[19547] in APO-L
Re: Fraternity houses
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Amy C Masters)
Fri Oct 30 01:04:47 1998
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 00:54:41 -0500
Reply-To: Amy C Masters <acmast01@ATHENA.LOUISVILLE.EDU>
From: Amy C Masters <acmast01@ATHENA.LOUISVILLE.EDU>
To: APO-L@LISTSERV.IUPUI.EDU
In-Reply-To: <199810280100.SAA03681@rintintin.Colorado.EDU>
On Tue, 27 Oct 1998, Jamey Wood wrote:
> However, not one person has been able to argue that if a
> chapter were to have a house, it would somehow be violating what APO
> stands for.
That's questionable. I think a pretty good argument could be made saying
that this detracts from the concept that this is a service organization
first, and a social organization second. I have difficulty coming up with
a service-oriented rationale for having a house.
> I believe that a chapter
> should be able to do anything that it wants to, as long as it does not
> violate the base values of APO or significantly threaten the name or liab=
ility
> of the national organization. Our national structure in in place to supp=
ort
> chapters, not to stereotype and restrict them for the sake of convenience=
=2E
The liability is the biggest problem with the house proposal, in
particular the provision in the proposed change that allows non-members to
live there. I definitely do not want to be responsible for stupidity on
the part of people who aren't even my brothers. Not to mention what it
could potentially do to our non-profit status with the government. And as
far as stereotyping goes, I think we would present a much more
stereotypical appearance to the rest of the world if we had a "frat
house."
> The few arguments that I do challenge are those saying that one brother's
> membership dues would pay for another brother's housing, or that chapters
> would turn away pledges when the house ran full. These arguments make
> unwarranted assumptions about the local financing and management of a hou=
se.
> Why couldn't a chapter place the entire financial burden for a house upon
> those members who live in it? And who is to say that all pledges would b=
e
> required to live in the house? Again, these arguments place an outside
> judgement upon decisions that should be made by the local chapter.
But where does the money come from to BUY the house in the first place?
From=20the people living in it? I devote a lot of time and money to APO,
but I'm not sure I'd be willing to go that far. Especially for a
residence that I don't plan on occupying long-term. These are college
students we're talking about here, and they don't have the money in most
cases to handle that. Or to replace a dead water-heater, or put on a new
roof, or general maintenance on the house. Some Greek organizations avoid
this by renting or leasing from their school, but I can't imagine a school
that wouldn't throw a screaming fit over open co-ed residency in one of
their buildings.
What it comes down to, IMHO, is that the problems this presents far
outweigh the (questionable) benefits.
=09=09=09=09Respectfully YiLFS,=20
=09=09=09=09=09Amy.
(Insert standard disclaimer here)
