[23854] in APO-L
[APO-L] Houses
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Mark Stratton)
Thu Aug 28 09:29:05 2003
Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2003 08:26:25 -0500
Reply-To: Mark Stratton <mark_stratton@yahoo.com>
From: Mark Stratton <mark_stratton@yahoo.com>
To: APO-L@LISTSERV.IUPUI.EDU
Brothers,
I've been reading with interest the discussion regarding housing, and
whether or not we should change that policy. The main prohibition against
property (if I recall correctly) exists not in the National Bylaws, but in
the Articles of Incorporation. Those Articles are the *legal* document that
forms Alpha Phi Omega as an entity, and they clearly state that only Alpha
Phi Omega may own property (I'm paraphrasing). There is no delegation of
power to allow any of the subunits of Alpha Phi Omega own property. There
are provisions to allow chapters to maintain an office or regular meetings
rooms.
This prohibition existed long before I joined in 1994, and though I can't
speak with any certainty, I'll offer my thoughts as to why it exists. From
the "Feel Good" level, it stands as a statement that we ARE different than
social organizations, that we do not maintain houses for our chapters, thus
freeing us up from the worries of property maintenance (if you are a
homeowner you'd understand) to allow us to focus on other things.
There is also, and I think this is probably the real reason, the interest of
liability. If the Fraternity were to allow Chapters to own houses, can you
imagine the world of liability concerns the Fraternity would be exposed to?
It is just far too great a concern to say, "let's just change it." The
policy that you are considering was adopted, I believe, in the best interest
of Alpha Phi Omega. Any change to this policy (indeed, to ANY policy of the
Fraternity) should be in the same vein. Tell me: how would allowing
chapters to have houses, with all of the attendant liability issues, be in
the best interest of Alpha Phi Omega? I cannnot see ANY way that it is. It
might be in the best interest of a chapter, or a series of chapters, but not
in the Fraternity's interest. Our chapters are important, but collecitvely,
they represent much more than the sum of the chapters.
I would hope that people do not seriously pursue this policy for it is
doorway to serious liability issues, and I'm hoping that the door will stay
closed. We do have a difficult enough time with Risk Management items,
violations of membership policies and the like. Let us not add one more
(and a large one at that) item to that list.
But, I will say, it's been a very interesting discussion. I don't post this
to try to end the debate, but to help other understand just how serious this
is - it goes far beyond something as simple as saying, "but it's just a
house." (And though that specific argument hasn't come up, it has in the
past.)
Fraternally,
Mark
