The Zeta Beta Tau brothers found themselves in a whole lot of trouble after one brother… The Zeta Beta Tau brothers found themselves in a whole lot of trouble after one brother sawed out a piece of plywood covering a hole in their custodial supply closet.

According to ZBT President Tim Stotish, the brother was trying to get into the supply closet to borrow the supplies and clean up a mess that was made in their fraternity complex on the Hill.

The supply closet had a hole in the door, made before Stotish was brother in the house, that was covered by a piece of plywood, slightly smaller than 2 square feet.

The ZBT brother had intended to fix the hole made by removing the plywood, Stotish said, but before he had time to make a trip to a hardwood store, a maintenance lady had complained to her supervisor.

ZBT then received a form saying it was a break-in.

“It wasn’t a break-in, in the way [that break in would mean] that we were going to steal things,” Stotish said.

Vice Provost for Undergraduate Studies and Dean of Students Jack Daniel did not return a phone call for comment.

Shortly thereafter, the University repaired the broken piece of plywood with a new piece. The brothers believed that was going to be the end of the issue, Stotish said, but they soon received word that they would have to face the judicial board regarding the alleged break-in that happened in their University complex.

While the judicial board met on Feb. 5 to discuss ZBT’s case, maintenance workers were already installing a new door for the cleaning-supply closet — a door that ZBT was told to pay for.

At the hearing, board officials recommended that ZBT pay $417.40 in restitution for the cost of a door that the brothers say they never damaged. Additionally, the board also recommended that the brothers hold a risk-management seminar for the entire Greek community.

Stotish thought that would be the end of it. Then, on Feb. 9, he received a letter from Daniel.

While upholding the recommended sanctions suggested by the judicial board, Daniel also suspended the fraternity for an additional six-month period. Daniel has told The Pitt News in the past week that he cannot comment on judicial affairs.

ZBT has been on social probation since May 1, 2003, after an incident involving an underage person drinking at one of their parties.

“We weren’t controlling our parties,” Stotish said.

As a result, the fraternity was put on probation, which would have ended on April 30, 2004, before the six-month extension. They were also required to hold a risk-management seminar, which they held this fall. In addition, each ZBT brother was required to complete 20 hours of community service.

“We were in complete compliance with trying to get ourselves out of the hole that we dug,” Stotish said.

The letter warned that any member who failed to complete the community service requirement would have a hold placed on his account.

According to the letter Daniel sent Stotish, “should ZBT violate any other University policies while on Social Probation [it] will result in immediate termination of chapter recognition.”

The letter defined social probation as, “the loss of chapter privileges to host, sponsor, co-sponsor or participate in any social activities with non-members ANYWHERE [sic].”

Stotish explained that, since the fraternity was put on social probation, members “can’t really do anything.” The fraternity was unable to attend Greek Week events or have a formal.

“We can’t even really participate in a benefit concert that we organized” Stotish said.

Interfraternity Council President Steve Mihlfried commented on the sanctions the administration placed on ZBT.

“It seems the University has adopted a two-strike policy,” Mihlfried said.

Mihlfried expressed his belief that IFC should have a greater say in fraternity sanctions.

“Since IFC officially recognizes the chapter, IFC should be consulted in matters involving chapter recognition,” Mihlfried said.

He explained that IFC would still punish fraternities for misbehavior.

“Even if [judicial board] was under us, there still would’ve been a fine,” Mihlfried said.

Mihlfried disagreed with how the sanctions were enforced.

“Why should a whole chapter have to pay for the actions of one member?” he asked. “To place a hold on someone’s account for being part of a voluntary organization is like putting a hold on a basketball player’s account if he doesn’t show up to practice.”