The MSU Board of Trustees passed the revised student Disorderly Conduct Policy at its monthly meeting today. The policy passed with six board members for, one against and one abstention.

An interim version of the policy was drafted by the university’s highest governing body after the March 27-28, 1999, riot. The policy was revised by Academic Council and then reviewed by the University Committee on Student Affairs.

Some trustees are pleased that the work done on the policy is finally at an end.

“I’m pleased with the compromise Academic Council brought when they considered this a year ago,” Trustee Dee Cook said.

“I liked the involvement of the students about what I’ve seen as a democratic process.”

When the board considered the policy last year, Cook said she wanted a more restrictive policy. While she said she could “live with” the amended policy, she still prefers the newly passed amendment.

Major changes in the code prevent officials from disciplining students for rioting until a verdict is reached through the campus judiciary system. University officials can still suspend students who present a “clear and present danger” to people or property.

The interim riot policy allowed university officials to punish students who take part in any uprising, on or off campus. It also allowed university officials to suspend students before any court hearing. This temporary suspension clause was removed from the new policy.

The new policy restricts the jurisdiction to MSU’s campus, areas near MSU and other college campuses. The interim policy said students could be punished for rioting anywhere in the nation.

MSU President M. Peter McPherson said the revised policy offers more due process.

“The new policy has additional procedural safeguards. I think that’s appropriate,” he said.

To McPherson, the finished product was worth the time spent on the revision.

“I supported it,” McPherson said. “I think the process on campus with the faculty and students was really appropriate. The deliberations are in keeping with what we do here.”

But some trustees felt uncomfortable passing the policy. Trustee Colleen McNamara said the university should not have any such policy.

“From a strategic prospective I would have preferred that we abandon the policy,” McNamara said. “From a personal, philosophical standpoint, I don’t feel the university has any business sitting in judgment. It’s got a lot of downsides and I don’t think it has many upsides.”

McNamara said while she’s not pro-riot, the policy is not an effective way to deal with the problem. She thinks it may even be dangerous for future administrations, but she wasn’t surprised that most of the board liked the policy.

“I knew it would be passed,” she said. “ We’re in a time where that kind of thing is popular.”

Trustee Dorothy Gonzales, the board’s only East Lansing resident, said the policy raised too many red flags in her mind to vote on it. She abstained.

She said because MSU has property across the nation, she had concerns with the jurisdiction portion of the policy. Gonzales said she also abstained because students protesting issues away from campus should have a right to do so.

“Where is the due process in those kinds of efforts?” she said. “There’s a lot of gray lines. Things were still not clear to me where the bottom line was.”

Some student representatives also still wish the policy was more lenient.

Jeff Ziarko, chairperson of the University Committee on Student Affairs, said while he was pleased with the policy changes, he wasn’t completely satisfied with the revision.

“We don’t think it’s a good idea for the university to be regulating the off-campus behavior of students,” he said.

But Ziarko said he recognized that some board members weren’t completely satisfied either.

“I think the board passed a compromised policy. They didn’t get everything they wanted, we didn’t get everything we wanted,” he said.

Pamela E. Spencer can be reached at spencerp@msu.edu.