Washingtonpost.com: Live Online

Years of growth under president Stephen Joel Trachtenberg have brought more students, more money and more real estate to George Washington University. But lately many long-time residents of the neighborhood are feeling overwhelmed by the expansion. And they're striking back at the school.

Christopher Shea, whose article "The University That Ate Foggy Bottom" appears in The Washington Post Magazine's Education Review on Sunday, will be online Monday, April 8 at 1 p.m. EDT, fielding questions and comments about the article.

Submit your questions before or during the discussion.

Christopher Shea writes frequently for The Washington Post Magazine.

Editor's Note: Washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Live Online discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions.

Christopher Shea: Hello, all. Thanks for your questions; there are some good ones, on a range of issues.

Bear with me as I do my best to answer them. I'll try to strike a balance between quick replies and thorough answers.

Best,
Chris Shea

Washington, D.C.:
President Trachtenburg's remark that "we were here first" tells us everything we need to know about his sense of responsibility to the community and the city that his university are part of.

I have lived in the Foggy Bottom area since the 1970s, in an apartment building that was constructed in the '60s and is one of a relative handful that was never converted to condos. In the last two years GW has rented a substantial number of units in this building for use as student housing. As your article reported, GW in recent years has bought outright a number of apartment buildings for use as dormitories. Apart from the issues of takng real estate off the tax rolls and reducing the city's stock of moderate-income housing, an important factor is that these buildings were never designed for that purpose. In my building residents have been a mix of younger working people, retirees and graduate students who mostly lived alone in studio or one-bedroom units. GW is housing at least two and often three students, including freshmen, in these units. The increased density overburdens the building's laundry room and other facilities. At the same time the students don't have study lounges, snack bars, common areas and similar amenities that would be basic design elements in any real college dormitory. Both the building's long-term residents and the students are hurt when GW takes over property this way, rather than providing everything that students should be getting in exchange for their very high tuition and fees. I have also seen some casual vandalism and other problems that might be expected from people who are only planning to be in the building for a few months, and who aren't subject to building management as anyone else would be if he rented his own apartment and signed his own lease.

My question for you is what zoning laws and landlord-tenant regulations govern GW in these areas, and is GW in compliance? What are the consequences if it is not? How can buildings that were licensed as hotels and apartments become dormitories? Is GW in effect functioning as a tenant when it takes over apartments, then subletting them to students? Or if it is functioning as a landlord, do its student/tenants have the same legal protections that other renters have? What laws apply here, and are they enforced?

Last year GW admitted several hundred more students than were supposedly permitted under city regulations. They claimed that they received more acceptances than they anticipated. What consequences does GW face under these circumstances? Is it required to reduce the target number next year? Can they get away with saying "Gee, we counted wrong. Silly us!" Suppose GW was fined, say, 300 percent of the total tuition that these excess students were paying. Would the administration be more careful next year?

When somone tries to drop a factory or an office building, or even a bar, into a residential neighborhood, the plan will usually be stopped cold unless the entrepreneur can demonstrate that what it wants to build will do more good for more people than what it will replace, and even then there are a lot of hoops to jump through. I don't think anybody should forget that GW, like any private university, is a big business. Its impact on the city deserves the same scrutiny, and its motives for expansion the same skepticism, that we bring to our analysis of any other business.

Christopher Shea: Thanks for your question. As you can imagine, the zoning laws are very complicated (and are also somewhat in dispute, as a result of the current lawsuit that G.W. has filed).

Basically, G.W. every 10 years or so has to file a campus plan, explaining what it wants to do within the confines of its campus. It has to meet certain guidelines concerning building height, density, etc.

What’s more in dispute—and this is what your question is getting at—is what G.W. can do outside of its campus boundaries. G.W. can buy property (just as anyone could, on the free market). It has to go to the city for permission to build on that property, or to change its usage.

City zoning laws are quite liberal, though, in allowing the building of dormitories. (Or the conversion of other properties into dormitories.) The city planners I talked to weren’t sure of the history of that policy decision. But there are few restrictions on universities that want to buy properties outside their campus plans and convert them into dorms.

If you’ve read the story, you see what the zoners are attempting to do to close this “loophole.” We’ll see what happens.

Annapolis, MD: Are there other inner-city Universities that have faced these same growth issues and have found innovative, peaceful solutions ?

Christopher Shea: Certainly, both Boston and Philadelphia zoners (and the universities in those cities) have faced these decisions. Both are densely populated urban centers with lots of colleges.

Penn and the city of Phila. used to be in constant conflict. Now both sides seem to be happy: Penn has invested a lot to improve what had been a declining neighborhood; it offers its professors incentives to move to the area, among other things.

It's not an analogous situation, I know, but it's an example of discussion and compromise between a city and a university formerly at odds.

One reason G.W.'s case is unique is that the neighborhood is unique; it's really penned in, geographically.

By the way, up at Mt. Vernon, in Foxhall, the mayor's office brought in mediators to help G.W. and the neighbors reach compromises. It worked in that case.

Arlington, Va.: Just as a point, you mention that the first student from North Dakota enrolled in 1997. I had a friend from ND who enrolled in 1993, and graduated in 1997. So there.

Christopher Shea: I apologize if I was, in fact in error. That information came from the G.W. vice president in charge of admission and enrollment.

I hope others don't think this slip undermines the rest of the story . . .

Piscataway, N.J.: I have heard from a number of people that the highly student-populated Columbia Plaza Apartments, set in the Foggy Bottom area, were originally built to be used as low income housing. Even if this may be a reach, I wonder how the neighborhood would have turned out without the University. It seems that GW came at the right time, as Foggy Bottom was very stagnant and on a downward turn....thoughts? (Oh, and I shared a floor with a student from North Dakota in 1994.) Thanks for the great article.

Christopher Shea: More trouble on the North Dakota front; I apologize.

Washington, D.C.: Chris:

Do you know what the university plans to do with the "old" hospital once the new one is open?

-- Doug Abbey

Christopher Shea: This is a crucial question. As far as I know, G.W. has not announced its plans. The city--the zoners and planners, that is--would very much like G.W. to use that land (if not the existing structure) to solve its housing "problem." A couple of superdorms, like the one going up near Don Kreuzer, would do a lot to allay residents' concerns.

G.W., however, would like to keep its options open, I imagine; anyway, it doesn't want the city ordering it what to build, and where.

Camp Springs: Did the officials at GWU who bought a full-page ad on the inside front cover of the magazine know the substance of issue's cover story?

Christopher Shea: They did not. There is what's sometimes called a "firewall" between the editorial and advertising staffs at the Post.

Of course, people at G.W. knew I'd been visiting the campus for several months, doing interviews, but they wouldn't have known the tenor or focus of the piece.

Boston, Mass.: Great article! As a '97 GW graduate, I am well-familiar with the Foggy Bottom residents plaintive cries over Trachtenberg bulldozing down their neighborhood. Few are ever willing to admit the bonuses of living in GW's realm (constant policing, well-lit streets, better trash and snow removal than in other neighborhoods, access to the library and fitness facilities, lectures and events free for the community, etc.)
GW has been vowing to house most of its student population on campus for years. What no one ever talks about is that with what GW charges for housing, even if the University could house 70% of students on campus, many students would still choose to live off campus. It's simply too expensive to live in the residence halls for what little you get in return. And building more dorms is only going to send room and board fees even higher. Not to mention the fact that living on campus means living according to the University's rules about noise, visitors, alcohol, etc. It can be worse than living at home with your parents. Did you hear this arguement from anyone you interviewed?

Christopher Shea: G.W., if I remember correctly, makes a point that's not too different from this one in its complaint (i.e., in the lawsuit).

The university could argue that there's only so much it can do to control where students want to live. If they simply choose, when they are upperclassmen, to move off campus (for the reasons you describe), what is G.W. supposed to do about it?

I imagine the city would then say that there is a *lot* G.W. could do about it; it could offer incentives of all kinds.

Foggy Bottom: Dear Christopher,

Your depiction of SJ Trachtenberg is what I've always believed. He cares little for education. He won't rest until he sucks the last dime from the students and the community. I think the article really hit all the major points of the growing crisis between the city and GW.

As a recent GW alum (01) living in an apartment building in the historic Foggy Bottom area I've lived both sides of this dispute. But I'm curious, were you able to speak with any of the few remaining businesses in the area? How do they feel about GW's incursion?

From a concerned alum who will never give anything to GW as long as SJT is running the show and building his legacy.

Christopher Shea: I notice that a few questions--I see them come in before you all do--assume that I intended to depict Stephen Trachtenberg negatively, and that I, personally, find him (or his style) off-putting.

I didn't intend to put him in a purely negative light. Under his tenure, G.W. has made enormous strides. He is also a strong personality. Even residents who dislike him intensely can find him charming. I certainly enjoyed our interview (though I have no idea what he thought of the story).

My mother thought that it was unfair that I compared his body to a "fireplug," however.

Foggy Bottom, Washington, D.C.: I was very dismayed by your article in the Post magazine. As a student and resident of Foggy Bottom, many things you wrote about were exagerrated, or not explored. While I certainly don't agree with all of Trachtenberg's expansions and the means he does so, and I agree that he isn't a very likeable man, there is much more to GW's relationship with Foggy Bottom than mere real estate.

"Many" (not nearly as many as your article would have us believe) Foggy Bottom residents complain about the cancer that GW is to their neighborhood, but without us, the streets wouldn't be as safe, or clean if it weren't for the students presence (we have Foggy Bottom clean-up days every semester, and University Police regularly patrols the area), there is a world class hospital within yards of many of their residences (and considereing how old the population of complainers are, that should be very important) not to mention that area homes are selling at record prices in record times -- NOT to GW but many to successful business people. Certainly such people moved into the area not becuase they hoped to be bought out in a few years by GW, but rather to take advantage of the opportunity that living near a major university brings. The FBA and ANC are only hampering their own access to facilities such as the new Lerner Health and Wellness center, which the University wants, and many neighbors want, to be open to the public, with their rants during zoning meetings. Most of the area residents LIKE GW, and if you'd asked the rest of the neighborhood and not the four loudmouths who speak up at FBA, ANC or zoning meetings, you would have learned that.

GW couldn't and wouldn't be such a great place to study if it weren't for the neighborhood, and students know this. While the University may eat up another block of decrepit row houses, their is no way GW could survive if it actually "ate" Foggy Bottom.

Why did you feel you had a complete article when you failed to truly consider these points, failed to interview more than three students at an institution that caters to thousands, and failed to speak with anyone in the neighborhood who didn't attend a FBA meeting?

Christopher Shea: These strike me as fair objections to my story.

I tried to both explain the current real-estate battle, and its history, and to give a sense of G.W.'s motivations: It's (understandable) desire to improve. I think I give a lot of evidence that G.W. has, in fact, gotten better, by many measures.

Other stories, it seems to me, have talked about the real estate dispute out of context.

I would object, however, to your suggestion that it's just a handful of cranks who object to G.W.'s expansion. Numbers aside, the key point is that the city--the Board of Zoning Adjustment and the Office of Planning--have stepped in on the side of those neighbors. (Though they wouldn't put it that way, and the neighbors would say it's too little, too late.)

Also, I talked to more than three students. I quoted (I think) five, and interviewed others. But I did have space constraints, and there was a lot of ground to cover.

An N.D. Defender: Not to be nit picky and not to detract from the power of your story..but we North Dakotans can be very defensive about our state! (witness Dave Barry's recent columns). Current Sen. Kent Conrad, D-ND, who is a ND native, received an MBA from GW in 1975. So come on, GW! Get your facts right and don't make ND out to be a state that hasn't had until recently any students good enough to attend your school!

washingtonpost.com: CQ's "Politics In America" says Conrad got his MBA at GW in 1975.

Christopher Shea: Uncle.

Maybe what G.W. told me is that '97 was the first year in which students actually enrolled from all 50 states.

My apologies for bungling the stat.

However, the point was not that North Dakotans are mentally feeble, but rather that G.W.'s recruitment efforts had been lacking, pre-Trachtenberg.

Washington, D.C.: As the Chair of the College Republicans at GW, I can think of no better University in the entire country to attend if you are interested in politics. No other school can match our access to Capitol Hill and the White House, as well as our abilty to host programs for students and the community, including CNN's Crossfire and numerous policy and political addresses by some of our country's greatest leaders. Why did you choose not to cover the life of students on this campus(which is what makes GW so attractive) but instead the relatively insignificant business practices of GW, which are conducted to make GW the best University it can be for students?

Christopher Shea: I have no doubt that G.W. could be a stimulating place to study politics. And I suppose I could have written a story that explained that in more detail.

What you call the "relatively insignificant business practices of G.W." are not considered so by its neighbors, by city planners or zoners, or by G.W. itself.

G.W. argues in its lawsuit that if the city wins, the university will suffer immense damages--perhaps permanent, crippling damage. That might be lawsuit hyperbole, but it's hard to argue that the current dispute is unimportant.

Simsbury, Conn: Any comment by Mr Shea on the short and long term prognosis for urban universities in the wake of 9/11?

Christopher Shea: This is still very much an open question. At first, there were a flurry of stories suggesting that applications were down. Then those stories were proved wrong, or at least incomplete. At G.W., at least, they are up (last time I checked).

D.C. will always be an attractive place to live and study, but if there's another attack at some point, or if the situation in the middle east and elsewhere continues to deteriorate, who knows?

Metro Center, District of Columbia: Are there any plans to convert the residential hotel on F Street and 24th NW I believe, The Allan Lee, into dormitory housing? Properties with weekly rates are often viewed as seedy by neighborhood coalitions and the locale is prime.

Christopher Shea: This one's too specific for me to answer. I know the building you're talking about, but don't know what its current status is, or if there are any plans for it.

Princeton, N.J.: George Washington University's campus expansion has remained largely east of 24th Street, which has been the westerly campus boundary line for decades. The exception is two hotels purchased by GW, one of which is being used as a hotel. Why is the university criticized for growing and expanding as any healthy institution would? Why does the Foggy Bottom neighborhood, made up of residents who arrived in the neighborhood well after GW located there in 1912, treat the university as if it has no property rights?

Christopher Shea: This is a crisp, concise summary of G.W.'s position.

I could have made clearer in the piece that G.W. says it has made a point of staying out of the townhouses that border it on the West. However, you can see from the map we included in the story that to say G.W. has had consistent borders for "decades" is a bit of a simplification.

Alexandria, Va.: Maybe the surrounding neighborhood would not have a problem with the schools growth it they were to teach the students respect and manners. Try driving down the streets there when the students are out walking in the middle of them. You have students who blast their stereos outside of their buildings. What has the University done to make the students act this way? Why hasn't the University done anything to stop the students from acting this way?

Christopher Shea: I think that G.W. has pledged to create a "hot line" that residents could call to report loud music, student rowdiness, etc. (Or, if it already has such a hotline, it's pledged to improve it.)

You ask, "what has the university done to make the students act this way"?

Can you think of a campus where students *don't* play loud music?

New York, N.Y.: Why doesn't GW have satelite housing like NYU, and provide bus services from dorms to the main campus? It would alleviate a lot of the congestion in the area and spread students out more.

Christopher Shea: The city planners would love to see this. They'd love, for example, for G.W. to put a dorm in a neighborhood that's hungry for development (rather than one, like Foggy Bottom, that's pretty much saturated). The dorms would be a catalyst for neighborhood improvement. OR they'd strengthen already-strong neighborhoods.

G.W.--and students I talked to--argue that one of the strengths of the university is its sense of community. The character of the place might change if you had to commute in from 7th street, or wherever.

Washington, D.C.: Regarding the Allan Lee, it is my understanding that the wife of the original owner has no intention of ever selling that property or converting it.

Christopher Shea: Again, I don't know the situation here, but I hope this helps whomever posted the earlier question.

Vienna, Va.: I know as a reporter, you come back after
a story like this filled with notebooks and
tapes of information and interviews. What
was something you wished you could
have highlighted or explained more?

Christopher Shea: I wish I could have given a better sense of what Trachtenberg is like; he is certainly worth a profile (and has been the subject of many). There was only space in this piece for the briefest of sketches.

As one student has pointed out already, I did not provide much detail on student life; I wonder if I could have captured, better, what's it's like to be a student at G.W.

On a more wonky level, there are layers and layers of argument and counter-argument in the various legal papers. I wish I could have delved more deeply into them.

In a geeky way, zoning law is fascinating.

Washington, D.C.: Is it possible that other universities in the area, like American University in Northwest, will follow the GW path and expand into their neighborhoods, or have neighborhood commissions in other areas learned from the Foggy Bottom ANC?

Christopher Shea: Both American and Georgetown have had their own conflicts with neighbors. The situations are different, because (especially at American) the universities and those neighbors aren't crammed into such a tight space, as they are in Foggy Bottom.

Georgetown's neighbors in the Burleif (sp?) neighborhood are especially concerned about student behavior. There have been a lot of talks and negotiations over what to do to control noise, etc.

Upstate New York: I graduated from The George Washington University almost four years ago, and I lived in a town house on 23rd Street that the University tore down. It was a beautiful house, typical of the town houses in Foggy Bottom. I was greatly distressed to see its steps still there, leading up to a pile of broken bricks and concrete. Unlike some students and alumni, I understand Foggy Bottom residents' anger over the University's expansion into areas that were previously untouched. But Mr. Shea's article gave me perspective I didn't previous have. The way Foggy Bottoms residents talk, you would think they moved there not knowing the University existed. I'm not a big fan of Trachtenberg, but he may have a point when he implies the childish argument that the University was there first. I just think his priorities are in the wrong order. He tears down beautiful old buildings to make room for "green space" and then expands into Foggy Bottom neighborhoods to build huge residence halls he can't even raise the money to have named. (Will this new dorm be called New Hall II?) Why not build more housing space in the green spaces Trachtenberg didn't need to spend millions of dollars on improving with pretentious iron gates that never open or close? They wouldn't be able to house 700 students, but maybe the University shouldn't keep expanding its class sizes anyway. Accepting more and more students every year devalues the education they receive. Perhaps the Unversity should spend its money on better pay for professors in order to attract higher quality teachers. I'm proud to have earned my bachelor's degree at The George Washington University. I'd love to keep that feeling.

Class of '98

P.S. You've probably heard this 100 times already, but it's technically not the George Washington Unversity. It's The George Washington University and The GW Hatchet. It's pretentious, as well, but true.

Christopher Shea: Thanks for the comments. Not sure I have anything to add.

Palm Beach Gardens, Fla.: I am a George Washington University alumnus, and I graduated as President Trachtenberg took over.

Since then, I have seen the university grow in numbers and improve tremendously in acedemic reputation. Other than the "NIMBY" (not in my back yard) argument, what is there to complain about?

Don't you think the school's accomplishments should be embraced and appreciated by the area (especially since GWU is also very committed to the local community)?

Gary S. Lesser
B.A. International Affairs 1989

Christopher Shea: I remain agnostic on whether the neighbors should "embrace" G.W.'s accomplishments. But regardless of what I think, I don't see it happening (on balance).

Fairfax, Va.: I graduated from GWU in May of 2000 and during that time I witnessed the enormous expansion. GWU's growth has dramatically reduced available housing in Northwest D.C. and created a congested environment. A cap on the university's enrollment should be imposed and they should pay a tax to compensate the district for the enormous services they require from the government. This is especially important since all their students live in D.C. but don't pay the taxes regular D.C. residents pay (i.e. income and property tax).

Christopher Shea: The Board of Zoning Adjustment initially opposed an enrollment cap (of sorts), in the Spring of 2001. A federal judge asked them to reconsider, because he thought the cap was arbitrary and unfair.

The current plan is an alternative to a strict cap.

Washington D.C.: The University opened this nice workout facility for the students. Why don't they offer the facilities use to the neighborhood home owners? I guess I am missing what the University is giving back to the neighborhood, because I don't see it giving anything back.

Christopher Shea: This is a touchy and divisive issue.

G.W. has offered to let some residents use the wellness center. In return--or, in addition--it would like to expand the operating hours of the facility. (Now I think it has to close at 10 p.m., because of residents' concerns about noise, even though 10 is early for students.)

Some residents would love to join the gym; others think G.W. is just holding out a carrot to get them to cave on other issues.

It's one of the areas where communication has broken down.

Washington, D.C.: I think the argument "we were here first," although childish, is valid. For example, if you didn't want to live next to an airport you wouldn't buy a house next to Dulles. If you don't want to have thousands of 18-year-olds as your neighbors, don't buy a house next to a university. D-uh.

Christopher Shea: Here's what one resident told me (Sara Maddux, I believe, whom I mention in the story): Sure, if you move next door to Dulles, you should expect to hear jet planes. But what if you move into a house that's near a tiny, regional airport that handles a few prop planes a day. Ten years later you wake up and find it's turned into O'Hare.

Can't you complain then?

Maddux would say that her situation is comparable to that one.

Arlington, Va.: RE: Housing -

What incentives do you believe GW could/should offer students to live on campus? And what if students still choose to live elsewhere? Neither the university or the city/neighborhood can dictate to these young adults. . .

The neighborhood complaint reminds me of people who live near airports and then complain about the noise - well, duh!

Christopher Shea: As you can see, the airport analogy is a popular one.

Washington, D.C.: As someone who had to drop out of GW due to higher costs and lesser services, not to mention a massive reduction in my department's budget, my only regret with this article is that it was written several years too late. GW is not a university, but a money pit. Anytime anybody asks, I will tell them not to go there, but to get a real education.

I guess my only question would be: Did you find Trachtenberg to be as much a pompous jerk as I did when I attended in the mid-90s?

Christopher Shea: I found Trachtenberg to be quite smart and witty; he certainly has no shortage of self-confidence.

A tendency toward acerbic comments, however clever, can sometimes be a liability for someone in a position like his.

For example, his oft-quoted comment that G.W. is a "conglomerate" that "does some education on the side" is, as I see it, a comment on how different higher education is from the romanticized version some people cling to. (Leafy quads, etc.)And how different it is from higher education three or four decades ago.

I am surprised that his critics use the quote to demonstrate Trachtenberg's own nefarious intent.

Washington D.C.: I would like to note that what you stated as the "Elliott School of International Relations" is known as the "Elliott School of International Affairs."

Christopher Shea: Noted.

Foggy Bottom, D.C.: This is less of a question, but more of a comment. I am a senior at GWU, and having lived in two off-campus apartments in Foggy Bottom, I can only say that any of the elder co-habitants in the buildings I have lived in, have been most wonderful people. Furthermore, not all students who live in these apartment buildings treat it like a dormitory. There is not always "hootin' and hollerin'" at 2 AM as some people will accuse us of doing, and in fact, most off campus students also appreciate quiet as much as the older residents. If the elder residents of Foggy Bottom don't want us living in their buildings, and they don't want the university to expand further, they should take it up with the admissions office. It would do GW well to lower the admissions rate not only to augment their own reputation, but also to pacify students complaining about overcrowded classrooms and residents who wish to curb GW's expansion.

Christopher Shea: I lot of residents told me they don't have anything against students; it's just tough to have two groups with such different lifestyles, and such different schedules, living together.

Washington, D.C.: 10 years from now will GW be considered on the same tier as Georgetown and other top notch schools or will it be undergoing a period of contraction (your best guess)?
-current GW student

Christopher Shea: This is the $64,000 question. I hate to be coy, but I just don't know.

Chicago: GW having a sense of community, ha! GW is an urban school scattered all over the place already. They need satellites, and the school needs to accept the fact that it will never be able to compete with the Georgetown's of the world and go back to being a nice little University like Catholic.

Christopher Shea: It's hard to imagine the university giving up on its ambitions . . .

Washington, D.C.: In response to your questioner of Piscataway, he obviously has no clue about Foggy Bottom. Although the Columbia Plaza was originally built with a low interest loan intended for low income residents, it was a luxurious apartment (Ilived there from '69-96)catering to middle and higher income level folks. There was a six months waiting list to get in. It was populated by senators, congressmen, state department and other agency officials, as well as private sector invididuals. Only in the middle 80's did it start catering to students because of the ownership of Dr. Tauber who favored students to gain control of the voting that was tending to convert the apartment to condominiums.
As for Foggy Bottom, it has never been on the downswing over the last 40 years. It has been a haven for comfortable folks and a place with a wonderful ambiance to live.

As for the DC questioner regarding the GW intended use for the "old" hospital, I believe the intent is to build a multi-purpose structure that is at once income producing as well as useful to the interests of the Universisty.

Christopher Shea: Thanks for the historical background.

Again, I'm not sure what the plans are for the old hospital site.

washingtonpost.com:

That wraps up today's show. Thanks to everyone who joined the discussion.

Stay tuned to Live Online:
Travel Talk at 2 p.m. EST
Fast Forward: Rob Pegoraro at 2 p.m. EST
Metro Columnist Courtland Milloy at 2 p.m. EST
Author, First Daughter Susan Ford at 4 p.m. EST
Astrologer Charlene Lichtenstein at 6 p.m. EST

Did you know that you can follow more than one Live Online discussion at the same time? Just open another browser window and toggle back and forth between discussions! And, if you miss one, catch up with the Live Online transcripts.

Keep up with the latest in news, sports, politics and entertainment with washingtonpost.com e-mail newsletters.

NEW! Personalize your Post with mywashingtonpost.com. Get customized news, traffic, weather and more.

Washington, D.C.: I'm glad you included the little blurb on SJT's trouble with the ABA over the law school. I graduated from there in 1998 and you wouldn't believe the amount of animosity that a lot of the law school grads have towards SJT. Even though our facilities were poor, so much of our tuition money was given to the main campus. I am happy that, recently, more money is going towards improving the law school. But, because of SJT's tactics, a lot of alumni refuse to donate to the school. Also, I lived in Columbia Plaza for over 5 years (3 as a student and 2 after). When I first lived there the student-resident ratio was quite balanced. By my last year, it had turned into a dorm. I had to leave because, hey, you gotta sleep when you have a job. I know of a lot of other residents that left because of the freshman dorm atmosphere. There needs to be more dialogue between the students and residents so that both sides can understand each other's concerns.

Christopher Shea: I think it's a good idea, even if overoptimistic, to end this session with the point about "dialogue." G.W. and its neighbors should continue to talk.

And I've enjoyed chatting with all of you. You raised some perceptive points--positive and negative--about the story.

Hope we get to do this again sometime.

Best,
Chris Shea

| |



	<img SRC="washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/liveonline/redesign/adv_discusssion.htm" width=125 height=110 border=0>