Alpha Chapter Woes

[Oldest_Pledge]

Originally Posted by EE-BO

It is impossible for me to provide the "other side" of the issue as I was not involved directly in any way.

I must disagree with you here. You can do anything you want if you apply yourself.

The fact that you are not directly involved with the situation coupled with your desire to see other issues handled in a more appropriate manner make you a highly qualified individual to share an objective report on the entire issue.

For what I have been ablet o read in the lbogs and here is that some brothers who did not live in the chapter house (reason not given) opted to rent a place to live. The fact that it near the chapter house and owned by a Beta Alum should have nothing to do with this. Then some activities took place at this "annex" that probably should not have.

Now, what is still confusing is the early converstation with the Advisors on this "annex." Since the Chapter and GF/AO have not published the minutes of the meetings, we do not know if they discussed this as a way to get around the dry rules or if they group that did get the "annex" announced they would be living there because they can not get a room in the chapter house.

If the chapter did discuss in official meetings ways to get around the dry house then it is possible that this reorganization is OK.

Maybe things regarding the GF/AO handling of the reorg could have been better. Maybe the Chapter Advisorory team should have been a little more determined in their efforts to get the chapter to operate better.

Just one brother's opinion from the outside looking in.

[EE-BO]

Originally Posted by Oldest_Pledge

I must disagree with you here. You can do anything you want if you apply yourself.

The fact that you are not directly involved with the situation coupled with your desire to see other issues handled in a more appropriate manner make you a highly qualified individual to share an objective report on the entire issue.

For what I have been ablet o read in the lbogs and here is that some brothers who did not live in the chapter house (reason not given) opted to rent a place to live. The fact that it near the chapter house and owned by a Beta Alum should have nothing to do with this. Then some activities took place at this "annex" that probably should not have.

Now, what is still confusing is the early converstation with the Advisors on this "annex." Since the Chapter and GF/AO have not published the minutes of the meetings, we do not know if they discussed this as a way to get around the dry rules or if they group that did get the "annex" announced they would be living there because they can not get a room in the chapter house.

If the chapter did discuss in official meetings ways to get around the dry house then it is possible that this reorganization is OK.

Hi Oldest Pledge,

When I said I cannot give you the other side of the story, I mean I am not privy to all the details and facts. I never will be- nor will anyone else outside of this situation I am sure.

But in my last post I really and truly gave you my sincere take and position. I am not sure what else I can say.

I would be shocked if there were official chapter meetings and meeting minutes detailing plans to get annex houses to host social events and activities that could not happen in the house. That does not make sense. It sounds like a legal argument to me- something a defense attorney might say.

I get the feeling many are looking at this from a legal standpoint. That is how the suspended members evidently feel. "The keg was empty" might work in a court of law, but not in a brotherhood.

We are not strangers asking strangers to make rulings on fact. This is all about a group of brothers and their advisors who knew each other well and could make reasonable judgements that to a certain extent other chapters have to trust if they wish to also be allowed to self-govern.

I don't know the Miami chapter like its alumni and active brothers do. And GF has to take reports from any chapter about RM issues seriously. If a chapter and its advisors cannot manage itself internally, what is GF to do?

How can people removed from the situation really get into the heads of those who were involved and make a fair decision- especially when both sides of this issue look at the facts and come up with vastly different ideas of what a fair decision is? GF has a list of policies there for a reason. If violations are reported, what else can they do but act? If they were to give Miami a pass here, would they not have to give everyone else a pass?

No system is perfect. And the imperfection in a fraternal order is that when a chapter cannot manage itself and members or alumni feel compelled to report incidents to nationals because they feel a critical boundary has been crossed, then the reality is that a uniform approach of action has to be taken. Truth be told, some might even call that an imperfection- but a practical reality.

The alternative is to pay far more dues to GF and then have them directly manage and oversee every chapter.

The men who were most close to this situation were unable to manage it themselves. And so as I see it, GF had to go in and look at the facts on the face and make a decision based solely on that. And the facts indicate, by the words of the suspended members themselves, that the presence and use of the annex houses was the key to this entire mess.

And from there, what else can you do but provide equal punishment against all who live in those houses? It may not be fair, but then again- what more could GF do to make it fairer? Really and truly, what more?

[EE-BO]

Hi again Oldest Pledge,

Just noticed someone posted some more early this morning- check out comment #8 in reply to the most recent blog post.

I wasn't going to go there because it was not my place- but someone did who apparently was around then, and you will see some insight into the background of all this.

[ECUJacob]

Orginally, I wasn't going to get too involved with this, but after reading the updated blog I felt the desire.

Based on the blog, there were three "Beta houses": the official, "The Fratican", and "The Slippery Slope".

...“The Fratican”, was an immediate red flag to certain individuals who believed it would be a detriment to the alcohol and substance-free Chapter House.

So obviously the chapter (or at least some members) observed the fact that this house would promote a lack of risk management and/or contribute to illegal actions.

at which point they assured the chapter that the keg was not even in use…it was being used as a stool to sit on (and they encouraged any administrator to check the expiration date on the keg itself).

It doesn't matter what the keg was being used for. You should have more common sense and choose not to place alcohol paraphenalia in plain sight of your advisors and Administrative Officers.

In a matter of a week, this proposal was struck down by the AO which proceeded to go over the top of our attempt at self-governance and place a punishment of six weeks social probation, barring the entire chapter from any social activities with other fraternities and sororities during that period.

You must realize that although you are given to the right and opportunity to govern yourselves, the AO (and it's representatives) are required to step in to prevent serious harm or worse to chapter members.

many men in the chapter arranged for a party at The Slippery Slope, so that the fraternity may rejoice in the accomplishment of bringing in another promising pledge class.

Beta Theta Pi requires us to have "dry" Rush. Until those members are inducted, they are considered rushees/bidees and should not have been placed in a situation involving alcohol with the chapter. It doesn't matter that you had a "social monitor"

According to those present, C.B. and M.O. were “manning the beer tower” and encouraging certain individuals in the room to drink, including the soon-to-be pledge. This young man, who was to be inducted into the latest pledge class of the Alpha Chapter, proceeded to vomit following his drinking from the beer tower.

So, basically your chapter members were strongly encouraging a rushee to drink... and he vomited afterwards. Once again, yet another example of bad judgement.

Apparently, an individual in the chapter who felt there was a serious infraction at the party, went straight to our advisory team/AO to notify them of a crisis in the chapter that was unapparent to most of its members. This person, who is still unknown, went above the chapter’s governance and his ability to personally hold his brother accountable for the alleged action, and instead went to an external body whose job it is NOT to govern our chapter.

I do agree that the person should've at least spoken to this chapter members first. However, given the attitude and tone of this blog, I would not be suprised if some members did not feel comfortable doing so.

The widespread ignorance in the chapter of the fact that there was any problem at all with the current state of affairs sent things to a boiling point.

Your chapter should be COMMUNICATING. That is not the fault of the AO.

However, one of the most absurd things that could not be ignored by those voting on the hazing incident was the fact that those prospective betas who were “hazed” were not even aware they were a part of a hazing incident or any event that caused them serious discomfort, and continue to be equally unaware that they were a part of the issue that is causing serious turmoil in our great chapter.

I person's knowledge or acceptance of a hazing situation does not change the definition of the word.

Now, after all that, I must say that from what I've read, the AO could've done a much better job of communication and documenting the reasons for their actions. If I were ever part of a chapte reorg, I would want concrete facts and reasons for being removed or placed on a different status. However, since I was not present for their discussions, I can't assume to know what they were thinking.

In the end, I hope that the chapter and its members as a whole can move forward in a positive way.

[Coramoor]

Just a minor point.

If a keg is in a brother house...why is it any of the GFs business? Will I get in trouble right now if they find out I have a bottle of liquor in my room?

It shouldn't matter if I have a case of beer or thirty kegs lined up in my basement...it's my house and I can do whatever the hell I damn well please. The only exception to this is if I was forcing pledges to drink or inviting pledges over during rush to drink with me.

Beta Theta Pi requires us to have "dry" Rush. Until those members are inducted, they are considered rushees/bidees and should not have been placed in a situation involving alcohol with the chapter. It doesn't matter that you had a "social monitor".

I don't know if I agree with this. Using this logic anytime you go to a bar you are breaking the dry rush rules because everyone guy there is a potential pledge. If I party with someone in the fall and then end up pledging in the spring...did I break any rules? How about if we chilled together in highschool?
Like I said, dry events during rush but the rest of the time it's game on.

[ECUJacob]

^ That's taking it a bit to the extreme. You won't consider every guy in the bar a rushee. That's just being foolish. The point is, if you are entertaining a guest who is interested in joining the Fraternity, then you should obey the law and our Code.

I'll just go ahead and quote myself:

Until those members are inducted, they are considered rushees/bidees and should not have been placed in a situation involving alcohol with the chapter.

He specifically stated in his blog that they were celebrating the fact that they had handed out bids. Therefore, these were not pledges, they were rushees, most of which I assume were not 21 years of age.

Allow me to provide you (and everyone else) with Beta's Risk Management Policy, since it seems some people haven't read it.

The Risk Management Policy of Beta Theta Pi includes, but is not limited to, the following provisions which shall apply to all fraternity chapters, colonies and levels of fraternity membership.

1. The possession, use and/or consumption of alcoholic beverages by any fraternity member or guest while on chapter premises, during an official fraternity event, or in any situation sponsored or endorsed by the chapter must be in compliance with all applicable laws of the state, province, county, city, institution or other controlling entity.
2. Abuse of the consumption of alcoholic beverages by any fraternity member or guest while on chapter premises, during an official fraternity event, or in any situation sponsored or endorsed by the chapter shall be prohibited.
3. To clarify the policies stated in (1) and (2) above, the following regulations are adopted but are not meant to be all inclusive:
a. No fraternity members, individually or collectively, shall purchase for, serve, or sell alcoholic beverages to minors (i.e., those under legal "drinking age")
b. No alcoholic beverages may be purchased through the chapter treasury, nor may the purchase of alcoholic beverages for members or guests be undertaken or coordinated by any member in the name of, or on behalf of the chapter. Pooling of funds is not permitted
c. No chapter may co-sponsor or co-finance a function where alcohol is purchased by any of the host chapters, groups or organizations
d. All recruitment activities will be dry functions
e. Common containers (punch bowls, etc.) for serving alcohol or bulk distribution of alcohol including kegs, party balls, etc., are strictly prohibited unless supplied and managed by a licensed caterer (i.e., third party vendor)
f. "Open parties", meaning those with unrestricted access by non-members of the fraternity without specific invitation, are prohibited
g. No member shall permit, tolerate, encourage or participate in "drinking games"
h. No chapter may co-sponsor an event with an alcohol distributor, charitable organization, or other entity licensed to sell or give away alcoholic beverages where alcoholic beverages are sold or otherwise provided to those present.
i. No alcohol shall be present at any Pledge activity of a chapter.
j. A sufficient number of mature party monitors must be adequately trained to handle alcohol and its distribution, and must be instructed not to consume alcoholic beverages prior to, or while fulfilling, the role of party monitor.
k. Designated drivers or alternative transportation for those individuals who cannot safely drive their vehicles must be provided at every chapter event
l. Other policies and regulations which may be imposed on fraternities or their members by law or the host institution, adopted by the chapter not in conflict herewith, or inculcated by educational seminars endorsed or provided by the General Fraternity are included by reference
m. The number of persons invited to any event sponsored or co-sponsored by Beta Theta Pi where alcohol is present is limited to three times the chapter size (a 3:1 ratio or 3 guests per member) or, if less, the maximum occupancy of the facility according to fire standards. Larger events are subject to approval, when notified two weeks prior to the event, of the Administrative Secretary.
-- adopted by the Board of Trustees 5/97
4. The possession, sale and/or use of any illegal drugs or controlled substances at any chapter house, sponsored event or at any event an observer would associate with the fraternity, is strictly prohibited

[Coramoor]

Just because it is in the rules doesn't make it right.