Fraternity presidents recently rejected constitutional amendments proposed by the Interfraternity Council that would have required fraternity presidents to live on campus and serve two-semester terms. Although many presidents recognized benefits in both amendments, they argued that the rules would create too much change too quickly.
IFC President Ken Collins said these amendments would have made fraternity leadership more effective: An on-campus president has a greater degree of accessibility to other fraternity leaders and administrators, as well as a better understanding of life in the section. Because presidents are also partially legally liable for members' actions, an increased presence could discourage violations of University policy. Year-long terms, he added, would eliminate an extra learning curve upon beginning the term.
Requiring presidents to live on campus would have been a problem for fraternities like Kappa Sigma, with a relatively small section that cannot comfortably accommodate most upperclassmen, said fraternity president Ben Sands, a Trinity senior. "To say that the IFC can dictate such policy sets a dangerous and unattractive precedent," he said. "It was generally agreed that those fraternities that could make these changes should do so internally."
Sigma Nu president Rich Yanuklis opposed the on-campus amendment because he did not think his fraternity could implement the changes in time for fall 2000, as potential presidents have already made plans to live off campus.
Nevertheless, the Trinity senior added, "I think it's something we want to work toward. We have to start stressing the importance of leadership and staying on campus during the rushing process."
Fraternity presidents also defeated the two-semester requirement. Although Theta Chi president Eric Tencer recognized many of the plan's potential benefits, he strongly opposed it, explaining that he was concerned it would drastically limit opportunities for presidents to study abroad.
Tencer, a Trinity junior, also argued that semester-long terms allow a fraternity to oust a poor president or reward a good one with reelection. "The president may be reelected if the brotherhood believes he has done well and if he desires to run for the position again," he said.
Tencer added that one-year terms allow presidents to develop better relationships with administrators, but that "it has been our experience that we have had excellent presidents who have had great relations with the administration for half-year terms. We would be happy to work towards improving presidential and administration relations in other ways."
As a result of the voting, Dan Hill, Trinity '66 and an alumnus of Kappa Sigma, resigned from the IFC Advisory Board. Although he remains on good terms with many of the chapters, he said, "I was disappointed that they didn't make [any] changes. I explained to them how I felt about it, and how I wanted to see some change occur.... To me, it was a relatively easy decision."
Next year, Collins, a Trinity senior, hopes the amendments will be reintroduced "with the stipulation that the requirements would be required in perhaps two years or so, so frats can readjust themselves to expectations of leaders to prepare for those requirements," he said. "This is a longer-term policy, which I think is important. The timing is not the issue, so long as it happens eventually."
Get The Chronicle straight to your inbox
Signup for our weekly newsletter. Cancel at any time.