NEWS ANALYSIS: UA earns mixed reviews for year

Student leaders cited the group's limited power and general apathy. As its term comes to a close, the 1997-98 Undergraduate Assembly's term is getting mixed reviews from members and student leaders. Although UA members and other student leaders cited several positive aspects of this body's tenure, the 1997-98 group has a relatively short list of accomplishments. The assembly was also plagued with low attendance this semester, despite several meetings with record-breaking turnout in the fall. UA leaders list progress in obtaining new recreation facilities and dining options among the successful causes the body has championed over the past year. But other issues, such as increasing Spectaguard hours to allow parties to stay open longer, took up hours of meeting time without resulting in any real progress. Despite its lack of progress on many issues, College junior and UA Vice-Chairperson Samara Barend -- a Daily Pennsylvanian columnist -- defended the UA, explaining that the body's lack of legislative power makes it difficult to affect change. "I think the root of the problem is that the [students and administration] expect that each UA meeting should produce big results -- it just doesn't happen that way," Barend said. "Our meetings are more about communication and ideas," she added. "We can't directly legislate? the administration is not bound by our resolutions." Last September, members outlined a number of goals for the UA: increasing its visibility, becoming more inclusive of other student groups and working on more concrete objectives. According to College junior and UA Chairperson Noah Bilenker, his assembly has made some progress in these areas but still has a ways to go. Although Bilenker cited the UA's collaboration with the Student Committee on Undergraduate Education to set up "leadership luncheons" -- which bring together student leaders from many of the UA's constituent groups -- he said there is still the need for more interaction between different student groups. Barend also emphasized the need for more "outside" input, particularly from those who are not involved in student government at all. UA members noted the creation of the Penn Consumer Board, the Dining Advisory Board and progress toward the construction of new recreation facilities as some accomplishments, among many smaller and less publicized successes. "Without the UA, we wouldn't have the McClelland Marketplace, weekend meals, or a lot of other little things," Bilenker said. Another issue facing this year's UA was the overwhelming presence of Greek members -- 20 of 25 members -- in the body following last spring's elections. Many members of the University community feared that Greek issues would dominate the agenda. And as attendance problems plagued the body this winter, some members blamed the absences on Greek rush and pledge events. Although several Greek-related initiatives -- such as the request for increased Spectaguard hours -- were introduced, UA members said the Greek presence did not overshadow other issues. "I don't think [Greeks] really influenced the agenda," Barend said. "A positive thing actually came out of it in that the UA has established a better relationship with the IFC and [the Panhellenic Council] than ever in the past." But Wharton senior and former Student Activities Council Chairperson Steve Schorr -- a former UA treasurer -- said he was disappointed with the assembly's recent allocation of $30,000 to the IFC. The decision to fund the IFC's "Greek Weekend" and other events effectively removed $30,000 from SAC's budget. "One of the more unfortunate things about this year's UA is that they followed through on their promise to give money to the Greek system," Schorr said. "They've never done that in the past and it really hurt many groups in SAC." Other student leaders raised concerns about the level of enthusiasm and participation within the UA. Junior Class President Sarah Gleit said she was pleased with her board's relationship with the UA, though she noted a general apathy within the body. "I think that the UA as a body was very weak," said Gleit, a College junior. "A lot of students on it just didn't show interest or were disillusioned. In order for a group to function properly, all the participants have to care." The fact that relatively few current UA members have chosen to seek re-election this spring may be indicative of a heightening sense of apathy and disillusionment within the board. "It's been a relatively lackluster year for the UA," Wharton sophomore and UA member David Goldberger said last week. "[The UA] has lost a lot of confidence from the administration and the student body." And College junior Olivia Troye, who resigned her position as UA secretary mid-term, said the organization "isn't going anywhere."