the minaret

Kappa Sigma will appeal the university’s decision to remove the fraternity from campus until 2010, according to John Filleti, the organization’s representative at the Nov. 2 hearing.

It appears the fraternity will argue that the sanctions (the fraternity’s expulsion) were inappropriate.

The fraternity was found responsible for personal abuse and not complying with university directives by an administrative board.

The board ruled that Kappa Sigma violated its strict month-old probation terms when fraternity members failed to seek medical attention for an extremely intoxicated pledge on the night of Oct. 21, according to Judicial Coordinator Mike Gilmer.

This was the second time in a month that the fraternity was found responsible for failing to comply with directives. The strongly worded terms of their Oct. 4 sanctions stated that the organization would be removed from campus if found responsible for any violation.

The appeal will go through Gina Firth, associate dean of students, who will decide whether to hear the appeal herself or put it to an administrative board. As of press time Firth said she is unclear which option she will pursue.

Firth said that a valid appeal must meet one of three criteria: it must present new information that was unavailable at the time of the hearing, demonstrate that the hearing was not conducted according to standards, or motion that the sanctions given were inappropriate.

Judging from Filleti’s statements, it seems that this latter criterion will be the basis of Kappa Sigma’s appeal.

“In my opinion, the violations we have been found responsible for do not warrant removal from the University of Tampa,” said Filleti. “We do acknowledge that any actions by members of the fraternity are a direct reflection of Kappa Sigma.”

Filleti said even the sanctions handed down during the first hearing (Oct. 3) were harsh.

“Note that no other fraternity or sorority at UT has been asked to meet such strict guidelines,” he said.

Filleti feels “as though it was hard for the board to ignore prior cases and that this trial may not have been looked at as an isolated incident the way it should have.”

Stephanie Russell Holz, assistant dean of students, responded, saying that “it’s a sad day when a fraternity loses their recognition; it’s not usually one event that does that.”

“Unfortunately Kappa Sigma has a history,” said Holz. “It’s not a decision that is taken lightly.”

While Filleti does not feel that there is a vendetta against the fraternity, he acknowledges that “our reputation precedes us, and our previous violations in the past may cast a negative shadow.”

Yet Holz maintains that Kappa Sigma’s shadow has plenty of positives as well. “From my perspective, Kappa Sigma has always had a lot of school spirit and has had individual members who have participated in many leadership roles on campus, including two SG presidents in the last four years.”

Found responsible for personal abuse

The administrative board, which comprised faculty and staff, Kappa Sigma for personal abuse as well as not complying with directives.

According to Gilmer, the fraternity was held responsible for the actions of a few of its members who the board determined did not seek medical help for a pledge with severe alcohol poisoning.

A responding security officer indicated that, if left alone in his room, the student may have died.

Gilmer said that the organization was charged because the brothers were deemed to be acting as representatives of the fraternity, and Kappa Sigma is either not educating their brothers about the dangers of alcohol poisoning or their brothers are not heeding this education.

Found not responsible on two charges

Casey Stevens, director of civic engagement, filed charges after the alcohol poisoning which included alcohol and community welfare violations, as it was alleged that alcohol was served at a fraternity event earlier that night.

Serving alcohol at the Big Brother Event would have been a violation of university directives, as it was not on Kappa Sigma’s events calendar that it was ordered to provide to pledges and the Dean of Students as part of their Oct. 4 sanctions.

The administrative board found it more likely than not that there was no alcohol at the fraternity event, and Kappa Sigma was found not responsible for alcohol and community welfare violations, according to Gilmer.

In the course of the hearing, a Kappa Sigma representative made statements indicating that the fraternity had failed to give all their pledges an events calendar, so they were found responsible for not complying with directives, Gilmer said.

Filleti said that Kappa Sigma has been working to improve their organization and have a more positive impact since the Oct. 4 compliance with directives sanctions.

“We have looked to our alumni advisers for support and began to make a change for the better,” said Filleti.

For Kappa Sigma, Filleti said that the appeal offers the hope of continuing this change and the chance to redeem themselves.

“We would like the chance to ensure nothing like this would ever happen again,” said Filleti. “The current members of Kappa Sigma understand the utmost importance of abiding by and adhering to school policy.”

According to Gina Firth, the fraternity has five business days from receiving their final paperwork from the Office of Student Conduct to request their appeal.