Bryan Cole / The Collegian File Photo

After an appeal to University Courtyard was denied last week, Associated Student, Inc. (ASI) President Graham Wahlberg said he will continue to fight a citation that charges him with violating the residence halls’ alcohol policy.

Wahlberg was cited on Dec. 19 after University Courtyard conducted a random room inspection.

In his personal refrigerator, which had been located in a common area of his suite, alcoholic beverages were present.

University Courtyard Staff Director Erin Boele stated via e-mail, “Typically, you are informed at least 24 hours in advance of a room check, unless an emergency arises, when no notice may be given.”

Wahlberg, however, said that neither he nor his roommates were given any notice.

He said that he has been told by University Courtyard officials that he signed a letter at the beginning of the semester agreeing to any random inspection without any notice necessary.

“This is absolutely a personal matter. The fact that it happened on campus and because of my position it puts me out there,” said Wahlberg.

“I’m just like everyone else.”

Appeals process

Wahlberg said the most frustrating aspect of the situation has been the appeals process and the investment of 15-20 hours of his personal time to solving the matter.

The University Courtyard Web site states that appeals can only be submitted due to “lack of due process, sanction too severe for the violation or new evidence that comes to light after the decision is made.”

Students who believe they have just reason to appeal must give a written statement for why they are appealing. Then five to ten days later, a student will appear in front of an appeals committee to plea their case.

Wahlberg: Citation too vague

The most aggravating part of the process is that Wahlberg felt he didn’t even understand why he was being cited.

“We didn’t even know what we were being charged of,” said Wahlberg.

“The U.S. Constitution says you can’t be charged for something and not know what you are being charged of. So how on earth can you appeal something if you don’t even know what you are appealing?”

Wahlberg appealed his case last week and on Thursday received notice that his appeal had been denied.

But he has stated that he will continue to appeal the citation as a means of saving his character.

“What is unfortunate for me is by admitting I’m wrong, I’m lowering my character and integrity,” said Wahlberg.

“I am essentially accepting their punishment and admitting I am wrong.”

Routine search finds beer cans

Boele said that these types of inspections are routine and occur for each room once a semester.

The University Courtyard staff and the resident advisory staff conduct them.

If Wahlberg’s second appeal doesn’t go through and he accepts the punishment he will be forced, alongside his roommates, to enroll in a $30 alcohol health class.

“I was given a written notice because they decided to stretch the rules rather than looking at them as they are directly stated, so that I am guilty,” Wahlberg said.

There are 12 ways in which students residing at University Courtyard can violate the alcohol policy.

Wahlberg received a written notice that he was being cited for furnishing alcoholic beverages to people under the age of 21 by having alcohol in his personal refrigerator, which was located in a common area of the suite. Wahlberg’s suite includes some residents under the age of 21.

Even though he says he was not physically giving alcohol to minors or advocating his possession of it, the University Courtyard saw it as enough reason to issue the citation.

In addition, Wahlberg said that he and his roommates had filled a couple of black plastic bags with recycling.

The bags were in a corner and tightly sealed, and those inspecting his room went through the bags and found several beer cans that contributed to the issuing of the citation.

“This is a question of probable cause. There is this thing called preponderance of evidence, which is a standard not even close to those outlined in the Constitution,” said Wahlberg.

“Their standard of evidence is a preponderance, where if there is a perception of something they feel they have the right to investigate it.”

Boele said that due to confidentiality of the case, housing officials were unable to comment on the specifics of the situation.

She issued a statement that said, “Because of FERPA privacy regulations, University Courtyard cannot confirm or deny any rumors or allegations.”