonably loud, just call in a noise complaint. The police can even crack down on a particularly problematic house under the College Area Party Plan. The plan dictates that if police are called for two or more noise disturbances within 60 days, the residence can be ‘capped’ and if police respond a third time to the ‘capped’ house within the year, the residents can be arrested.

In regard to the complaints over trash on the ground and paved-over lawns, the city of San Diego also already has laws to combat these issues as well. The city has very specific landscaping ordinances written in to the municipal code, and a building permit is required to extend a driveway. Similar ordinances exist regarding litter.

If for whatever reason students, or any residents, are being obscenely loud and messy, there are already laws in place to address these problems. Trying to outlaw a thing created solely to describe college students acting within their legal rights is blatant age discrimination. Although councilmembers continue to stress that they are not targeting students, the term ‘mini-dorm’ by itself identifies students as wrongdoers, and Madaffer’s Web site makes it clear that his concern is with students. While the Web site agrees that renters and students are ‘well within their rights,’ Madaffer is quoted in the San Diego Union Tribune article having said that ‘one mini-dorm can ruin an entire neighborhood.’ Clearly, the only argument against mini-dorms is that grumpy old people don’t like them. Unfortunately it appears these grumpy old people have a lot of power when it comes to city politics.

Let’s face it: Students don’t like living next to people who break up their parties any more than old people like having their peace disturbed. The reason mini-dorms even exist is clearly out of financial necessity. With limited on-campus housing and the high cost of rent in San Diego, packing six students into a three-bedroom house is the only viable alternative for a large number of students.

It isn’t the best situation for anyone, but a ban on mini-dorms — essentially a ban on students — is unnecessary, unreasonable and absurd.