UC Party Fund: Redux

Our Response to Dean Pilbeam October 4, 2007

See here.

Dean Orders “Immediate End” of Party Fund October 2, 2007

Wow. I woke up to receive the following email in my inbox, along with about fifteen replies and press queries. My first thought was — what happened to our previous months of negotiation? Almost every issue mentioned in the letter has already been addressed. Even if more issued remained, they could have been addressed in the meeting that had been abruptly canceled. Oh, and by the way — the email was sent at 7:28AM, just two hours before said meeting was scheduled to begin.

The message is also posted online at: http://www.college.harvard.edu/deans_office/communications/302.html

from David Pilbeam <pilbeam@fas.harvard.edu>
to rpeters@fas.harvard.edu, sundquis@fas.harvard.edu, ragalie@fas.harvard.edu, anli@fas.harvard.edu,
date Oct 2, 2007 7:28 AM
subject Undergraduate Council Party Grant Program

Dear Ryan, Matt, Mike, and Zander,

In light of your most recent email to Dean Nelson, I write concerning the Undergraduate Council Party Grant program. I have been briefed in detail about the discussions that have taken place with the Committee on House Life, the Resident Deans, and Deans Nelson and Kidd about the need to modify the UC Party Grant program in response to various important concerns, such as the potential reimbursement of minors for the purchase of alcohol, inappropriate advertising of parties, and inadequate management of these events.

While we are sympathetic to the goals of the program — to stimulate more social events for students — all reports I have received from House Masters, Resident Deans, and other members of my staff convince me that the UC Party Grant program is inherently flawed, and must be ended immediately. From this date forward no further funds can be dispersed for private parties, including any that may have already been approved for forthcoming dates.

My reasoning is as follows. First, the UC has not assumed responsibility — and, as emphasized in your most recent email to Dean Nelson, affirmatively refuses to assume responsibility — for verifying that underage students will not be reimbursed for purchasing alcohol. As sponsors of the Party Grant program, it was the UC’s responsibility to ensure that grants that included funds for alcohol did not go to students under 21. Since you have not assumed this responsibility, we cannot continue to allow funds to be used for this purpose, as institutional funds can never be used to sponsor private events with alcohol that the College has no way of regulating.

Second, it is quite apparent that the UC Party Grant program, in practice, has funded parties where the focus is on drinking. Alcohol abuse is the number one student health concern at Harvard as it is on other campuses nationwide. We have taken many proactive steps to mitigate the harm that results from high-risk drinking and have also tried to develop spaces on campus where students can socialize with alcohol safely and legally. The UC Party Grant program is at odds with the message that students, parents, faculty and administrative leaders of this community should be sending about responsible and safe alcohol use.

Finally, the Party Grant program has caused problems for the Houses in multiple ways. The grants promote events for large groups of people in relatively small spaces, ultimately leading to overcrowding in student suites and hallways. The common spaces of the House are better suited for hosting parties with guests, and in these settings Beverage Authorization Teams can be used to make sure that only those over 21 may be served alcohol.

Instead, I urge you to consider making grants to House Committees to support House-wide events. The HoCos should use the funds for social, cultural, recreational and/or educational programs in the Houses, open to all House members. The UC also might consider making grants to the DAPA Grants Program to help party planners purchase food, soft drinks and other activities that provide an alternative focus to the alcohol that, as now we know from experience, has been at the center of the events funded by the UC Party Grants program.

I also would like you to consider recommitting your funds for uses that will benefit the majority of students who are members of student organizations. I remind you that these funds are collected in the form of “student activity fees” and are intended to be used for events to which all students may be invited and/or for the direct support of student organizations. We have a growing number of student organizations (270 to 390 in four years), and these groups need the support of the UC. Failing to fund groups because resources have been diverted to individuals for parties is not in support of the greater good of the students you represent, not in keeping with your mission, and not the intended purpose of these funds.

I would like you to consider the options available to the UC (along the lines of the suggestions I have listed above) when you recommit the funds formerly committed to the Party Grant program. Although my decision that the Party Grant program must be discontinued is final, members of my staff will work with you to find the best ways to redirect those funds.

Yours sincerely,

David Pilbeam
Dean of Harvard College

Another meeting?? September 24, 2007

Uh oh. Mike sent an email to Dean Nelson letting her know that we were restarting the Party Fund as per our August agreement, and she replied saying, in effect, “we should talk.” So much for the case being closed.

From: Suzy M. Nelson <smnelson@fas.harvard.edu>
Date: Sep 24, 2007 10:05 PM
Subject: Re: Party fund reauthorization
To: Mike Ragalie <ragalie@fas.harvard.edu>
Cc: Zander Li <anli@fas.harvard.edu >

Hi Mike:

Thanks for this note. Sarah was going to set up a time for you, me, Jude, and David to get together and talk more about the grant program.

I also got your message about the Masters’ council, We meet this Wed, but there is no chance I can get anything on this agenda because it is a pretty full meeting schedule.

Maybe we can talk so I can hear how you would like the masters’ support.

Best, Suzy

———-

From: Mike Ragalie <ragalie@fas.harvard.edu>
Date: Sep 24, 2007 9:12 PM
Subject: Party fund reauthorization
To: Suzy Nelson <smnelson@fas.harvard.edu>
Cc: Zander Li <anli@fas.harvard.edu >

Hi Suzy,

The Council’s Executive Board has asked me to let you know that the Undergraduate Council voted to temporarily reauthorize the party fund until the next Council is elected and congresses in early October. Specifically, the legislation authorizes the Vice-President to distribute up to 9 $100 regular party grants and 4 $200 super party grants over each of the next two weekends.

If you have any questions about the legislation, feel free to contact me and I will do my best to get answers I have also attached the text of the legislation for your perusal.

Yours,
-Mike

Ryan’s follow-up July 20, 2007

Time to pull out the big dogs. Ryan, the UC President, drafted a letter to Dean Nelson today. There is no way to dodge this issue so we will have to simply come out and deal with it. If all goes well, we can get out of this by just adding an additional warning or disclaimer to our application.

At 04:45 PM 7/19/2007, Ryan Petersen wrote:

Hope all is well,
Suzy

OGC: no counsel for the UC June 30, 2007

Well, this is no good. An attorney from the OGC wrote back to us today regarding our request for legal evaluation on the UC Party Fund. She made the somewhat absurd argument that:

1) We are a student group (simply false — as far as the legislative bodies of the FAS are concerned, we are a creature of the Faculty).

2) We can have adverse interests to the University, so we are not part of the legal “entity” of the University. If this were true, then the legal liability that our program supposedly poses to the University must be false. If we are not part of the University, we cannot make it liable. If we are part of the University, then we should be entitled to counsel.

3) We could take our issue up with the Office of Student Activities. OSA is run through the Office of the Dean of the College, precisely the entity whose secondhand legal counsel we are trying to evaluate. It’s also a bit disconcerting that the attorney CC’ed Judith Kidd, Associate Dean of College Life, who works for the Dean of the College (and supervises OSA). Not only did OGC refuse us counsel, they referred us back to the Deans after we specifically requested confidentiality.

Sounds like a concerted effort to me. The full message is posted below.

From: Diane Lopez <dlopez@camail.harvard.edu>
Date: Jun 29, 2007 10:55 AM
Subject: Your request for representation
To: Mike Ragalie <ragalie@fas.harvard.edu>
Cc: mary_ann_mendes@harvard.edu , jhkidd@fas.harvard.edu

Dear Mike

I am an attorney in the Office of the General Counsel. My office manager, Mary Ann Mendes, forwarded to me your email correspondence with her about the Undergraduate Council. In answer to one of your questions, at the end of this email is some information from the FAQ section of the OGC’s website about who Harvard’s lawyers represent.

Our only client is Harvard University. We do not represent students, like yourself, or student groups and we consider the Undergraduate Council to be a student group. One reason this is so is that it is possible for the Undergraduate Council to have adverse interests to the University. As Harvard’s lawyers, it is not prudent to place ourselves in a situation where we might be conflicted under the Massachusetts Rules of Professional Conduct from representing our one and only client because we gave legal advice to a student group that develops a dispute with that client. This is not just a theoretical possibility. In my time here at the OGC, we’ve had at least one lawsuit with a student organization.

It may also not be in your best interests to attempt to seek legal advice from my office because of the issue of confidentiality. While our communications with clients for the purpose of rendering legal advice are confidential (and privileged), they are not confidential within the client. The client is a single legal entity. This means that if it were true that the Undergraduate Council was a department of the University, what we might learn about a matter from you could not be withheld from other parts of the University. If a department is part of the whole client for one purpose, it is part of the whole for all purposes.

It is also the case that no part of the University may hire its own legal counsel without the OGC’s permission. I doubt you would want to take the position that the Undergraduate Council is bound by this policy. It is hard to imagine that Undergraduate Council members who came before you and those who will come after you would agree with such constraints on the Council’s autonomy.

If you have questions about the operations of the Undergraduate Council, I recommend that you take them up with the Office of Student Activities (“OSA”). If there are questions of a legal nature that the OSA cannot answer on its own, it will consult with us. Through that consultation, Harvard will come to its view on the answers to the question, which you might agree with or dispute. If you are not in agreement, you could certainly consult your own legal counsel on the answers. We frequently give referrals to students, student groups and others to outside lawyers and there are sources of
referrals at the Law School as well.

Diane E. Lopez
University Attorney
Office of the General Counsel
Harvard University

OGC: request for legal counsel June 28, 2007

Mike’s taken some initiative here and checked in with the Office of General Counsel for some advice on the legal concerns presented by Dean Nelson. Unfortunately they’re not being too accommodating, at least at the gatekeeper levels, so Mike’s pushing it a bit. Hopefully we’ll escalate it to an attorney and see what happens.

By the way, his argument about us being a Faculty department is spot-on. The UC is an agent created by Faculty legislation in 1982, not “just” another student group.

From: Mike Ragalie <ragalie@fas.harvard.edu>
Date: Jun 27, 2007 3:19 PM
Subject: A few questions
To: mary_ann_mendes@harvard.edu
Cc: Ryan Petersen <rpeters@fas.harvard.edu>

Dear Ms. Mendes,

I’m writing today as an executive officer of the Harvard Undergraduate Council (UC), a department of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences authorized by Faculty legislation of 18 May 1982. In the course of my official duties, I have stumbled across several issues which touch upon the legal liability of the UC, and the legality of recommendations which the UC — through its members who serve ex officio on several committees of the Faculty — intends to submit to committees of the Faculty through established processes.

Is there an attorney in the OGC with whom I can speak about these issues? Also, I would assume that conversations with your Office are privileged and confidential, right?

Thanks,
-Mike

———————-

On 6/28/07, Mary Ann Mendes <mary_ann_mendes@harvard.edu> wrote:

Dear Mike,

We are sorry but we are precluded from giving legal advice to students or student groups. In your situation a faculty member would need to contact us about this. Also, re your question on confidentiality — what students say to us could not be withheld by us from Harvard administrators.

Mary Ann Mendes
Office Administrator

—————————

Hello Mary Ann,

Thanks for your response. The Undergraduate Council is not a student group; it is a department of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences, much like the Faculty Council or any of the several Offices of the Deans located in University Hall. Additionally, I approach your office not as a student, but as an officer of a department of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences.

Do you have any documents which explain the charter and charge of the Office of the General Counsel? I would think it atypical that a department of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences would be prohibited from seeking legal advice from your Office, especially since so much of what we do and recommend has legal ramifications for the Faculty and the University.

Thanks again,

-Mike

Alcohol issue June 27, 2007

So much for dropping it. Dean Nelson wrote back today asking us to change our process to make sure we can’t reimburse minors for alcohol. Unfortunately I can’t really see a way for us to do this without becoming a police state. We’ll have to do some research into the arguments presented before replying.

On 6/27/07, Suzy Nelson <smnelson@fas.harvard.edu > wrote:

Hi Zander, Mike, Ryan, and Matthew:

After talking with Jude Kidd and checking with our Counsel, we definitely need to have the UC create a process that ensures that minors will not be reimbursed for the purchase of alcohol. Also, the UC must be responsible for ascertaining the age (and not leave it to the Houses as the grant program is orchestrated by the UC, not the House). Harvard administers the funds the UC receives from the student activity fee (through Paul McLoughlin who releases the funds to the UC) and Harvard therefore is obligated to make sure that we (and you) are in compliance with the law.

You could still reimburse minors for hosting social events provided the receipts submitted to the UC are for food and non-alcoholic beverages. I’m assuming this is what you do with the freshmen events. Please look at your process again and work this into the language & process. Also, it needs to be advertised prominently to students on your website and across the Houses. I’ll be sure to notify the House Masters and Resident Deans of this too, so they can let students know when they register a party.

I’m happy to discuss this more, but really, our hands are tied here. Thank you again for all of your work on this.

Best, Suzy

———————–

At 02:52 AM 6/27/2007, Zander Li wrote:
Hi Dean Nelson,
Thank you for the email. I will discuss this with the UC executive board and we will get back to you within a couple of weeks. I am sure we will be able to arrive at a satisfactory conclusion without treading into pernicious legal waters.
Best-
Zander

———————-

On Jun 27, 2007, at 9:05 AM, Suzy Nelson wrote:
Thanks Zander. I agree. Suzy