By Mary Shinn and Yvonne Gonzalez
Disciplinary records of four ASU fraternities show their national organizations did not always collaborate or agree with University decisions in instances of misconduct that occurred over the last three years.
Wednesday’s article in The State Press focused on the University’s disciplinary practices for fraternities, but these groups also answer to their national organizations.
Some organizations work closely with their chapters to investigate claims of misconduct, while others allow chapters to deal with issues internally.
Ronald Hicks, ASU associate dean of students with the Office of Student Rights and Responsibilities, said collaboration creates a climate where all parties can discuss and address behaviors of concern.
“Working with the national organization sends a clear message to the individual membership that the University and the national organization agree that behavior that leads to sanctions is unacceptable to ASU and the beliefs of the organization as a whole,” Hicks said.
Documents obtained by The State Press detailing communication between the University and Delta Sigma Phi, Sigma Nu, Alpha Epsilon Pi and Sigma Chi show differing strategies for collaboration between the chapters’ nationals and ASU.
Alpha Epsilon Pi defended its ASU chapter on several occasions in communications with University administrators.
After ASU placed Alpha Epsilon Pi on probation in 2008 for underage drinking, Marc Katz, the lawyer for Alpha Epsilon Pi, sent Student Rights and Responsibilities a letter accusing ASU of harassing the chapter. He said the national organization refused to accept the charges and that the fraternity was being bullied out of existence.
“Quite frankly, it appears that ASU’s actions are simply an attempt to harass the chapter,” Katz said in a letter to the University.
Katz is an alumnus of Alpha Epsilon Pi and has contributed more than $100,000 in donations to the national fraternity.
The University responded by saying the chapter had neither been suspended nor expelled and that having alcohol on campus and distributing it to minors was against Arizona Board of Regents policy.
AEPi CEO Andrew Borans responded to administrators in 2008 by saying the charges were unacceptable and they were likely to hurt the fraternity.
In September 2010, after the chapter was turned in for sexual hazing, both Borans and an AEPi lawyer objected to the University’s decision to revoke the chapter’s recognition.
Members of Alpha Epsilon Pi are still living in the house on Alpha Drive and are trying to regain University recognition this fall.
Katz and Borans did not respond to requests for comment.
Sigma Nu’s national organization also worked closely with ASU and is still in constant contact with the chapter to ensure the men are meeting the fraternity’s expectations.
Fred Dobry, Sigma Nu’s national director of risk reduction, said Sigma Nu tries to use a combination of punishment and education to improve fraternity behavior when problems arise.
“In some cases there needs to be an investigation and that is a huge learning experience [for the chapter],” Dobry said.
Sigma Nu does not get involved in every disciplinary case, he said, but the national organization wants to be notified in cases of underage drinking connected with fraternity events.
Documents show Dobry was involved with the disciplinary action taken after the March 2010 stabbing of a Sigma Nu member and allegations of hazing, and that ASU was responsive to his requests.
Records show Delta Sigma Phi’s national organization worked closely with the University, even sending its assistant director to Tempe in September 2008 to investigate the “Gallon Challenge” hazing incident in which the chapter’s members chugged milk and vomited onto passing cars from the University Drive footbridge, causing an accident that injured a mother and her 6-year-old daughter.
In a May 2010 letter to the fraternity from ASU notifying the men their recognition was revoked, the University applauded the national organization for its actions and the level of support it provided.
Delta Sigma Phi Executive Director Scott Wiley said the national organization wants and expects to work closely with universities.
“We do believe in self-governance, but we do have a responsibility to work with university partners to make sure the chapter experience is consistent with our standards and principles and the University’s mission as well,” Wiley said in a telephone interview. “At Arizona State, the men who were recruited did not have those shared expectations.”
He said Delta Sigma Phi will not re-establish at ASU with the same men who had been there when its chapter was revoked.
“We will wait for them to graduate and we will recruit new members,” Wiley said.
Sigma Chi’s national organization shifted its focus two years ago from disciplining chapters as a whole to identifying individuals responsible for breaking fraternity and university codes of conduct.
“When they take care of their own problems it’s not like they are being babysat anymore,” Dunn said.
He said the national organization is more likely to get involved with a chapter-wide problem or when a university requests their intervention.
Since Sigma Chi switched to individual accountability, the national organization hasn’t shut down a chapter, Dunn said. Shutting down a chapter is taking the easy way out, he said, and that often means dumping behavioral problems back into the general population.
“I would much rather roll up my sleeves and stand shoulder to shoulder with the university and deal with those issues,” Dunn said.
Dunn, who lived in Arizona and worked closely with the ASU chapter, said the University has become far more proactive in dealing with chapter issues as they arise instead of waiting for the situation to get out of control.
“The schools I worry about are the ones I never hear from,” Dunn said.
Reach the reporters at mary.shinn@asu.edu and ymgonzal@asu.edu
