‘ On Tuesday, the Boston City Council held a public forum regarding the proposed ‘Ordinance Increasing University Accountability.’ The ordinance would essentially require that universities submit the addresses of all off-campus students to the city twice a year. Currently, under Municipal Code 10-10.4, universities are required to submit, among other information, the total number of students who reside off campus and a breakdown of the number of students who reside off campus aggregated by each zip code.
The hearing began with a presentation from Boston City Councilor Michael Ross, and included questions and testimonials from several community members, students and university officials from around the city. The community members mainly spoke on behalf of the ordinance, citing personal stories of issues and encounters with troublesome students. The focus of their remarks seemed to be the impact of the students on their neighborhoods rather than the specific implications of the ordinance. Their testimonies would have been better reserved for a hearing on the already-approved ‘No More Than Four’ ordinance. I appreciated one community member’s remarks in which he cited that it was not a fight against a group of students, but rather a fight against a group of property owners ‘with no concern for the community.’ That begs the question:’ Why is the city pursuing the universities, and thus the students, to enforce this policy rather than those property owners?
Alternatively, many of the university officials, including those from Northeastern and Emerson College, among others, touched on their biggest concern related to this ordinance:’ Family Education Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA), which is a federal law that protects the privacy of student education records. Early in the hearing, Ross said he believed the ordinance not to be a violation of FERPA, following consultation with city lawyers, and he stuck by his guns for the remainder of the meeting. Alternatively, the university officials each stated that, following consultation with university lawyers, they believed the ordinance would be a violation of FERPA. So who is right?
Maybe they both are correct. There seemed to be conflicting ideas of what kinds of information would exactly be shared with the city. City Councilor Maureen Feeney seemed to believe they would only need the university to submit the number of students within a specific unit, not specific addresses. If the university does not release information other than how many students are in a unit, then that may not be a violation. However, with the way the Municipal Code Section 10-10.4 is worded, specific changes to that part of the code could allow for addresses to be a required piece of information, at which point the city would determine if there was a violation. If this is true, then it would potentially be a FERPA violation. Any institution that violates FERPA has the potential to lose federal funding.
Toward the end of the hearing, I had the chance to speak. To be honest, I did not go into the hearing with the intention to speak, but I was compelled after seeing how many testimonials seemed to ‘miss the mark’ of the discussion. My point was not that the intentions behind this were malicious, but rather that the idea of holding universities accountable for enforcing zoning laws was not the right solution. If it is a zoning law that affects property owners, then they should be the ones held accountable.
There are so many potential flaws in the university reporting, including incorrect addresses (parent addresses, former addresses, etc.), students from multiple universities living in one unit, combinations of students and graduate students living in one unit and our co-op schedules and the resulting constant fluctuation of living situations (abroad, across the country, home, etc.).
With these flaws, the system is likely to fail. What will they do next? What other types of information or actions will be imposed to rectify these issues?
Furthermore, when students realize where their information is going, they will likely opt out of allowing that information to be shared; every student has that right under FERPA. Another point that was raised is what actually changes when five students graduate and remain in the same unit? It is no longer illegal, but what really changes?
The bottom line is this:’ The ordinance is a solution to the fact that the current ordinance cannot be enforced within the city’s current means; but it is not the right solution. The data will not be accurate and the system will not work, so what comes next?
It was great to see so many Northeastern students at the meeting, especially since Northeastern was the only school I saw give testimonials at the hearing. It absolutely speaks to the quality of students we have, and I encourage all of you to take a vested interest in these types of decisions that will ultimately affect you ‘- and don’t be afraid to speak your mind.

‘- Rob Ranley is the president of the Student Government Association.