p. Over the course of three town hall meetings last Friday Board of Visitors Rector Michael Powell ’85 and other members of the BOV defended their decision not to renew former College President Gene Nichol’s contract and answered questions from staff, faculty and students.

p. “We tried … he tried,” Powell said of the breakdown that took place between the BOV and Nichol. “The failure’s ours too.”
Student leaders said they felt the BOV’s meetings represented an olive branch.

p. “They showed they really do care about the College,” Student Assembly Vice President Valerie Hopkins said. “I think a lot of students feel more certain of their decision.”

p. The decision not to renew Nichol’s contract, coupled with his sudden resignation announced via e-mail Feb. 5, generated a highly vocal protest movement on campus.

p. The BOV’s decision faced further scrutiny in light of the transitional package offered to Nichol, the resignation of BOV member Robert Blair ’68 — who revealed that the decision not to renew Nichol was not unanimous and contradicted statements made by Powell — and the perceived lack of transparency and communication with the campus community.

p. The three meetings took place consecutively in the University Center’s Commonwealth Auditorium. The first meeting was for staff, followed by one for faculty and then students.

p. At the meeting with students, questions taken from online submissions were compiled into eight composite questions meant to address the general attitude of concerned students.

p. Powell and other BOV members declined to give specifics regarding the criterion used in determining Nichol’s renewal, but instead implied that, although Nichol was talented in creating ties with the student body and faculty, his skills as a fundraiser and manager were less than inspired.

p. “You can’t be perfect,” Powell said, in his assessment of Nichol’s presidency. “But it’s also not enough to say you can be A-plus on two-fifths of it, and have [low grades] on the rest.”

p. BOV Secretary Suzann Matthews ’71 agreed.

p. “The next president, as a package of skills, must be a fundraiser,” she said.

p. However, in smaller group meetings following the town hall meetings, Powell said that Nichol’s political leanings had a negligible effect on fundraising. He dismissed the withdrawal of a $12 million donation by James McGlothlin ’62. “Donors who have big money have big egos,” he said.

p. Powell’s repeated characterization of the BOV’s decision as unanimous was brought into question following Blair’s resignation.

p. In his announcement, Blair said that he and two other BOV members actively fought for Nichol’s renewal.

p. When asked if calling the decision unanimous complied with the College’s Honor Code, Powell, along with Matthews and Anita Poston J.D. ’74, apologized for any confusion that the characterization may have caused. Powell explained that governing boards often attempt to convey a decision as unanimous if it is believed that it may cause controversy. He was unaware that any other BOV member disagreed with the characterization until Blair’s resignation.

p. “[Blair] did not say ‘note my objection,’” BOV member John Charles Thomas said. In the meeting with faculty, Thomas described Blair’s e-mail as “nasty,” and said that he appeared to support characterizing the decision as unanimous when it became clear Nichol would not renewed.

p. A frequent theme of the many protests that took place in the wake of Nichol’s resignation was the belief that the voices of student and faculty had not been weighed during the decision-making process.

p. Powell said that there was no attempt to devalue the input of students, staff and faculty during the process but that the administration’s flawed “strategical [sic] operating planning process” may not have been as visible to those outside the BOV.
Powell added that he held meetings with various student groups in the months prior to Nichol’s resignation to discuss the former president’s performance, and that the BOV did consider the potential student reaction in their deliberations.

p. Later in the meeting, several BOV members said that students, faculty and staff would have input in the process of finding a new president. However, the prospect of getting a voting member representing students, staff or faculty does not appear likely, given that the process requires a governor’s appointment and the approval of the General Assembly.

p. In his Feb. 12 e-mail announcing his resignation, Nichol wrote that the BOV offered him and his wife “significant economic incentives” to not characterize their decision as based on ideology.
p. Many considered the nature of this offer as hush-money after Nichol himself referred to the proposed transition package as a potential act of censorship.

p. Powell detailed the specifics of the offer, saying that non-disclosed transitional or severance packages are common in business and college communities.

p. Included in Nichol’s proposed package was one year paid faculty leave with benefits, use of university housing through the summer, and a third, final investment of $10,000 into an account established by the BOV at the beginning of Nichol’s term. Had he accepted the agreement, the BOV would also have been contractually obligated not to disclose the reasons for his non-renewal.

p. According to Powell, at the time the offer was made, the BOV was counting on Nichol continuing to serve as president at least until a “mutually agreeable public announcement” had been made Powell added that the board had been concerned that if the decision was announced unexpectedly, the situation might have become less than amicable.

p. During the faculty meeting, Powell read an e-mail he sent to Nichol after notifying him that his contract would not be renewed.
p. In the e-mail, Powell offered to moderate the proposed transition package and urged Nichol to “talk with those you trust to give sound advice and give this the time you need to work it out.”

p. The limited communication in the aftermath of Nichol’s resignation was seen by many as a lack of transparency.

p. “We’re as transparent in a process like this that you can be,” Thomas said, when asked why the BOV had not disclosed information behind their decision. “We didn’t want to rip this man apart, tear him down.”

p. BOV member Kathy Hornsby ’79 said that Nichol was given the same privacy as any other College employee during a performance review.

p. Powell said that the legal constraints placed on the BOV in disclosing information regarding individual employees makes it difficult to reach the level of transparency desired by many on campus.

p. Powell’s closing remarks addressed the behavior and actions of Nichol’s highly vocal conservative critics.

p. “We don’t think they won,” Powell said, characterizing the actions of the General Assembly members who publicly attacked Nichol in recent weeks as “despicable.” He went on to say that he would not allow outside influence to impact BOV decisions.

p. Powell closed the meeting by promising the continuation of the Gateway Program and a commitment to diversity on campus.

p. Although the conclusion of each meeting was met with a round of applause, and several student leaders stated that they feel students obtained a greater understanding of the board, many in the audience made clear that they were not satisfied with the BOV’s answers.

p. Sociology Professor Kate Slevin called for Powell’s resignation at one point during the faculty meeting, saying that as rector he has “compromised his legitimacy.”

p. One graduate student said that she found the BOV’s language highly patronizing. Another student, Eric Newman ’10, pulled his shirt up toward the end of the meeting. The words “Wardrobe Malfunction” were written across his chest in reference to Powell’s former position as chairman of the FCC and the 2004 Super Bowl halftime show controversy involving Janet Jackson.

p. “I think the BOV did a good job addressing student concern,” Sarah Rojas ’10, a member of pro-Nichol group Tribe United, said, adding that she wished that the meeting had taken place sooner rather than later.

p. SA Sen. Devan Barber ’08, a leader of many of the student demonstrations that took place on campus in the days following Nichol’s resignation, described the meeting as a step in the right direction, but said that this should not be the end of communication between the student body and the BOV.

p. “There needs to be a more institutionalized means of communication,” Barber said. “I think students are dissatisfied we can’t get a more complete picture.”

p. Powell ultimately confirmed his accountability to the College.

p. “I’m accountable to the school,” Powell said in an interview with reporters following the meetings. “This can’t be a one-shot thing.”

p. Interim College President Taylor Reveley has been working since Nichol’s resignation to unite the campus. To that end, Reveley announced Monday he will hold an open meeting with students in the UC Commonwealth tomorrow at 7 p.m. to discuss the first two weeks of his presidency.

Williamsburg voters are now over 1,000 strong at the College.

p. Last fall, the Student Assembly passed the Williamsburg Civic Engagement Act, which allowed students be paid 10 dollars for each other student they register to vote in the city of Williamsburg.
That program and previous SA voter registration drives have registered over 1,000 students to date, making the student body 14 percent of the 7,000 registered Williamsburg voters.

p. The WCEA alone has registered approximately 200 students. It allocated $15,000 for funding.

p. “I do not see the money running out based on progress so far,” bill co-sponsor Senate Chairman Matt Beato’09 said. More students are expected to become involved as a “dorm storming” campaign, expected to begin soon, will heavily advertise the program.
So far no cases of students abusing the program, such as splitting the 10 dollars between the student registering and the student being registered, have been reported.

p. In an interview, SA President Zach Pilchen ’09 talked about the SA’s two strategies to get more students involved in Williamsburg politics: on-campus registration programs such as the WCEA and off-campus efforts to work with local officials in hiring a registrar receptive to student’s voting rights.

p. Pilchen said that the city was embarrassing with their student voting policy from 2004 to 2007, he said.

p. Pilchen cited his own experience of having to argue with the city registrar for an hour to be able to register to vote two years ago.
“Serious candidates will appeal to students,” Pilchen said, referring to the 1,000-strong student voting body. “Any candidate who ignores us will lose in May,” he added.

p. Beato also expressed optimism regarding the May local elections and the power of the student body.

p. “A majority of the potential candidates have actually contacted [Pilchen] or myself to sit down and talk about their platforms and what we’re interested in seeing, which did not happen in 2006 or 2004, to my knowledge,” he said.

p. “It’s amazing how much more willing people are to listen when you’ve registered a lot of voters.”

p. SA senator Sarah Rojas ’10, who also worked on the drive, said that the drive will help break down alleged town/gown friction.
“For far too long, there has been this stereotype that the city is against the students and that the students are against the city,” she said. “We see this voter registration drive as a way to end that miscommunication and work to make Williamsburg the best home it can be for everyone.”

At approximately 6:40 p.m. Tuesday, the fire alarm in the University Center went off, evacuating the building. After 20 minutes, police and fire fighters allowed students and others back into the building, although the dining hall remains closed.

p. A UC employee and a police officer both confirmed that a fire started in the kitchen, although they did not say what exactly started it. About one month ago the UC was closed when a kitchen toaster caused a small electrical fire.

p. Officials said the dining hall will reopen once health inspectors deem it safe. Last month the dining hall was reopened in time for breakfast the next morning.

1. ALLEGATION

p. Stealing a large amount of materials and using false identification

p. Verdict

p. Stealing: Not Guilty
Lying: Guilty

p. SANCTION

p. Probation through spring 2008 and 40 Hrs of Community Service.

p. 2. ALLEGATION

p. Cheating on a multiple choice midterm

p. Verdict

p. Guilty

p. SANCTION

p. Probation through spring 2008 and F in Course

p. 3. ALLEGATION

p. Cheating on a multiple choice exam and lying to a College official

p. Verdict

p. Guilty on both charges

p. SANCTION

P. Indefinite Suspension through at least spring 2008, an F in course and must write a letter of apology.

p. 4. ALLEGATION

p. plagiarism on an assignment.

p. VERDICT

p. Not guilty

p. 5. ALLEGATION

p. Copying a significant amount of a project from another student.

p. VERDICT

p. Guilty

p. SANCTION

p. Suspension through fall 2007; probation through spring 2008.

p. 6. ALLEGATION

p. Using unauthorized materials on an exam

p. VERDICT

p. Guilty

p. SANCTION

p. Probation through graduation, 50 hours of Community Service, an F on Test, Letter of Apology.

p. 7. ALLEGATION

p. Stealing from the College and lying

p. VERDICT

p. Guilty

p. SANCTION

p. Probation through spring 2008
Letter of Apology

In an e-mail addressed to the College community Wednesday, Robert Blair ’68 announced his resignation from the College’s Board of Visitors.

p. Blair said that he was “one of several” board members who supported the contract renewal of former College President Gene Nichol, who resigned Feb. 12.

p. “Although no vote was taken, one was not required if the contract was not to be renewed,” Blair said. “Those for renewal were given ample opportunity to argue their points. We ultimately found ourselves in the minority.”

p. Blair’s statement contradicts earlier statements by BOV Rector Michael Powell ’85 that the board’s decision was unanimous. Powell told The Flat Hat in an e-mail this week that he had spoken with the board about holding a unified position.

p. “I have said there was not a vote, only a discussion and a consensus,” Powell said. “There was a discussion about speaking with one voice and whether anyone objected to describing our decision as unanimous. I did not hear any objection and believe other board members understood this. I deeply regret if I misunderstood Mr. Blair’s intent.”

p. Blair reaffirmed his position in an interview with The Daily Press Wednesday, after board members Henry Wolf and John Gerdelman said that the board had reached a unanimous decision.

p. “There was not a unanimous consensus, decision or other unanimous action against renewal,” Blair said.

p. Wolf also told The Daily Press that several board members had approached Nichol on Feb. 10 and informed him as a “courtesy” that his contract would not be renewed. Wolf said that he and other board members had not known Nichol would resign until the morning of Nichol’s resignation.

p. In an interview with The Flat Hat Thursday night, BOV member Barbara Ukrop ’61 confirmed that she — along with Powell and one unnamed board member — met with Nichol to inform him of the board’s decision. Ukrop said that she had agreed with the non-renewal decision.

p. Ukrop said that the non-renewal decision had been agreed upon at a BOV dinner in the days leading up to the board’s February meeting, but she did not recall Powell using the word “unanimous.”

p. “I guess maybe what [Powell] meant is that he thought the board agreed to speak with one unanimous voice,” she said.

p. In his e-mail Wednesday, Blair attributed his resignation to an “incipient effort” on the part of BOV members to “pick apart” Nichol’s presidency. He said that he had read unprofessional BOV e-mails.

p. “I have also seen mean-spirited communications that are not worthy of the professional deliberations of any managing board, but most especially not the Board of Visitors of William and Mary.”

p. Blair thought originally that the board had not based their decision on ideology, but has since grown skeptical.

p. “Such communications call into question the real motivation for the initial decision not to renew the President’s contract,” he said.

p. When asked about the e-mails, Ukrop said she did not recall reading any negative comments against Nichol. She said that many board members were upset about the anti-BOV graffiti that appeared on many College buildings last weekend, including the Wren Building.

p. “I think maybe there got to be some anger last week, especially with the defacing of the Wren building, and maybe tempers flared,” Ukrop said. “I never saw any mean spirited thing against Nichol.”

p. Ukrop said that she was sure the board did not base its decision on ideology.

p. “Our decision was in no way based on ideology,” she said. “We believe in diversity, in multiculturalism, and access and Gateway … and we’ll continue to push forward with all of that.”

p. In his resignation e-mail, Blair praised Nichol for his efforts to increase racial diversity at the College, and particularly lauded the Gateway Program, which offers financial aid to low-income Virginia students.

p. “Mr. Nichol boldly created and gave Gateway William and Mary its name, funded it through the College’s budget process, and put the program in place. Now some detractors wish to belittle his achievement, and others claim wrongly that it is affirmative action in disguise. I have been assured that students benefiting from Gateway share one common denominator, socio-economic status.”

p. Blair had been on the board since 2004. He served as junior and senior class president while completing a mathematics degree at the College and received his J.D. in 1973 from the University of Virginia School of Law. He currently serves as President of Blair Law, PC in Washington D.C.

More than a week after former College President Gene Nichol announced his resignation, student protest groups are transforming into cohesive organizations with specific goals aimed at the reformation of the Board of Visitors.

p. One group, Tribe United, was formed before the BOV’s decision in an effort to promote Nichol’s contract renewal, according to founding member Sarah Rojas ’10.

p. “Once the decision became public, we transformed into an all-inclusive organization working to promote the best interests of the College,” she said in an e-mail. “We embody the values that President Nichol stood for, and we are now all different sections of the College community working together to keep our College heading in the right direction.”

p. She added that there are approximately 35 students at the core of Tribe United. As of press time, 427 students were members of the Tribe United Facebook group.

p. Rojas said the group is looking forward to today’s forums.

p. “We hope that this meeting with the BOV is the first of many and that we can continue an open and transparent relationship in the future,” she said. “It is important that students, faculty, staff and alumni are able to voice their concerns to the BOV when they come to campus and in the months to follow.”

p. According to Rojas, the group’s long-term goals include continued student, faculty, staff and alumni involvement in the presidential search process, keeping students involved in college affairs and dialogue, open communication with the BOV and working with Interim College President Taylor Reveley to promote the best interests of the College.

p. “Tribe United hopes to help preserve the future of that dialogue and work to make sure it continues over the course of the upcoming months,” Rojas said.

p. Another student group that mobilized in response to the situation is Students for a Democratic Society. Sean Walsh ’08 and Margaret Smith ’10 said that, although they are members of SDS, they do not speak for the group but as “concerned students.”
Walsh said that he opposes the BOV’s closed-door decision not to renew Nichol’s contract.

p. “I personally believe that’s wrong,” he said.

p. SDS has used this situation to advocate a more open BOV decision-making process in order to prevent situations such as this in the future.

p. “We really want a more open, democratic process in the way the BOV makes its decisions,” Smith said. “One of the things we’re asking Michael Powell — we’re really excited he’s coming — is to keep an open mind.”

p. Walsh said that they will formulate a long-term plan after today’s forums and but that they were anxious to hear what Powell and other BOV members have to say.

p. “We want to hear them out,” she said.

p. “We’re really dedicated to seeing change here,” Walsh added.
One new website, ReplacePowell.com, focuses on BOV Rector Michael Powell. Founder James Rosenthal M.A.’08 said that he intends for it to be a place for those who want to see Michael Powell removed as BOV rector to organize — maybe.

p. “This website hasn’t been officially launched, and I hope it never will be,” he said. “If people find Powell’s explanations [at today’s forums] adequate, this website will quietly go away.”

p. If Powell’s explanation is not adequate, Rosenthal said, ReplacePowell.com will launch and provide a petition and information on contacting government officials.

The American Civil Liberties Union is willing to help students sue the Board of Visitors because they claim that the board’s actions were a violation of Virginia’s Freedom of Information Act.

p. In a closed session last week, BOV members decided to make Dean of the Marshall-Wythe School of Law Taylor Reveley the interim president. Virginia law states that motions agreed to in a closed session must also be agreed upon in an open session in order to take effect.

p. Rector of the Board of Visitors Michael Powell countered that the BOV had to make a decision due to Nichol’s early resignation.
“[Reveley] is president designate and the board will formally appoint him this week,” Powell said. “Counsel has approved of this approach given the vacancy suddenly created by Mr. Nichol’s unexpected resignation.”

p. The director of Virginia’s branch of the ACLU, Kent Willis, disagrees.

p. “[The BOV] can go into a closed executive session to discuss personnel decisions, but any vote after that needs to be taken in open session,” he said.

p. “They had a right to meet in closed session … on Nichol’s job, but they did not vote in the public, and it is clear to us in that regard that they did violate the open vote law,” Willis said.

p. The ACLU is willing to send out a press release or help with litigation based on the violation of FOIA law.

p. “The basic rule is in law 2.2-3711, section B,” Staff Attorney for FOIA Alan Gernhardt said. “They can do a straw poll to get a sense of what their general consensus is in closed session and people can say, ‘Hey, I’m going to vote this way,’ but it doesn’t take effect until agreed upon in open session.”

p. The law reads: “No resolution, ordinance, rule, contract, regulation or motion adopted, passed or agreed to in a closed meeting shall become effective unless the public body, following the meeting, reconvenes in open meeting and takes a vote of the membership on such resolution, ordinance, rule, contract, regulation or motion that shall have its substance reasonably identified in the open meeting.”

p. Based on this law, the ACLU told Student Assembly Senator Matt Beato ’09, who contacted them last week regarding the BOV’s decision, that Reveley is not yet legally president and that the BOV did not have authority to issue a severance package to Nichol.
According to Willis the point of the lawsuit would not be to uncover information but to take corrective action.

p. “The problem I see with this is that you would want to see who voted which way, but [the BOV] made it clear it was a unanimous vote,” Willis said. However, BOV member Robert Blair ’68 announced this Tuesday that he was resigning from the Board, indicating that the decision may not have been unanimous as Powell had stated.

p. “Blair is now able to claim that he supported President Nichol and that Michael Powell misrepresented the “unanimous consensus” that he said existed,” Beato said. “If you have an open vote, that can’t happen. I’m frustrated because I fear BOV members might see an outcry from students and then pretend that they supported Nichol all the way, enabling them to curry favor with students and faculty, which they can do if decisions are made in closed sessions.”

p. Beato sent an e-mail Feb. 14 to other SA representatives to ask what they thought about pursuing the issue.

p. “I don’t think a lawsuit is a good idea because it would have the effect of removing President Reveley from his office. None of us need that right now,” Beato said. “Nevertheless, I do think that the BOV should have had an open vote. The reason why they did not have an open vote to appoint President Reveley is because they didn’t expect that they would need to appoint him so quickly.”
No other students appear to be pursuing litigation.

p. “Though some outside organizations have been mentioned at various times over the last week, we are dedicated to focusing our efforts on the future of the College,” said Dave Johnson ’09, SA undersecretary of Public Affairs for Williamsburg and one of those Beato contacted after talking to the ACLU. “This is a time for the students, faculty, staff and alumni of the College to engage in an open conversation about the events of the past weeks and months in order to proceed on solid footing.”

p. Johnson added that the work to be done regarding this issue will continue for some time.

p. “I believe that our community still has plenty of concerns that must be addressed, and revisiting the same issues for the next several months is not a productive element of that process,” he said.

Flat Hat News Editor Austin Wright contributed to this report.

For J.D. Bowers ’89, an assistant professor of history at Northern Illinois University, college campuses have always been a place where the free exchange of ideas was a welcome and secure tradition.

p. But after last week’s fatal shootings at NIU, Bowers says these beliefs have been shaken to the core.

p. Last Thursday afternoon, Bowers and the entire NIU community experienced tragedy when a lone gunman opened fire on a large lecture class in Cole Hall, killing five students and wounding 17 others before taking his own life.

p. Bowers, who was in his office when the shootings occurred, received a call from a student at 3:12 p.m. After explaining that there had been a shooting, she asked what he thought she should do. Bowers told her to remain where she was and stay safe, then ran down the hall to the history department office, which overlooks Cole Hall.

p. “Students were fleeing … some were down on the ground bleeding, paramedics were already on the scene, and police officers in full gear, with high-powered rifles and flak jackets, were everywhere,” he said. “At least two students were down and visible in our line of sight, just across the bridge. Even through the closed windows of a seventh floor office, I could hear the sirens of the arriving emergency vehicles — police, fire, ambulances — and sense the fear.”

p. NIU’s emergency plans, instituted in light of last spring’s Virginia Tech shootings, were implemented. Bowers’s building and the rest of campus were immediately placed on lockdown.

p. In the aftermath of that afternoon, Bowers received more information on the shootings. They had taken place in the very classroom in which he had lectured to 325 students every Monday and Wednesday during the previous semester. Friday, Bowers received a “most shocking revelation.” He learned that one of his honors students from that class had been a victim.

p. “I can tell you where she sat, who she sat with,” he said. “I take my honors students to dinner, try to do all the same things my professors did for me. Now this student is gone … On Valentine’s Day she entered that classroom as a 19-year-old college freshman, full of hopes and dreams, and she never left the classroom alive.”

p. As students and professors prepare to return to classes on Monday, the university has received an outpouring of support from various other universities — Virginia Tech in particular, which sent staff and counselors to aid in NIU’s recovery.

p. “It’s a terrible fraternity to be in, but it’s nice to know we’re not the only ones,” Bowers said. “They can tell us where we’ll be tomorrow, in a week, in six months.”

p. In talking and meeting with students this week, Bowers is challenging them to seek solutions in the wake of such tragedy.
“I ask them ‘What are you going to do? What action will you take? What does this moment mean for us as a community and as a larger group of humanity? How do we rectify gun culture with a culture of life and liberty?’” he said.

p. Though he lacks the answers, Bowers hopes to “preserve this moment that we may remember it in the future” — hoping, in particular, that his alma mater will benefit from his story. “I now feel that I must call this to the attention of others,” he said. “And as much as NIU has come to mean to me in my six years here, I would never want William and Mary, my home, to fall victim to this type of event.”

p. Printed below are the results of this week’s Honor Council elections.

p. Class of 2009
Matthew Kenneth Dinan
Will Eaton
Kyle Marie Kearney
Katie McCown
Brandon Jaston Nichols
Ashley Elizabeth Poling
Kelley Nicole Quinn
Jonathan Lloyd Sladky

p. Class of 2010
Christina Phuong Dang
Rory Alexander Eaton
Chase Percival Hathaway
Jay Jones
Dawson William Lindauere
Kristen Elizabeth Pantazes
Bailey Thomson
Alexandra Lee Whitehead

p. Class of 2011
Brian Joseph Focarino
Morgan Leigh Furman
Skyler Nicole Halbritter
Maggie McEvoy
William Jay Perkins
John Matthew Pothen
Andrew David Rudd
Justin de Benedictis-Kessner

The Student Assembly passed the Reasonable Expunging of Written Warnings Act, the Disambiguate Facebook Act and the Northern Illinois Condolence Act during Tuesday’s meeting. The senate also nominated students to the Review Board and the Elections Commission, voted to send the Green Fee Support Act to the finance committee and heard the Honor Council No Confidence Act.

p. The Reasonable Expunging of Written Warnings Act, sponsored by Sen. Ben Brown ’11, passed 13-3-4. The bill proposes that students be able to expunge their records of a written warning two semesters after the warning is issued.
Under the current policy students can only expunge their records during their senior year. Some senators said that the bill was unnecessary.

p. Brown said the policy would be useful for students applying for internships prior to their senior years. The bill ultimately requires the approval of Vice President for Student Affairs Sam Sadler.
The Disambiguate Facebook Act, also sponsored by Brown, passed unanimously and requests that Sadler clarify his policy toward incriminating students using social networking websites such as Facebook. Brown said the current unofficial policy is that social networking websites may be used by students to incriminate other students suspected of involvement in illegal activities.

p. The Northern Illinois Condolence Act, sponsored by Sen. Brittany Fallon ’11, extends support and sympathies in a letter to be sent to NIU. It passed unanimously.

p. The Green Fee Support Act, sponsored by Sen. Caroline Mullis ’09, proposed a $15 addition to each student’s tuition in order to decrease the College’s energy usage and increase its energy efficiency. If the SA were to pass the bill, it would still need to be passed by the Board of Visitors.

p. “I don’t feel comfortable asking the BOV to raise our tuition,” Sen. Orlando Watson ’10 said.

p. Sen. Michael Douglass ‘11 was uneasy.

p. “I’m really concerned about [not] doing this … by referendum,” he said.

p. Mullis responded by saying that the rise in tuition would save the school money in the long run, but the senate still sent the bill back to the Finance Committee.

p. The SA also nominated Billy Mutell ’09 to the Review Board and Sens. Matt Skibiak ’08 and Devan Barber ’08 to the Elections Commission.

p. Sen. Joe Luppino-Esposito ’08 and Douglass presented the Honor Council No Confidence Act which alleges that Tuesday’s Honor Council election violated the body’s own bylaws because advertising for the election began 15 days ahead of time instead of the required 30.

p. The bill’s sponsors wanted it to be heard as old business but the motion was rejected and will be heard at next week’s meeting.