CC to review comments and vote on policy in the coming weeks
Mariah Joyce
Editor in Chief
Campus Council (CC) currently plans to pass the new alcohol policy in their upcoming meeting on April 28. Student responses to the new alcohol policy have been mixed.
The new version of the policy was released by CC via email on Tuesday, April 12. In the email, CC Chair Ben Taylor ’16 asked for feedback on the document from the campus community and said that Council would accept comments until April 20.
According to Taylor, CC planned to review the policy and take comments into consideration during the CC meeting on April 21 and hopes to pass the policy with the necessary changes on April 28.
However, Taylor added that if someone were to provide a new and pertinent comment after the April 20 deadline but in time for Council to still consider it before voting on April 28, they would be remiss not to discuss it.
Thus far, comments have been received directly onto the Google Doc through the link provided in the email, forwarded to CC, and sent directly to Taylor at his personal email address.
Taylor said that CC plans to go through those comments at their upcoming meetings, see if they relate to anything that CC has not already discussed, and then determine what, if any, changes need to be made. So far, Taylor has said that some of the comments from community members have brought to light issues that CC did not consider.
“I recently received an email from Common Grounds pointing out that their events usually end at 11 p.m. but that the policy includes a 10:30 p.m. limit for events on most weekdays,” said Taylor by way of example.
“If I recall correctly, this ending time provision was included in the original draft we received from the Alcohol Task Force, and I don’t believe that it was discussed much at Campus Council. Common Grounds has made us realize that this is a provision that needs to be discussed more fully before we pass anything,” he said.
CC member Theresa Spadola ’17 said she was pleased that CC clarified procedures and added a medical amnesty policy. However, Spadola said she wished the sanctions were not as hefty.
“I don’t believe a fine is a good deterrent or a good way to prevent a student from breaking the policy again,” said Spadola. She added that she wished drinking games were not banned, and that she was disappointed that under the current version of the policy, students playing drinking games where water, not beer, was involved, could still be penalized.
Student Government Association (SGA) President Spencer Gilbert ’17 said that SGA had also received feedback on the policy from the student body, some positive and some negative.
Gilbert said that while he supported the policy overall, he agreed with Spadola that he wished the sanctions had been removed, calling them “arbitrary fines.”
“The best change in my opinion was having more of a gradient system for when you have events so you don’t automatically have several new requirements that you probably can’t meet when you have an additional guest walk in the door,” said Gilbert.
Gilbert added that in his capacity as a Resident Assistant, he thinks this policy does a much better job of creating understandable, enforceable and fair regulations regarding consumption of alcohol.
“This policy, combined with fair enforcement and administration, will make RAs’ lives easier,” said Gilbert. “And with what I have seen so far from Res Life, I’m pretty optimistic.”
Members of the Alcohol Task Force (ATF) were much less optimistic about the new policy.
The ATF was a group of students who were tasked with creating a new alcohol policy in the fall semester under the supervision of Jess Etell, coordinator of student rights and responsibilities.
Sophie Nathanson ’17, who served on the ATF in the fall semester, said she felt the version of the alcohol policy released to the campus community did not reflect the desires or ideas of the ATF.
Cassie Huye ’17, another member of the ATF, said that the policy released to the campus community by CC “looks vaguely like” the policy submitted by the ATF.
Huye said that two changes made by the ATF that made it all the way to the CC version were the inclusion of wine for service at registered parties and the provision that open containers are permitted in hallways as long as the individual is in transit from one wet space to another.
Huye said the major change by the ATF not reflected in the CC version was the addition of keg service at registered campus parties.
“I am not sure why Campus Council removed this addition,” said Huye. “The Underground serves beer into cups that are the same as the cups we proposed for kegs, and binge drinking is possible through both kegs and cans.”
“Ultimately, the Alcohol Task Force was an incredibly frustrating process that turned out to be a waste of my time,” added Huye.
“A majority of the proposed changes are not reflected in this draft and the student representatives on the ATF have been manipulated to seem as though we endorse this version of the policy even though it is not what want many of us wanted,” she said.
Students who have missed the April 20 deadline for comments but feel they have a new suggestion for the alcohol policy can direct their comments to CC’s email address at campuscouncil@email.edu.