Student leaders divided over plan

Student government leaders had mixed reactions last night to the Commission on Strengthening the Community's preliminary report released yesterday in Almanac. And Undergraduate Assembly Chairperson and College junior Seth Hamalian said last night he was vehemently opposed to the Commission's recommendation on "randomized housing." "The suggestion of randomized housing makes me furious," he said. "It dilutes the diversity that exists on this campus and robs freshmen of their right to determine where they'll be most comfortable." The randomized housing issue caused the most debate and controversy among the leaders of student government. But, the Commission did not advocate complete randomized housing. Instead, the report advocated ending freshmen's opportunity to choose a college house or living/learning program. "I think it's a good idea," said College junior and UA member Dan Schorr, who is also a Daily Pennsylvanian columnist. "It's a good way to stop segregation which has happened immediately to freshmen when they get here. "Making originally heterogeneous communities is a great idea," he added. Despite the anger and debate surrounding the housing issue, many student leaders said they were surprised by the "concrete" proposals put forth in the report. "I am honestly pleasantly shocked," said Wharton sophomore Daniel Debicella, a UA representative. "I thought it was going to come out with a lot of politically correct, trite solutions but there were some really good ideas and sweeping changes in it." College junior Eric Stock, vice-chairperson of the Student Committee of Undergraduate Education, voiced similar sentiments. "The Commission exceeded my expectations," he said. "I think they did an admirable job." Engineering and Wharton junior and SCUE chair Matthew Kratter said he was "pleasantly surprised." "I like the support of the college house system, the Revlon Center and the approval of the coffee house/bookstore," he said. "I also really like the recommendation which says faculty members should take a more active part in campus life." Most student leaders also supported the Commission's proposals for increased faculty-student interaction. "Proposals of getting faculty more involved are essential," Debicella said. Despite the surprise of some student leaders, UA member and College senior David Heimann said the report "was what I thought it would be." "I question whether or not some of it is realistic or will contribute to the success of the community," he added. Heimann specifically disagreed with the movement of fraternity and sorority rush to first semester of sophomore year. "I don't understand the advantage of it," he said. "I don't see it as a good goal to work on." UA Vice Chairperson Scott Sher said he was happy that the Commission advocated funding more student sponsored activities and events. "That's a good thing for immediate implementation," said Sher, a College senior. "It also lends credibility to the Commission in its dealings with students." UA members also focused on the Commission's facility proposals. "The coffee house on Locust Walk is one of the best recommendations," Debicella said. "And once the Revlon Center is built, it can prove as the focus for the University community." The judicial system was also an important topic to student leaders. "The one thing that should be implemented is a student run judicial system," Debicella said. "That wasn't really in the Commission's report." "I do appreciate their suggestions to improve the judicial system and to encourage an environment where academic integrity is of the utmost importance," Hamalian said. The Commission's stance on free speech, which advocates the removal of regulations on speech, including racial epithets and slurs, brought mixed opinions from student leaders. "My belief is that the damage done to someone by telling them they can't call someone a racial slur is much less than the benefit of affording students that protection," Hamalian said. "I don't see how [allowing racial epithets] contributes towards strengthening the community." He added that his views on free speech were not incompatible with his opinions on randomized housing. Schorr, who began the First Amendment Task Force last year, said the Commission's recommendation caught him off guard. "I was surprised they said that speech codes don't work, but they are absolutely right," he said. Student leaders said they would be discussing their ideas with the Commission. Kratter said SCUE would make a statement within a week. But Hamalian said he was not sure if the UA would make suggestions as a body, or on an individual basis.