Poorman stands firm on alcohol changes
By JASON McFARLEY
News Writer
As nearly 200 students surrounded him on three sides Monday, the man behind proposed changes to the University alcohol policy welcomed student input into the writing of the revisions but closed the door on reversing the planned crackdown on campus drinking.
"I don't want to build false hope," Father Mark Poorman, vice president for Student Affairs, said, receiving grumbles from the student audience."This does appear to be a definitive direction we're moving in. If we look at that again, it'll be down the road."
Poorman's words came at a divisive Campus Life Council meeting, where the administrator formally introduced amendments to the alcohol policy a week after announcing them to students. He spoke in front of hundreds of undergraduate students who filled the chairs in the LaFortune Ballroom after the crowd had packed another room to capacity.
On a day when CLC members and several students at the 2 1/2-hour meeting directed frank comments and questions to Poorman for the first time publicly, the council's defeat of a Student Senate resolution also thwarted hopes for an eleventh-hour stand against the policy changes.
The CLC voted 11-7 in closed ballot in favor of the resolution to overturn the proposed ban on in-hall dances, leaving the measure one vote short of passage. The vote likely reflected a split between the students and the rectors and lone administrator who sit on the council.
Comments throughout the meeting reflected the division.
"With the amount of effort we put into alcohol awareness, education, discipline, we could be doing so many other things," said Keenan Hall rector Father Gary Chamberland, who asked Poorman why he hadn't taken the more drastic action of banning all alcohol on campus.
Poorman, a former Dillon Hall rector, restated his belief that alcohol abuse is a problem at Notre Dame but said his proposed changes to outlaw "hard" liquor in undergraduate residence halls, ban in-hall dances and loosen tailgating rules address the issue.
Poorman announced the changes March 18, after a two-year study into abusive drinking on campus. Approval by University officers of the changes likely will be a formality, and the revised policy will take effect in the fall.
Students were critical of the changes and decried being left out of the policy-making process.
Chris Manuel, co-chair of the Hall Presidents Council, said Poorman should release survey and focus group results that were part of the study.
"I know that you feel that they are private, but I feel entitled to them," said Manuel, a member of the CLC's alcohol use and abuse task force, who sat next to Poorman at the meeting. "Your report loses a considerable amount of credibility without these statistics."
Poorman said the data was best used for internal planning and "wouldn't advance the discussion at this point."
Poorman compiled and distributed a one-page list of what he believed were the questions students have asked him most in the week since he announced the changes in a campus-wide e-mail.
In the document, he answered concerns about enforcing the liquor ban, saying hall staff won't search for and seize the contraband unless individual rooms or gatherings draw undue attention to themselves.
He also responded to suggestions that the changes would drive more students to consume alcohol off campus and increase drunk-driving cases.
"We can't be held hostage by threat of students drinking and driving because the alcohol policy isn't liberal enough," he said.
Poorman acknowledged that he considered student safety played a role in the changes. He linked incidents of sexual assault and alcohol poisoning to abusive drinking and said the changes would have a "huge impact" on creating a campus culture that isn't alcohol-focused.
Freshman Adam Istvan said the changes were the result of the University wanting to disown liability for students' well being.
But Poorman said, "If we were interested in liability, we would have gone `dry.' The thing that would have reduced or eliminated our liability was going dry."
Following the meeting, Libby Bishop, student body president-elect, said Poorman hadn't fully answered students' questions.
"I still have a problem with the process of how this policy was formed," she said. "After the CLC meeting, Trip [Foley, student body vice president-elect] and I realized we need a new way to empower students. We want to channel the energy we saw today from students are working on a new way to do that."
Bishop, who enters office April 1, said she would continue to contest the in-hall dance ban. She and Foley expect to meet with Poorman in early April.
All News Stories for Tuesday, March 26, 2002
