An email I received

[lambdaindenver]

The phrase "Burn and Turn" is nothing that I have heard in the general fraternity in 25 years - 4 executive directors and working with a bunch of chapters. It is nothing but a campaign slogan to get people fired up.

The fatal flaw in the logic of the legislation's proponent is that the time for alumni concern and involvement is with the chapter on a regular basis, not after the chapter has commited a hazing violation, an alcohol violation or some other problem that results in a campus dictating that Lambda Chi is to remove its chapter from that campus, or that results in Lambda Chi having to close a chapter. Alumni involvement to write an appeal to the general assembly, or to fuss with the Grand High Zeta, the staff or the presidents, to change the terms of a chapter's discipline is completely misguided. That is alumni involvement too little, too late and out of touch with the principles of Lambda Chi Alpha. The point to alumni involvement is to provide mentors and structure for the undergraduate members, not to provide someone who will run flak and smoke screens when they violate the law, the insurance requirements and fraternity policy. What sort of message does that send to the undergraduates about the lifetime commitment of our alumni?

[Tom Earp]

Bill as I remember, Tom Helmbock replaced George Spaysk, and Kip Zurker then replaced him in that capacity who in turn was replaced by todays Bill Farkas.

The title is Executive Director I beleive.

lambdaindenver, many times it may boil down to a Zeta being closed because of RM problems.

The Zeta feels wronged by IHQ and will fight to keep the fire burning. I am aware of the Zeta and from what I have garnered they did have problems and continued to have problems and were closed down.

I do not know all of the ins and outs, but, I am checking some of my sources to get more information.

I am proud of LXA and anyone who goes against the rules and regulations that were and are voted on by our members have to take the resposibility for their actions.

Remember, we as a Fraternity do not abide hazing or drinking under certain circumstances. If a Zeta is on probation, then the clamps come down for a reason, correct?

[Shane Foley]

Originally Posted by lambdaindenver

The phrase "Burn and Turn" is nothing that I have heard in the general fraternity in 25 years - 4 executive directors and working with a bunch of chapters. It is nothing but a campaign slogan to get people fired up.

The fatal flaw in the logic of the legislation's proponent is that the time for alumni concern and involvement is with the chapter on a regular basis, not after the chapter has commited a hazing violation, an alcohol violation or some other problem that results in a campus dictating that Lambda Chi is to remove its chapter from that campus, or that results in Lambda Chi having to close a chapter. Alumni involvement to write an appeal to the general assembly, or to fuss with the Grand High Zeta, the staff or the presidents, to change the terms of a chapter's discipline is completely misguided. That is alumni involvement too little, too late and out of touch with the principles of Lambda Chi Alpha. The point to alumni involvement is to provide mentors and structure for the undergraduate members, not to provide someone who will run flak and smoke screens when they violate the law, the insurance requirements and fraternity policy. What sort of message does that send to the undergraduates about the lifetime commitment of our alumni?

I was a staff member at HQ for five of the 10 years mentioned in the resolution (and related notes). I never heard the term/phrase "burn and turn" during my time on staff.

The point the resolution makes that I think does have some validity is that there is generally little due process when a chapter is closed. When this decision is made, the information associated with closing the chapter comes from only from the General Fraternity staff. Chapters are not afforded an opportunity to challenge the information presented by the staff or present a possible action plan. There is good reason that chapters are usually not made aware that they are being suspended. If chapter members knew the chapter was going to be suspended (in the future), the chance of the chapter having one last party with no risk management being followed would be high.

We do want to ensure:

1. Chapter risk management issues are thoroughly investigated.
Additional commentary--There were times when I knew a chapter would be closed based upon the information we knew about but a thorough investigation provided due process (or the appearance thereof). There was also a time when I thought a chapter would be closed but extra effort with the alumni and chapter leadership allowed for the chapter to remain open (Miami-FL).
2. Chapters and alumni are consulted (if possible) regarding alternatives to indefinite suspension.
3. Chapters and alumni are afforded the opportunity to be presented with the information that was presented to the GHZ and the opportunity to challenge that information and propose an alternative to indefinite suspension.

I tried to provide a balanced perspective based upon my knowledge and experience. Of course, it is just my two cents.

Shane Foley

[JonoBN41]

Originally Posted by Shane Foley

If chapter members knew the chapter was going to be suspended (in the future), the chance of the chapter having one last party with no risk management being followed would be high.

Considering a group of guys can have a party anytime they want to anyhow, is this argument really valid? I would think it more important to gather input from the chapter than worry about the prospect of their having a party.

[Shane Foley]

Originally Posted by JonoBN41

Considering a group of guys can have a party anytime they want to anyhow, is this argument really valid? I would think it more important to gather input from the chapter than worry about the prospect of their having a party.

YES, it is a valid argument. If a group of guys wants to stay open, there is some reason for them to follow the rules (even if they actually don't follow them). If the chapter knows it will be closed, there is no incentive to follow the rules. After all, they are going to be closed one way or another. There is also a concern that chapter members could damage the property if they have one.

[JonoBN41]

Oh right. Just like when the IRS said I owed more taxes a bunch of years ago and froze my bank accounts so I couldn't pull out all my money and stuff it under my mattress, but neither could I write them a check. Game over.

[Tom Earp]

Originally Posted by JonoBN41

Considering a group of guys can have a party anytime they want to anyhow, is this argument really valid? I would think it more important to gather input from the chapter than worry about the prospect of their having a party.

Jono, I think from what I am getting it was much more than this one thing, it was a culmination of many things.

Shane, I am sure you speak from experience from having worked for IHQ. Is it ever easy?

You are correct in the point, okay guys, you have broken the rules/regulations not set by IHQ or The Grand High Zeta, but by Brothers who voted on it.

Ergo, if you were in the wrong then you have to take the closing. It is no ones fault but yours alone.

If the School tells IHQ, if you want to have a chance to come back, then take care of it.

We still do not have the full story as I see it.