Both university and greek officials, after studying the pros and cons of the proposed social policy, began the negotiation process to revise it.

The policy, which addresses issues such as the banning of philanthropy sponsorship from local bars and specific hours when greek organizations are allowed to have parties, was drafted last spring by the Campus Security Greek Subcommittee as an effort to cut back on the risks fraternities and sororities face. The subcommittee gave its first draft to the chapter presidents about a month ago, who then brought some of their concerns to the meeting.

‘We explained that the policy is in no way set in stone,’ said Laura Madelone, director of Off-Campus Student Services and a member of the subcommittee.

Members of the Chancellor’s Commission on Substance Abuse Prevention and the Campus Security Greek Subcommittee heard about 25 fraternity and sorority chapter presidents voice their concerns about the policy for the first time Monday night.

‘It was basically an open forum for all chapter presidents to get a chance to share their opinions on the social policy,’ said Missy Morrison, a senior musical theatre major and vice president of SU’s Panhellenic Association. ‘They got a chance to talk it out and get more understanding of reasons behind the new social policy.’

Monday’s meeting was part of a monthly roundtable discussion between fraternity and sorority chapter presidents and Joe Oravecz, associate dean of students in the Office of Greek Life and Experiential Learning. Four members of the Campus Security Greek Subcommittee sat in on the social policy discussion as well.

‘We’re looking for creative and helpful solutions,’ said Rebecca Reed Kantrowitz, the director of the Office of Residence Life and member of the subcommittee. ‘In the end, it’s the students who are going to have to live by the policy.’

The chapter presidents addressed several main issues in depth, such as concerns about underground chapters and non-greek organizations that wouldn’t fall under the policy, Madelone said.

‘Some greek organizations would be singled out compared to some athletic clubs that sometimes function as fraternities because they aren’t governed by the social policy,’ said Michael Nagy, a senior aerospace engineering major and Interfraternity Council vice president.

Nagy also said that too much control over parties could drive them into off-campus houses or residence halls.

Though the social policy primarily addresses issues with fraternities, the restricted party hours would greatly affect sorority affairs.

‘Because we are all dry chapters, our only option is to have parties at local taverns,’ Morrison said. ‘We can only have these events on off-nights when no one will be at the bars.’

Other concerns included third-party alcohol vendors, which is when someone buys beer from a store and then sells it to others, and bars’ sponsorship of philanthropic events. Most chapter presidents acknowledged the university’s reasoning behind a social policy.

‘The university is trying to cut back on partying – what every university in the country is trying to do,’ Morrison said.

In the committee’s first draft of the new social policy, parties would only be allowed from 4 p.m. Friday to 2 a.m. Sunday.

‘A lot of it has to do with alcohol, but if our members who are over 21 want to have a private party, they should be able to,’ said Tom Toole, a senior finance and accounting major and the IFC president .

For Toole, it comes down to the issue of self-governance.

‘We deserve the opportunity to self-govern our organization,’ Toole said. ‘We’re capable of doing that, and we hope the university sees that.’

The committee hopes to turn in its final draft to the chancellor’s commission in spring for implementation in Fall 2004.

Published on November 11, 2003 at 12:00 pm