Students in Eliot May Restrict Voting

This week Eliot House residents will decide whether to restrict voting on all house committee business to house committee officers and entry-way representatives.

According to House Committee chair Jason C. Grillo '97, the committee issued the referendum to prevent abuse of house funds.

"We're letting the students of Eliot House decide this," Grillo said.

But student opinion is divided, primarily because residents have different views of the role the committee should play in house life.

"I like the pure democracy," said Daniel J. Kolodner '97, former Charles Eliot co-chair. "I don't think it should change." The Charles Eliot co-chair is a position designed to foster house spirit.

Eliot has 28 officers who represent the approximately 450 students in the house.

Current Charles Eliot co-chair Jose M. Padilla '97 agreed that residents have a fundamental right to be heard.

"I'm against this, because I think we should be able to vote when we want to," said Padilla. "It all depends on your vision of the house committee: Should it be a congress that works for you, or a true democracy?"

"I think it should be a true democracy," Padilla said.

But some students, based on their faith in the committee's past leadership, support the initiative to restrict voting to committee members.

"I think it's probably a good idea, because I think decisions should be made by people who go to the meetings," said Kevin M. Kilcullen '98.

"I'm sure that the officers would be accommodating of people's needs. It's not a cutthroat organization," Kilcullen said.

But according to Grillo, the initial motion to restrict the vote was provoked by a battle between committee officers and residents to control house funds.

Grillo said some residents stacked a spring 1995 House Committee meeting and successfully voted to spend house funds on their individual interests.

"They passed a vote to appropriate about $800 for some crew shells," Grillo said.

Although the committee later voted to retract the money allocated for the shells, some committee members wanted to prevent such abuses from occurring in the future.

"We discussed it together as a committee and decided together to issue a referendum," Grillo said.

"It's not done because we think the rest of the house doesn't care about house issues," said Timothy J. Casey '98.

Casey, who authored the referendum, said important committee decisions should be made by residents who regularly attend meetings, not just those interested in supporting specific issues.

"We just think that people who regularly come to meetings know more about what's best for the house," Casey said.

"There are usually only one or two things people usually vote for, and we want to keep one big group of people from packing one particular meeting," Casey added.

Currently, any Eliot House resident may attend a meeting and vote on issues, regardless of previous attendance.

The House Committee's duties include setting the budget and house dues.

If the referendum passes, Eliot will not be the only house that limits votes to committee members.

Leverett House limits votes on allocation of house funds to the seven house committee officers, according to Russel G. Perkins '97, Leverett house committee chair.

Other houses have instituted more complicated rules to enfranchise all residents but reduce the power of special interests.

At Currier House, every resident is a voting member of the house committee, but significant financial decisions are made through a double vote.

"To make sure a group of people don't come to a meeting to pass their own motion, we vote on the issue two times if it's a large expenditure over $200," said Currier House Committee chair Jocelyn M. Kiley '97. "We vote once during the week it's brought up and again at a later meeting."

At Winthrop House, residents are permitted to vote after attending three meetings.

"We do it this way to encourage people to come to the meetings and get involved," said Winthrop house committee chair Nicole M. Rekant '96.

"It's everybody's money, and restricting voting isn't the answer," said Rekant.

According to Casey, the original suggestion was to limit voting to the house residents who had attended one prior meeting.

But "taking attendance is just too much of a hassle," Casey said

"We discussed it together as a committee and decided together to issue a referendum," Grillo said.

"It's not done because we think the rest of the house doesn't care about house issues," said Timothy J. Casey '98.

Casey, who authored the referendum, said important committee decisions should be made by residents who regularly attend meetings, not just those interested in supporting specific issues.

"We just think that people who regularly come to meetings know more about what's best for the house," Casey said.

"There are usually only one or two things people usually vote for, and we want to keep one big group of people from packing one particular meeting," Casey added.

Currently, any Eliot House resident may attend a meeting and vote on issues, regardless of previous attendance.

The House Committee's duties include setting the budget and house dues.

If the referendum passes, Eliot will not be the only house that limits votes to committee members.

Leverett House limits votes on allocation of house funds to the seven house committee officers, according to Russel G. Perkins '97, Leverett house committee chair.

Other houses have instituted more complicated rules to enfranchise all residents but reduce the power of special interests.

At Currier House, every resident is a voting member of the house committee, but significant financial decisions are made through a double vote.

"To make sure a group of people don't come to a meeting to pass their own motion, we vote on the issue two times if it's a large expenditure over $200," said Currier House Committee chair Jocelyn M. Kiley '97. "We vote once during the week it's brought up and again at a later meeting."

At Winthrop House, residents are permitted to vote after attending three meetings.

"We do it this way to encourage people to come to the meetings and get involved," said Winthrop house committee chair Nicole M. Rekant '96.

"It's everybody's money, and restricting voting isn't the answer," said Rekant.

According to Casey, the original suggestion was to limit voting to the house residents who had attended one prior meeting.

But "taking attendance is just too much of a hassle," Casey said