The Daily Pennsylvanian is a student-run nonprofit.

Please support us by disabling your ad blocker on our site.

The Undergraduate Assembly approved 21 of the 25 proposals in Project 2000 at its meeting last night. Three recommendations in the five-year plan for improving the University were referred back to their authors, and one of the proposals was voted down. Throughout the meeting, there was consistent opposition to many of the proposals. Ten of the 25 proposals were voted against by at least one-fifth of the members present. UA Chairperson and Wharton junior Dan Debicella said last night's approval of most of the plan marked a significant success for the UA. "This is the most substantial thing the UA has done this decade," he said. "It is the capstone of our success on this UA." But some members of the UA said the plan was unimportant, and voiced objections to some of the recommendations during debate. Many recommendations passed with little resistance, with most UA representatives saying they agree that the plans will improve University life. But some proposals met stiff opposition. A recommendation that students vote on a tuition increase to pay for a new campus center did not pass. UA members said in debate that they disagreed with the basic principle behind the proposal. "I know my constituents didn't send me here to raise their tuition," College senior Dan Schorr said. Three other proposals were sent back to their authors for clarification or reworking. These included a plan to reform academic advising in the College and Wharton, a recommendation to convince University faculty to live in West Philadelphia, and a proposal on building the new campus center. Debicella said he thought a vote on the campus center proposal was postponed because of the administration's recent decision to build the Perelman Quadrangle instead of the Revlon Center, and not because of UA opposition to the recommendation. After the meeting, some UA members said they were not as pleased by the project's approval as Debicella. "Some of the proposals gave new meaning to the words 'mental masturbation'," UA representative and College junior Lance Rogers said. "I think we need to focus more on students' immediate needs and things that will affect their daily lives now." UA Vice Chairperson Tamara Dubowitz, a College junior, said some of the resistance to the plan resulted from an "opposing force" in the body that has consistently caused tension throughout this year. Dubowitz added that although Debicella has received most of the criticism for Project 2000, it is not a reflection on him alone, but rather on the whole body. Debicella said Project 2000 has the potential to greatly improve student life at the University. But he added that the UA must continue to lobby the administration for the plan's passage. "If the UA just forgets about Project 2000 now, then obviously it's going to be meaningless," he said. "We have to push for the ideas in Project 2000." But some UA members said they doubt that Project 2000 will have any importance no matter what the administration decides to do with the recommendations. "I think it's mostly irrelevant," Schorr said. "But I hope it succeeds and improves the University."

Comments powered by Disqus

Please note All comments are eligible for publication in The Daily Pennsylvanian.