CCAOD Hits the Streets

by Alexander Wilson

Dean of the College Lee Pelton announced the new campus alcohol policy this Tuesday. The policy, a compromise between the Interim Report of the College Committee on Alcohol and Other Drugs (CCAOD) and a counter report presented by the Co-ed Fraternity Sorority Council (CFSC), will take effect on May 1st.

The policy includes a new keg formula, a ban on kegs during Summer Term, stricter enforcement of the 3am closing time of social functions, harsh penalties for violation of the policy, and retains the mandate that Safety and Security take over monitoring duties.

The relevant Greek organizations endorsed the proposal.

While the policy states that S&S monitor teams will be granted “immediate access” to CFS houses, they are to work in conjunction with student monitors in a yet to be determined fashion.

With the exception of the Summer keg ban, it appears that a compromise between CCAOD and CFSC was easy to formulate due to the similarity of the two proposals.

Pelton expressed his happiness that the CFSC report “endorsed in principle many of the recommendations of the CCAOD” report. In fact, most of the changes to the CCAOD report made by Pelton, as a concession to student opinion, seem largely cosmetic.

S&S will be allowed into CFS houses, harsh penalties will be assessed to violators, the peer monitoring system will be dismantled, a twenty-four keg limit for the whole campus will be enforced, and kegs will be banned during the Summer.

The compromise with CFSC consisted of two additional kegs permitted per house, within the overall twenty-four keg limit, an extra hour before social functions must end, and one, rather than many, alcohol management plan.

It is unclear whether these limited concessions are merely a result of minimal requests from CFSC or if Pelton ignored more extensive requests. The speed of acceptance with which CFSC president Muckle greeted the arrangement indicates the former.

The issue of S&S entry to CFS houses was the most prominent in the widespread campus outrage over the initial CCAOD report.

The new policy also discussed the need to provide more late night social options to limit the influence of CFSC houses at Dartmouth. It includes a reiteration of the College’s right to enforce it rules in privately owned CFS houses and to prohibit students from living in Greek-letter houses not associated with the College.

The policy also restates the need for tougher sanctions to reduce underage drinking based on Dartmouth’s legal responsibilities under the Drug-Free Schools and Communities Act of 1989. Under this act, an institution which does not attempt to prevent illicit drug and alcohol use by students and employees is ineligible for federal funding. The fact that this act has never been enforced by the government, an issue raised by students early in the CCAOD debate, was not addressed.

Pelton responded in his report to other student concerns about the possibility of the policy, as outlined, increasing high-risk drinking by saying that the new regulations “seek to balance the acceptable levels of risk while keeping in mind we have legal obligations.”

Many campus leaders praised Pelton for his fairness and his willingness to accept the views of the students. Case Dorkey IV ’99, Student Assembly Vice President for administrative and faculty relations, said, “I think that Pelton was very reasonable in how he handled the whole situation. He made a real concerted effort to listen to what students had to say and to incorporate their input into his final report.”

The new keg formula strikes a balance between CCAOD’s and CFSC’s recommendations. The limit on kegs in a single CFS organization on a given night is set at five. CCAOD recommended three while CFSC had called for a six keg limit. Muckle referred to this as a “good compromise.”

Pelton did, however, institute a ban on kegs during Summer Term, when the vast majority of students are below the legal drinking age. The summer keg ban was one of CCAOD’soriginal recommendations,but was firmly opposed by the CFSC.

Though not enthusiastic about the change, Muckle capitulated, saying that Pelton, “made a good point” about the limited number of legal drinkers.

The new policy does not change the 3 am closing time for social functions, but urges CFS houses to stop serving alcohol before then to ensure compliance with the deadline. CCAOD’s report called for a 2am closing time.

CCAOD recommended that all CFS houses be forced to develop a new alcohol management plan in order to bring themselves into line with federal regulations. Pelton chose to accept instead a single plan to be applied by all houses, as requested by the CFSC. The nature of this plan is still under discussion.

Pelton also implemented the CCAOD recommendation that harsh penalties be assessed to CFS houses that violate the new policy. The exact nature of these penalties was not announced either by Pelton or by the initial CCAOD report. However, sources with knowledge of the original CCAOD deliberations stated that loss of rush for a first violation and derecognition for a second violation received majority support. Whether Pelton supports these penalties remains unknown.

The CFS plan will have to include an accommodation with S&S monitoring. Under the new alcohol policy, S&S teams will be granted admission into CFS houses, and acceptance of the CFS management plans is contingent on the entry of those teams into the houses without delay.

The outpouring of criticism among students over the decision to allow S&S patrols into CFS houses makes the eventual decision over their role in the new policy the essential factor in how the policy is received.

Aside from the determination that S&S will have a considerable role in alcohol monitoring, Pelton made no definitive statements as to what he feels is necessary.

Even among those who were generally positive about the policy, there is a feeling that the eventual relationship between S&S and the CFS system will make the difference between success and failure. Dorkey said, “A lot depends on how Safety and Security’s involvement plays out. I think it will only cause more problems to have S&S just arriving at the doors and getting immediate access. If there isn’t trust between the two groups, a spirit of cooperation rather than antagonism, then there won’t be any positive results.”

CFSC representatives refused to comment on their reaction to the S&S section of the policy, and to share their thoughts on the workability of that section.

Pelton said that the new alcohol policy should be subjected to an annual review and is not to be considered a permanent solution to the alcohol situation.

Some students have expressed concerns that this statement opens the door to an increasingly harsh policy that avoids the possibility of overwhelming student outrage by making incremental changes rather than one huge one.

The policy will go into affect on May 1st, the same day as the deadline for the submission of a CFS plan for joint student-S&S monitoring. The nature of the eventual monitoring system will depend on the substance of that CFSC report.