In a rare joint press conference yesterday, Dean of Students Luoluo Hong and Madison Police Department Captain Luis Yudice sat together and announced a joint initiative to combat “unsafe” house parties in the greater campus area. While understated in tone, Wednesday’s meeting was a clear signal to the would-be revelers of Breese Terrace and College Court: UW’s proverbial sabre of prohibitive sobriety has again rattled. Students have no reason to expect the collective sword of university administrators and city officials will remain sheathed against student drinkers for the duration of the academic year.

Make no mistake about it: though not present at the podium (perhaps a symbolic public-relations maneuver), the minions of UW’s vaunted Policy, Alternatives, Community and Education (PACE) machine stand behind this new initiative. The group, comprised of students and University Health Services staff, seeks to curb the negative effects of high-risk binge-drinking with the use of private grant money.

Watchful readers may remember PACE’s informational meetings and discussion groups of the past academic year, which lead to a suspension of weekend drink specials. We had hoped the group’s crusade would end there. Sadly, this proved a wishful notion. We have seen the work of PACE against house parties thus far in published guides and benign awareness efforts, but we must prepare for the same political pressure once reserved for curbing drink specials now applied to house parties.

Dean Hong and Capt. Yudice touted the value of a manual produced “by students, for students” with tips on holding a safe house party. Yet, for all practical purposes, conforming to the safety instructions in this “guide” requires Ovaltine and a Scrabble board. Its tenets draw largely on simple common sense. Its proposals fail to take into consideration the reality that students drink heavily, seek to meet new people, and engage in behavior that is distasteful to some while attending house parties. Yet, such behavior is not necessarily “unsafe” from the standpoint of good public policy.

Yudice and Hong insist this initiative is not a new incarnation of the now defunct “Operation Sting” or “Party Patrols.” While we have no reason to doubt their intentions, their general lack of specificity on the scope of any new enforcement initiatives leads us to believe Yudice and Hong are falling short of full disclosure.

We find it hard to believe the goal of “furthering dialogue” necessitates a high-profile press conference, and this raises red flags. Yudice says more aggressive policing procedures are not currently underway, but nowhere in today’s presentation were they explicitly ruled out.

Campus-area revelers remain deep within a trap of uncertainty regarding how police exercise discretion while regulating house parties. As students, we must ask of law enforcement: What exactly is considered safe and what is unsafe? Which activities will yield immediate police attention, and which will not? While dialogue is certainly a noble goal, students need a bit of direction for a sense of security when their parties are indeed safe. Authorities must tell us which transgressions will be punished and which will not so students can avoid stiff penalties and hazardous situations.

The bottom line in this debate involves fostering a spirit of pragmatism and transparency: UW students are going to drink. And some, albeit a small minority, will choose to do so in an unsafe and irresponsible manner. Others will drink heartily, safely and sociably. Either way, students need direction from campus and city authorities as to how law enforcement officers on the beat make critical enforcement decisions. Vague, sabre-rattling press conferences are not the answer.

To this end, we call on the Madison Police Department to provide students their own printed guide, explicit in its content and pragmatic in its guidance — describing what constitutes a safe house party and what does not. Police must make clear distinctions between noise and danger, between a crowded room and a firetrap. And their enforcement of these standards must be consistent. Quaking, aged balconies packed with revelers are not safe and deserve police attention; this much is sure. Fifteen friends enjoying some beer and a game most certainly do not. But these are the extremes.

It would be far from our purview to suggest Madison Police officers stray away from a clearly dangerous situation. The possibility of a Chicago-like balcony collapse at a Madison house is real and would be nothing short of nightmarish for all members of the UW community. But just as PACE and the dean’s office believe two-way communication is essential to combat the problem, a bit of one-way communication and clarity from campus and city officials would push the movement for safe partying further, faster. Only then will “dialogue” meet progress.