As DeltaBetaBaby stated, if you remember, we did support the fraternities when we enacted alcohol free housing resolutions in our groups. While NPC could not make a policy to govern all of us, each sorority had the responsibility of choosing what level of support they provided. Those in the top tier (AZD is one I remember), they passed a policy saying that their chapters could not hold functions with fraternities that were not alcohol free. Plain and simple. Those in the second tier (most of us, including D Phi E) said you know, that's a bit harsh, but we will not hold functions in fraternity housing that include alcohol. It was a whole functions vs. facilities vs. fraternity argument. Most sororities passed something in one of these two groups. The three sororities (SK, I know for sure) chose to say, we will support those groups who choose to follow the alcohol free housing policy, but we're not going to stop having functions in fraternity housing with those who aren't a part of this policy.
Now, there was a HUGE difference amongst the sororities in how the policies they chose were passed. Many had their international/national executive councils meet and pass something. D Phi E had an alcohol free task force that was made up of students and alums and met for a weekend to make its recommendation. Sigma Kappa took the issue to their entire collegiate delegation at their Convention, and they chose their policy.
No matter how much support we provide as sororities, fraternities have to want to follow these rules, and fraternities have to be willing to cut ties with their chapters who aren't going to comply. HQs needs to be a babysitter and be well aware of what's going on in their chapters, b/c if Sigma Phi's HQs KNEW this was happening (could be found in any reports the chapter sent in, meeting minutes, etc.) then they knew and didn't do anything, and they SHOULD be liable.
OK, now I'm going...I've rambled enough
