Annunziata 1

Stephanie Annunziata

Fredrick deBoer

Writing 303

7 March 2011

The Scarlett Letter of Narragansett

Dear Editor,

It is a milestone in a young adult’s life to graduate high school and enter the real world.

For many, entering the real world means returning to school in the fall at college campuses all

over the world. College is the experience of a lifetime, not just for the education but also for the

social gatherings and the meeting of new friends. Across the United States and around the world,

partying on college campuses is inevitable. As a college student, I understand partying can

become very chaotic and unruly, which demands the attention of the authorities. In a local town

where students from the University of Rhode Island live, the orange sticker policy allows the

authorities to reprimand students for partying by plaguing their house with a 10 by 14 sticker.

This controversy is not about consequences of partying, it is about the policy that Narragansett

upholds. This orange sticker acts as a modern day scarlet letter, humiliating students, and forcing

them to pay consequences much greater than the offense. Students have paid fines, have

remained under close watch by the authorities, have been reprimanded by the University of

Rhode Island, and have even faced eviction from their house. I do not propose that partying

uncontrollably should not face any consequences, but that this unconstitutional policy be

changed to better suit the offense.

 Annunziata 2

The orange sticker policy derives from Chapter 46, Article II, Sections 31-35 of the

Narragansett Codes of Ordinance. The statute itself is too vague, allowing the authorities to use

an undefined power against students of this offense. The severity of the consequence depends on

cooperation and respect towards the “higher” authorities. But in all honesty, how cooperative

will a student be when intoxicated? Section 31 of the ordinance states, “It shall be a public

nuisance to conduct a gathering of five or more persons on any private property in a manner

which constitutes a substantial disturbance of the quiet enjoyment of private or public

property…”(Narragansett Code of Ordinances, §§ 46-31 2005). Five or more persons I believe is

an inaccurate number that constitutes unruly gatherings because some households have five

people at least living in one house! The statute defines unlawful acts like crowds, obstructing

roads with too many cars, public drunkenness, and disturbances of peace. The above behaviors

may be actions of students who are guests, which allow the authorities to place an orange sticker

on the house, even though the homeowners are not related to the unruly behavior. Therefore, the

law fails to define good behavior and fails to provide a clear definition of prohibited behavior.

Because of the vagueness, authorities have created undocumented powers like monitoring the

houses and students who have received an orange sticker. But regardless, the underlying

problem is its vagueness allowing for harsher consequences than deserved, but not the principle

itself.
 Annunziata 3

Besides humility, this orange sticker policy violates ideals of the Rhode Island

Constitution. Article 1 Section 2 of the Rhode Island Constitution states, “No person shall be

deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law, nor shall any person be denied

equal protection of the laws” (R.I Const. Art. I. Sec. 2.). Often, the authorities fail to allow

students to explain the circumstance and appeal the accusations on site. Every person under the

Constitution is allowed the protection of his or her legal rights, which is denied when an orange

sticker is placed on the house without proper discussion. Article 1 Section 5 proposes, “Every

person within this state ought to find a certain remedy, by having recourse to the laws, for all

injuries or wrongs which may be received in one's person, property, or character” (R.I Const.

Art. I. Sec. 5.). Every student’s right to justice goes hand in hand with due process because they

have the right to fight the accusations and file for appeal, which is often disregarded. The orange

sticker is in violation of Section 10, a fair and speedy trial to defend themselves. This is often

denied because students are unable to defend themselves against the accusations even in a court

of law. Although it may be a stretch, Section 21 allows everyone the right to assemble, so there

should not be a number that signifies an unruly gathering.

 Annunziata 4

On top of the community service, the fines, the orange sticker, the authorities contact the

University of Rhode Island of the incident. Students receive a letter as a warning from the

university, and if needed, the students will be reprimanded. The contacting of the university also

allows coaches to take actions against their athletes who are in violation of the orange sticker.

Even if students are representing the University of Rhode Island, off campus behavior should not

be reprimanded especially because Narragansett is a different town from Kingston. The further

disciplinary actions are unnecessary because partying is not related to academic behavior and

their attendance at the university. The guidelines for punishment does not allow the authorities to

contact the University of Rhode Island, it is a matter between the town and the student. What

about other surrounding towns like Wakefield and Kingston, where students do not face the same

consequences as students in Narragansett? If it were to be a matter of the school, then all towns

where students resides should face the same punishment, rather than it being the risk students

take by choosing to live in Narragansett. There is no reason for the University to involve

themselves in the matter, unless the unruly gathering involved a serious crime like murder where

expulsion would be necessary.

Not only does the orange sticker affect students, it affects the landlords and homeowners

as well. Many renters depend on the income received from student renters. Once plagued with

the orange sticker, they face great difficulty selling their house. Homeowners, without

involvement in their renters’ actions, face fines as well. Is it even fair to charge the landlords

with a fine based on the behavior of their tenants? The landlords are not parental figures to their

renters and are unaware of the behaviors presented by their tenants. Therefore, the orange sticker

violates the landlord’s right to a fair use of the property.

 Annunziata 5

Again, I am not proposing that chaotic parties should go without notice. If other

campuses can control parties without an orange sticker, then the town of Narragansett should do

the same. Since its enactment in 2005, the policy has accomplished very little to deter parties and

has caused much resentment against the university and the Narragansett authorities. Should

students face consequences for the rest of their college career because of this orange sticker?

Since it has failed to work thus far, I propose a new policy called the three-strike rule because I

students do not have a right to party uncontrollably. The first offense should be a minimal fine

acting as a warning. The second offense should be a higher fine because they have already been

warned. The third offense will result in an orange sticker. The first two strikes will allow

students to appeal the accusations. This policy is better fit for the students because it gives every

student a chance before receiving an orange sticker.

Stephanie Annunziata

Narragansett, RI

sannunziata@my.uri.edu

Works Cited

Mulvaney, Katie. "Arguments Filed in ACLU Challenge to Narragansett 'Orange-Sticker' Law."

Editorial. Providence Journal [Providence] 9 July 2009. Rhode Island News. Providence

Journal, 9 July 2009. Web. 06 Mar. 2011.

 Annunziata 6

<http://www.projo.com/news/content/ACLU_STICKERS_07-09-

09_VIF00QE_v9.38b20e9.html>.

Narragansett Code of Ordinances, §§ 46-31-35 (2005). Print.

R.I. Const. Art. I. Sec. 2.

R.I Const. Art. I. Sec. 5.

R.I Const. Art. I. Sec. 10

R.I Const. Art. I. Sec. 21.

URI Student Senate vs. Town of Narragansett. RI Superior Court. May 2008. Print.