UPDATE: In a letter to the Community Council on May 16, President Liebowitz accepted the CC’s recommendation to disband Delta House for good. So that’s it. It’s not suspension, its disbandment. Prescott House, the former home of Delta will turn into summer draw housing for the upcoming year, and then probably become a super block like Palmer.

Update: Prez Liebowitz still has to approve the Community Council’s decision for it to be official. Delta should have a chance to petition him not to approve the vote, but his reversing the Community Council’s vote would be very unlikely. 

(Updated) The Community Council just voted to disband Delta House (ADP) with a 13-4-1 vote. After reviewing the Residential Life Committee’s recommendation to disband the social house last Thursday, the Community Council decided to table the decision until today to give themselves more time to discuss.

Earlier this afternoon, in executive session, the Community Council voted to disband the house.

To see middbeat’s complete coverage of the Delta issue, see here.

We will update this post as we get more information. Please comment with your reactions and submit any tips you have to us (where it says ‘Got a Tip?’ on the sidebar).


  1. This decision terrifies me. Does anyone know who comprises this Residential Life Committee, which apparently has primary jurisdiction over social life on campus? What is the ratio of faculty to students? Were alumni, who surely have an interest in campus decisions, included in the discussion? What about heads of social organizations? People who have firsthand experience in hosting events and thereby shaping the social atmosphere on campus?

    1. Unfortunately, most decisions are based in financial cost-benefit analyses which fail to take into account the other costs and benefits of decisions. Because Delta committed X-amount of dorm damage (in Dollar$) they must be disbanded. It’s an unfortunate system, but it’s often the way the world works. Kind of like how Middlebury invests a portion of its endowment in WAR AND FOSSIL FUELS despite its projected image of sustainability and virtue.

    2. Jared, the entire Residential Committee Report (including a list of its members) has been on Midd-Blog since last week . It’s one-third students. I’d urge you to read the whole thing if for no other reason than it’s really interesting.

      Social houses are reviewed every two years. It’s a regular review and has been considerably streamlined (only a few years ago social houses were fully reviewed by Community Council every year).

      Community Council did receive and consider a letter of support from Delta’s alumni among other voices.

      A former president of a social house and another social house member are on the Community Council and Residential Life Committee.

      Finally, the Community Council is more than half-students (10 students, 9 faculty/staff/admin). The recommendation could not have passed without student support.

      It’s a contentious decision (and I have my own thoughts), but it’s hyperbolic to claim the Residential Life Committee has “primary jurisdiction over social life on campus.” It didn’t go delta’s way, but that doesn’t mean that it wasn’t fully and carefully considered by everyone on Community Council or that the whole process is some bullshit Old Chapel conspiracy.

      1. Yeah, perhaps “primary jurisdiction over social life on campus” is an overstatement. But in my opinion, Delta’s disbandment represents a pretty huge change/precedent (regardless of the amount of care that went into the decision). Since it was the Res Life Committee that recommended it and the Community Council that passed it, I think it’s fair to say those groups have a large jurisdiction over campus life.

        Thanks for the information about the decision process. Having read the brief, it does seem very streamlined. I think for the most part the Res Life committee seems in touch with what is going on (at least statistically) with the social houses. However, I do think there are some ways in which they are clearly, painfully out of touch with the realities of the social house system.

      2. I would also add that a former president of a social house is not the same as a current president of a social house. Things change dramatically from year to year, as evidenced for example by the new New Member Recruitment requirements.

  2. I’m just afraid as to where this party scene will go next year- watch out suites. Or perhaps, and more scarily, watch out town of Middlebury.

Leave a Reply