In recent discussion regarding the Recognition Review Committee (“Objectivity needed for RRC to help programs,” ODE Oct. 13), an ASUO committee with the job of determining the efficiency and necessity of incidental fee-funded groups brought to light an important question. How similar are the services of the Assault Prevention Shuttle (APS) and the Designated Driver Shuttle (DDS)? There is a lot of confusion about the difference (or lack thereof) in the student body, so let’s put the issue to rest by going straight to the mission statements for each group. As the RRC will find when they review APS and DDS, these groups are working toward very different goals. Sure, they both drive students as part of a free service, but the question that reveals their differing goals is: Why?
The mission of the Assault Prevention Shuttle is to provide a free and reliable service to students, staff and faculty who might otherwise walk alone and risk possible assault. In turn, DDS is a free shuttle service offered to all University students. The shuttle allows intoxicated students and their friends a safe alternative to driving under the influence, preventing endangerment of themselves and others. So what does this really mean?
APS is providing transportation to men and women who prefer not to walk alone at night. Some of these patrons are survivors of assault and most of them are sober. DDS provides rides to intoxicated students who don’t have a designated ride home. The differences between these mission statements are supported by how each group operates. For example, APS provides rides through advance reservation, and DDS schedule rides throughout the night on a first-come, first-serve basis. APS gives rides to and from any location within their boundaries. DDS patrons are transported to their home addresses only. APS gives rides to parties of 3 or fewer (as groups of 4 or more are unlikely to face assault) and the number transported in a party of DDS riders is only limited by the capacity of their vans.
The bottom line? APS exists so that students can go about their routines without fear, and DDS keeps drunk drivers off the streets. These are both very necessary and very separate groups. Merging APS and DDS would be like merging the Native American Student Union with the Black Student Union. Both receive incidental fees, both combat issues of racism, but we would never think of pushing them into the same group. Just like APS and DDS, these groups are working from different mission statements and have different concerns and needs. Merging APS and DDS would dismiss the specific, separate goals of reducing assault and preventing drunk driving. These issues are too large to commit to one group and deserve the attention and separation they currently receive. Need more proof? Check the RRC’s report at the end of the year. I’m confident they will agree.
Diana Erskine is the Assault Prevention Shuttle co-director