Cole-Newkirk's decision to delete rules a surprise

Administrators and faculty unaware of changes

Dean of Student Life and Services Charlene Cole-Newkirk's decision to delete clauses from the Rules and Regulations last summer without going through a formal process came as a surprise to other administrators, faculty and students recently.

The clauses state that evidence collected in room searches conducted when a student is absent, during room repairs, during fire inspections and during any search that does not follow College regulations cannot be used against a student in College judicial procedures. All the clauses are deleted from this year's Fussers; all but the clause concerning evidence found during a room repair are deleted from the Student Handbook.

Cole-Newkirk said the clauses were added by former Dean of Student Life and Services Pat Penn without faculty or committee approval and she felt she could thus eliminate them without approval. She said that she only remembers discussing it with the College lawyers. College Lawyer Michael Franz said he could not comment on the issue because it would violate attorney-client privileges.

Under the College's faculty governance system, rule changes usually have to be approved by the General Faculty (GF) or a committee of the GF. Members of the Student Life Committee (SLC), the GF and the General Faculty Council (GFC) do not remember discussing or hearing of the rule change.

President Nancy Dye was unaware of any changes to the rules surrounding room inspections. Secretary of the College Bob Haslun was also unaware of the change. "It is curious that the one [Fussers] has it and the other doesn't," he said.

Cole-Newkirk said that she made no attempt to keep the changes secret. "I'm probably going to get beaten up about it now," she said.

Cole-Newkirk rescinded these clauses during the editing of the Student Handbook last summer. The clauses are also omitted from the version of the rules which Judicial Board members receive.

"The rule was a dean-made rule. It was never approved by any committee. It never really existed," Cole-Newkirk said. "If Pat had the right to make it, I had the right to get rid of it." She said that the bottom line is whether the dean can make a rule. "I argue no," she said.

Penn said he remembered the rule in question, but that he did not remember if he went before SLC with it. "I highly think it's not possible that I didn't," he said. Penn said that during his time as dean, his policy was to discuss and report rule changes to the committee.

Theo Jennings, college sophomore who edited the Student Handbook and was asked by Cole-Newkirk to delete the clauses, said he now believes Cole-Newkirk overstepped her bounds by deleting the clauses. He said that at the time he thought the College had a system "where decisions like that are made by many people."

Jennings did, however, speak with Cole-Newkirk as a concerned student about the clause at the time of editing. This discussion did not lead Cole-Newkirk to consult with other students, faculty or administrators on the issue. "I didn't see it as something I had to consult with students about at the time," she said.

According to Jennings, Cole-Newkirk explained to him during the summer that she had the power to change the rule because of her position as dean. At the time, she did not mention the fact that Penn had created the rule as her justification for cutting the clauses out.

Cole-Newkirk emphasized that she did not intend to take away student's rights by deleting the clauses. "I understand students' fears of administrative power," Cole-Newkirk said. "I have no intention of violating students' rights."

Junior Joshua Kaye, a member of the Drug Task Force, thinks Cole-Newkirk's change in the rules is directly related to the recent discoveries of three marijuana plants in students' rooms. "She has an agenda and it served her purpose to take [the clauses] out," Kaye said.

Although Secretary of the College Robert Haslun said he does not know for certain whether there is a precedent for Cole-Newkirk's action, he said he would think many rules were made in this way. "So much of the rules are not subject to faculty approval," he said.

Professor of Politics Ron Kahn disagreed. He said Oberlin is run on a faculty governance system and rule changes would clearly have to be approved by the faculty.

Michael Nee, associate professor of Chemistry and former chair of SLC, said that the power of a dean to make or remove a rule is unclear. He said, however, that he was surprised to hear that Penn made the rule without consultation with SLC. "Pat tended to use the committee to get approval and feedback," Nee said. "Normally, the dean has gone through the committee at least to get feedback."

Chris Howell, co-chair of SLC last semester, said, "My view is that yes, it should [go through SLC], but there is no hard and fast constitutional definition of what has to be passed by SLC."