To the Editor:

What Fairfield students arranged and intended to be an annual beach party complete with music, food and fun, was not perceived in the same light by some year round residents of Fairfield Beach. News stations from the tri-state region have been camped outside of Lantern Point and have been questioning students on the “debauchery,” “out of control party” and “fun gone terribly wrong.” Feeding off of misconceptions and speculations of year-round residents who were not inside the gates of the private property, news stations are eager to report as much as they can about what went on. In doing their job, they are inaccurately portraying Fairfield University students. Visions are clouded by the “hundreds of kegs thrown around the beach,” the “five-thousand students” who crammed the point and the “forty-five arrests” that were tallied throughout the night. Boy, would I like to have been at that party! As an attendant of the luau and in monitoring the beach with the police for part of the day, I can assure you that the number of kegs reported is a gross exaggeration and since I personally, along with fellow members of the Student Beach Resident Association was out cleaning the beach until 12:30am, I can also testify that no kegs were “thrown” around the beach. Our undergraduate enrollment here at Fairfield lingers around 3,500. In order to reach that 5,000 students that were supposedly here, each undergrad would have had to attend the luau, with nearly half of the student body bringing a guest. Though forty-five arrests have been documented, it should be duly noted that only eleven of them were Fairfield University students, and the majority of the offenses fell under carrying an open container or disturbing the peace. Conceding that these are legitimate offenses, I still feel the nature of these “arrests” should be noted. These are unnecessary violations that with a little common sense can be avoided. While camera crews have been spotted on private property setting up beer cans “to get their shots,” what they are not documenting are the proactive measures that the beach residents are taking to maintain the sanctity of the beach. We do not enjoy living in squalor or waking up to a trash-laden yard. That is why we have taken measures to conduct weekly beach clean-ups in addition to a myriad of other actions aimed to keep harmony for two opposing groups who live in the same area. Please, when talking about the hot topic of Fairfield Beach, do not forget to emphasize the good that we do for the area and the community. Stress that we are not “criminals” and/or “animals” as some members of the town feel we are. In talking with neighbors, it has become clear that the group that has shot video footage of us on our property and 21 year olds leaving the Sea Grape Café do not represent the feelings of all beach residents. This is a fanatical group that is targeting and harassing students. They are not working with us, as we are working with them to create an environment in which we can all live happily. I urge underclassmen with visions of living at the beach as seniors to work with us to preserve this privilege. Please do not come to the beach on weekends. We, as residents, are the ones faced with fines and potential arrests for the irresponsible actions of a few. The strife between year-round and student beach residents is at a breaking point. Something will have to give. In our efforts to preserve the student population at the beach, and to secure you, as underclassmen, the privilege to live there, we need your help. Please take advantage of what on-campus events have to offer so we can enjoy our senior year and afford you the opportunity to do the same.

Sincerely, Robert C. Grimes, ’01 Student Beach Resident Association, Executive Coordinator

To the Editor:

“What happened down here was nothing less than a state of siege that was planned and executed by the student body” – quote from Wayne Van Amburgh of Reef Road in the Connecticut Post on Tuesday, October 3, 2000.

Whoa. When I read this quote in Andrew Brophy’s report of last weekend’s luau a few thoughts immediately ran through my head. One, these people don’t give up. I mean, they got their ordinance passed, what else do they want? As Matt Bradley says, “It’s like poisoning me after I’m hanging from the noose.” Two, the terminology used by Van Amburgh is going to paint a picture for the public that looks like this: the students met at Alumni Hall dressed in fatigues, drew up blueprints, and marched down to Lantern Point with nothing but malicious intent. What was he thinking? Why would he say such things? The students came, they drank, they left. The weather was perfect, everyone was dressed accordingly (not in fatigues), and spirits were high. So, it was difficult to get a drink and if you did, it was pretty disgusting but hey, that’s the way it is every year and the people at the Fishbowl did do their best to keep everyone happy. A typical fall extravaganza. “State of siege?” So, I called up Van Amburgh and asked him. After an hour-long conversation of constructive give and take I got off the phone and felt a wave of overwhelming reality engulf my spirits. I got on the phone hoping to discover a crack in the poetic licensing of Mr. Brophy but instead, I saw a new future for Fairfield students. Apparently, the quote is accurate and Van Amburgh was quite content to expound on his opinion. He has lived at Fairfield Beach for 19 years and explained that the beach’s rapid deterioration of harmony between students and residents is the result of “a change in the attitude amongst students towards residents.” I asked him to consider the possibility that because of the black eye created for the university by all the negative media fed to the region by the Post and Channel 12, students have a frustration so deep, that communication is not plausible. However, Van Amburgh was quick to recite the usual problems that residents have to deal with and that he has tried to communicate in the past and his current neighbors are cooperative but overall, the situation needs correction. As an example he cited the young woman who passed out in her running car before fire fighters found her. “What if she had enough energy to last thirty more seconds and drove her car fifty yards before passing out behind the wheel, letting her car barrel into a pack of students crossing over to the Water’s Edge?” Doh! It is points like this that the public is eating up and the media is feeding it to them. We are losing a battle fought against a group of individuals who are not satisfied with their living conditions but are content about chipping away at our way of life with slow but large steps, such as last week’s passing of the repeat offender ordinance. Unfortunately, the large steps are coming quicker and I knew we were in trouble when Van Ambrugh mentioned that this past weekend’s party justifies more legal action by the RTM “already in the making.” Mr. Van Ambrugh, like every other resident, says that he doesn’t mind students living at the beach but the mutual respect that is essential to such a virile relationship is not present.

He also explained that going into last week’s RTM meeting, the chance of approval was 50/50. The scales shifted when a female resident who was speaking against the students and labeling us, as a whole, as a menace to society, and was interrupted by an expletive disguised by a cough. The culprit does live at Lantern Point but does not attend Fairfield. Van Amburgh spoke to RTM representatives after the meeting and that outburst served as the fulcrum for many of their decisions. These people have been complaining about us for years and nothing happens until we justify their complaints.

This is a prime example of how the beach students, who in the past, have welcomed campus students into their homes, but are now having to pick and choose their guests because of the actions of a selected few. And like this weekend where only 25% of the arrests were Fairfield students, beach students are forced to these circumstances by the actions of others. We can’t help it. We like to have fun and it is fact that when we’re drunk, our judgement is impaired. This happens at colleges across the country but not in environments so heated by student/resident agitations.

I’m not blaming the campus residents. God knows we’ve all been there. Even though the new village complex offers another venue, campus restrictions make partying there, the townhouses, or in the dorms impossible. And as long as we can’t even buy condoms on campus, we can forget about enjoying the freedoms of the “old” beach on campus.

So, what does this all mean? What was this disheartening vision that came over me? I think that in the near future, the future when the 2004’s are getting ready to leave like I am now, restrictions will be so tuff, that underclassmen will be completely shunned by those at the beach and totally discouraged from attending the beach. They will have to wait their turn to live at the point and then, and only then, enjoy the beach.

This school will be turned to a gathering of the geeks because after reading this piece, many will start filling out their transfer applications and I don’t blame them. Why miss out on the “Animal House” expectations that everyone has of the college years. For those brave souls or stupid souls, partying at Fairfield Beach will continue. There is no way that partying at Fairfield will completely stop, but it will cost a pretty penny and who knows what the RTM has planned too.

To the Editor:

Alms for the poor, alms for the poor! In last week’s article “‘Justice’ for Sale in Fairfield,” the editors of The Mirror tried to build their own soapbox so they too can try to fight city hall. Unfortunately, their meager account of wit has been long overdrawn. I am sure that they learned in their journalism courses that every good polemic should contain at least three or four of those $.65 words that you find in the Sunday crossword puzzle—but let the buyer beware! Maybe if they had invested in a dictionary they would not have confused ‘coiffure’ (viz., “university students…do not directly fill town -coiffures- with tax dollars”) with ‘coffer.’ ‘Coiffure’ means hair-do; as for ‘coffer’, you might find a few fat ones in Bellarmine Hall. So much for my pedantry. Please do notify me when www.fairfieldmirror.com makes its IPO.

As an alumnus, resident of Fairfield and retired cop, I want to congratulate the student body for an exemplary showing at the recent RTM meeting.

The student representatives were much better behaved than the full time residents in attendance, and student speakers were articulate and passionate. Tim Healy did an outstanding job representing your interests and attempting to inject a little sanity into this ludicrous ordinance. It was great to see the student body work together to protect your dignity. This ordinance is just a little bump in the road and will probably not stand up to judicial review.

Please register to vote …

The time will come soon when you get to tell all the politicians in Town just how happy you are with the way they represented your rights!!!