Search Results
Below are your search results. You can also try a Basic Search.
(03/28/92 10:00am)
A colleague of mine took his life last month. I also liked him. It was affection borne of the respect a former student journalist feels for a present one; rooted in the ineffable affinity one who has devoted his college career to "The Paper" feels for another who has made the same outwardly inexplicable choice; and nourished by my certain knowledge of and admiration for the sensitivity and integrity, keen intelligence and sheer talent he brought to his job. Steven was a colleague indeed. College journalism is a fraternity unto itself, an endeavor that, wherever practiced, attracts a small band of hard-core devotees whose commitment to informing the university community often borders on obsession. That endeavor exacts a high price, transforming the traditional badges of a student's collegiate experience. Texts mutate into newsprint, beer becomes black coffee and rock songs are displaced by the telltale clackety-clack of Associated Press wire machines. Peers perceive those who rise to the editorial rank Steven attained as masochists, people bent on sacrificing endless hours in the pursuit of largely thankless and often lonely jobs, with only the pride of seeing the fruits of their labors distributed to the campus community each morning to serve as remuneration. But that can be remuneration enough. Some forty-odd years before I served my undergraduate school paper, The Cornell Daily Sun, as associate managing editor, a man named Kurt Vonnegut filled a similar role. At a banquet celebrating the paper's 100th anniversary, Vonnegut spoke of his involvement with the school daily. "Those who know me know I am an atheist," he noted. And yet, he added, as he made his nightly trudge up the hill from The Sun's offices to his home -- "so late at night and all alone" -- after putting the paper to bed yet another time, "I knew that God Almighty approved." Journalists are widely regarded as unrepentant cynics. The mien of trained suspicion, however, conceals an ironic truth: journalists, especially student journalists, are hopeful romantics. As student writers tilt at the windmills of apathy and ignorance, their quixotic efforts breed a shared belief in the inherent value of giving something back to one's immediate community, of keeping people informed. To do so day in and day out over the course of one's college career is not cynicism; it is the optimism that gives wing to the belief that one can make a contribution, a difference. Somewhere, somehow, that optimism deserted Steven. Wordsworth comes to mind: The world is too much with us; late and soon, Getting and spending, we lay waste our powers: Little we see in Nature that is ours; We have given our hearts away, a sordid boon! Steven gave his heart away. And that act of giving both enriched, and stands as an example to us all. Keith Eisner is a second-year Law School student from Colorado Springs, Colorado. His Daily Pennsylvanian column, Bound and Gagged, appeared during the spring of 1991.
(03/06/92 10:00am)
Approximately 14 University students will be able to visit the former Soviet Union for under $30 a day. For the second year in a row, Peter Steiner, chairperson of the Slavic Languages and Literatures Department, will lead an exchange program between the University and Moscow State University. Steiner said this week that the trip -- which will only cost $400 because it is subsidized by the University -- aims to "introduce the students to Russia." "[It is meant to be] an educational experience -- not just tourism," Steiner said. The students will spend time with Moscow State students and stay with them in their dorms during the two-week visit in May. Steiner said the students will visit museums and monuments, attend lectures and take part in other programming prepared by Moscow State. He added that he hopes the group will be able to take some trips to places such as Leningrad, but he said traveling in Russia is difficult. But traveling is not the only problem the program will be facing in the former Soviet Union right now, Steiner said. He added the economy abroad has had its effect on the program. "The economic situation has changed the nature of the exchange," he said. Steiner said the Moscow State students originally planned to travel to the University this month, as they did a year ago, but the price of airfare was too high and the students could not afford to make the trip. Assistant Provost Jean Morse said yesterday while she is unsure whether the second part of the exchange will be completed, "we have invited them to come next fall." Applications for the exchange program are available in the Slavic Languages and Literatures Department and are due by April 3. The applications require a parent's signature. Steiner said he encourages freshmen, sophomores and juniors from all schools of the University -- including those who are not specialists in Russian or Russian History -- to apply. Steiner added many students who went on the trip last year benefited greatly from the experience. "It was a very nice exchange," he said. "I was surprised at the depth of the experience."
(03/04/92 10:00am)
Nearly all University students have a large debt on their shoulders after receiving a degree. And for medical students, this figure can reach as high as $100,000. While medical students currently are able to hold off on paying back their loans for up to 30 months due, the federal law which includes the deferment clause may be changed, eliminating the deferment option and forcing students to begin immediate repayment of their loans. Medical School Government President Mark Weiner said yesterday the Title IV reauthorization bill was passed on the Senate floor two weeks ago. But the bill has not yet passed in the House of Representatives, and may be sent back for a compromise if it fails. "He seemed very sympathetic to our needs," Weiner said. "But I was very disappointed to hear that he was unaware of our letter-writing campaign." According to Weiner, the revised Title IV would have a generous grandfather clause covering all students currently attending medical school, and possibly current undergraduate students who are planning to attend medical school. Medical School Director of Admissions and Financial Aid Gaye Sheffler said she is uncertain how the new law will affect the University. "We don't know what shape the new deferment policy will take until we know the exact wording of the change," she said. "My concern is that not all medical students have the income to repay their loans in such a short period [of time.]" Sheffler pointed out that the average indebtedness of medical students graduating from the University is $52,000, while the average first year income is $27,000 to $29,000. This first year is part of medical students' residency, a period in which they are paid but are still considered in training. Sheffler added that she is impressed with the letter-writing campaign the students have organized. She said the inclusion of a grandfather clause is a result of letters written by students all over the country. "Until a firm decision is made, we will watchfully wait and see what happens, then we will adjust to the decision," she said. "But hopefully, we want to influence the decision."
(03/03/92 10:00am)
Former University of Wisconsin Nursing School Dean Norma Lang took the helm of the University's Nursing School yesterday, praising it as "the most outstanding nursing school in the country." "My challenge as the [new] dean is to facilitate and allow faculty to do the many creative things that they do best, so that this school can continue being number one," Lang said. "It's like coming in to coach the team that just won the Super Bowl." Lang described her first day on the job as "wonderful," saying "it's been a busy day, but it's also been an exciting day." She spent much of yesterday becoming acclimated with her new working environment and meeting with Nursing students and faculty. Nursing School Media Coordinator Constance Gillespie said yesterday that Nursing School faculty held a welcoming reception for the dean in the afternoon, during which she was presented with a photograph of the Philadelphia Electric Company Building's light board displaying the message "WELCOME PENN NURSING DEAN." She also expressed some concern over budgetary restrictions, particularly in light of Gov. Robert Casey's intended elimination of state funding for the University. "[Budget restrictions] seem to be a concern to the University, so I have to learn about how it would affect the School of Nursing," Lang said. Mary Mundt, now the acting dean of the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee's School of Nursing, said Lang will be missed. "She was very instrumental in her [12] years as dean in the growth of the school and in the quality of the school," Mundt said. According to Mundt, Lang "established a network of nursing-research appointments with local hospitals and health agencies" during her tenure at Wisconsin. Lang said that she wants to implement a similar program at the University, in order to try to "integrate nursing into public policy, particularly health care." "Nursing has so much to offer to the current health care crisis," she added. Lang also said she thinks nurses should be involved in making national health care decisions, unlike what she said is current practice. "You ask physicians, you ask administrators [for input] but nurses are not at the table when health care decisions are made. I think that should change," Lang said. "Nurses are in the health care field 24 hours a day, seven days a week, 52 weeks a year." "Nurses have a lot of insight into the solutions of health care problems," she added. Lang replaces former Nursing Dean Claire Fagin, who served as head of the school for 15 years.
(03/03/92 10:00am)
Some capital campaign donors may wait to see how much money, if any, the University receives from the state this year before deciding how to direct their pledges, administrators said last month. Otherwise, the University's billion-dollar capital campaign is not expected to fluctuate greatly during upcoming legislative debates to determine whether the University will retain $37 million in state funding, they added. "It is really to early to tell what will happen," said Rick Nahm, senior vice president for planning and development. "If there is a change it would occur once it is determined definitely what the appropriations are." Last month, Gov. Robert Casey proposed eliminating all of the University's state appropriations in his budget proposal. The General Assembly will now debate and revise the proposal before returning it to Casey for his signature this spring. Among the proposals, the governor suggested eliminating all state aid to the Veterinary School, an amount equalling 40 percent of its operating budget. Nahm noted, however, that the University updates donors of the budget situation. "Some people want to wait and see what is going to happen," Nahm added. "If the money is cut, you may see people rallying with gifts to restore it." "The rallying could particularly be seen in the Vet School or with financial aid," Nahm said. "Or you may see people putting their money in other areas of the University." Executive Vice President Marna Whittington said last month she believes donors know that the University is a "quality institution" and will continue to give. "The jury is out," Whittington said. "They may be waiting until we get through the appropriation issue." The capital campaign is divided into several smaller parts. Many donors request their money be placed one of these specific areas, such as financial aid or facilities. Nahm said that when the governor proposed halving the University's state appropriation last year, donors also watched to see how the University would eventually fare. He added the campaign was not affected greatly either way because the University retained $37 million in state funding. Budget Director Stephen Golding said last month that preserving the academic core will be the highest priority in the University's upcoming plan to deal with the potential cuts. The University's five-year $1 billion campaign is several months ahead of schedule and has raised 64 percent of its goal as of this summer.
(03/02/92 10:00am)
Classified research takes place at the University City Science Center, even though the center adopted a policy outlawing it years ago. Classified research takes place at the University City Science Center, even though the center adopted a policy outlawing it years ago.CORRECTION (3/3): A story in yesterday's Daily Pennsylvanian incorrectly stated that the University City Science Center does classified military research. While it does receive money from the Department of Defense, the research the UCSC conducts for the DoD is not classified. It seems as if one piece of history at the University has been lost. It deals with a little-known institution north of campus on Market Street named the University City Science Center, and it stands as a milestone that rocked the University. The UCSC's research policy was changed in 1969 as a result of intense protest and demonstration by both students and faculty on the University's campus, culminating in a six-day sit-in at College Hall. At the time, student and faculty activists felt the University was using the Science Center as a legitimate way for University professors to conduct classified military research while not breaking the University's open-research policies. Activists pressured the University to revise the charter to state that the UCSC "should only seek research contracts oriented to to the enrichment and prolongation of human life," and that "classified, military or Defense Department research" could not be undertaken by the UCSC. In the 20 years since the Science Center's charter was changed, its significance has all but vanished with its intents falling by the wayside. Some University and UCSC officials said last week that the center is ignoring the charter, which caused such a furor 20 years ago, and now conducts classified research. UCSC president Louis Padulo said he is "positive" the center conducts classified research, adding "I'm not aware of" the center's policy against it. So, while students and faculty protest the University's connections to the Department of Defense and the proposed Institute for Advanced Science and Technology, the classified research IAST opponents protest takes place every day at the Science Center -- a venture owned partially by the University. University and Science Center officials say the center's purpose has changed, that it promotes economic development as much as research. But the center's director displayed a marked lack of knowledge about both the policy and its history. · The UCSC is an institution that was "put together under change," said Robert Rutman, an emeritus professor of biochemical animal biology. He added that many of the faculty of today participated in the effort to change an establishment they felt was at the time "destructive" and "oppressing." And he questioned whether the University and the Science Center are living up to the charter that they set into place more than 20 years ago. No one expected the protests of February 18, 1969. Prior to this date, University activists had immersed themselves in civil rights, the research policies of the University itself and community housing. But in February 1969, over 600 students from the University and several surrounding universities marched on College Hall and began a sit-in that would last six days. Concerns about the various policies of the University City Science Center sparked the protest. Protestors had three demands: · First, that the UCSC give land it owned to West Philadelphia. · Second, that the UCSC, the University, and the West Philadelphia Corporation give money to build low rent housing to help out the community. · And third, that the UCSC change its charter so it could not undertake classified, military-related, or Department of Defense funded research. The final demand was a result of 37 classified projects being undertaken by University researchers. The projects, bearing names such as Spice Rack, Summit, and Big Ben, were all highly classified projects. The University undertook the projects so the United States military could gain an advantage in Vietnam using biological warfare. According to Robert Davies, a professor emeritus of molecular biology who was then the chairman of the committee on research at the UCSC, the University had recently established its own policy of not accepting "unpublishable" research. Administrators were then trying to fight the policy's renewal, and were transferring projects to the Science Center. But the president of the University at the time, Gaylord Harnwell, renewed the research for the Spice Rack project without notifying the faculty committee intending to reject the renewal. As well, Davies claimed the project was to be transfered to the UCSC when the University finally adopted its non-classified research policy. The transfer enabled the University to continue research without technically violating its own policy. But, in 1969, the University held 2000 shares in the UCSC, thereby giving it controlling power of administration. As a result, he said that he "welcomed such research as Spice Rack" to the UCSC. By switching the classified military projects to the UCSC, research would still be conducted under the auspices of the University. However, researchers would circumvent the ruling that the University itself had put in place to support "free-publication." "Part of the situation was that when Spice Rack was removed, it would go to the Science Center," Davies said. He also explained that over 10 colleges had arranged a consortium, with students at all shareholding colleges at the UCSC, to discuss the project transfer. The consortium would eventually lead to "the prevention of the project starting at the UCSC. This was a major aim of the sit-in," Davies explained. The executive vice president's words sparked a debate that would not end until his eventual resignation after the University won the charter battle. · On February 19, 1969, with College Hall 200 flanked with students, the time had come. The sit-in shook the campus awake, as debates, discussions, and forums were held to argue the issues the demonstrators were bringing to light. The demonstrators formed a steering committee that said its protesters would "stay in this building until we are satisfied that the Trustees of the University have taken postive action toward meeting the requests." The steering committee in fact threatened to turn the sit-in into an occupation of College Hall. By February 20, the second day of the College Hall sit-in, the demonstrators eagerly awaited the reaction of the administration, as approximately 400 students woke up to address President Harnwell as he dashed into his office. With the hallways jam-packed, the president soon returned to the hallway to face the students. The first to address Harnwell was Joe Mikuliak, the leader of Students for a Democratic Society. Mikuliak asked the president to "cut his jive and tell us straight, 'yes' or 'no' to our demands." That same day, the demonstration steering committee issued a statement demanding that "the Trustees of the University to be called to meet within the next 24 hours to discuss the demands about the UCSC and the role of the University within the community." One student demonstrator said that "It's about time the University is confronted so it faces its responsibility." · The results of the eventual six-day sit-in were astounding, explained Rutman. Alluding to the demonstrators at the time at Columbia and Berkeley, he explained that the six-day sit-in was the first "non-violent" protest accomplishing positive results from the standpoint of both students and administrators. By Sunday, February 23, 1969, the Trustees had reached an agreement with the demonstrators to honor all three of their demands. As a result of the Trustee's approval, the University established a quadripartite committee. It was charged with forging the University's future relations with the community and accepting "the concerns and aspirations of the surrounding community as its own concerns." The committee consisted of the Trustees, community members, faculty members, and students. By Monday, February 24, with the agreements and committees in place, the 800 satisfied demonstrators "drifted lazily" out of College Hall, donning victory signs to the watchers-on, according to news reports at the time. Ira Harkavy, the Vice Dean of the School of Arts and Sciences, who was then the head of the student negotiating team, declared "victory for the community of demonstrators." "We have won more than any other college movement in history." Harkavy said. In the aftermath of the sit-in victory, Davies said, a steering committee was set up to ensure that the newly-established charter of the UCSC was being obeyed. The steering committee consisted of three faculty and two students from Penn, and one faculty and student from the other universities that held shares in the UCSC. · More than 20 years later, two of the three goals are still intact. The community housing, which resulted from the first two student demands, is standing. Davies said the University followed through with the establishment of low-cost housing on the land originally belonging to the UCSC. Standing ghostly still on Market Street, the houses mark the progress of student devotion of twenty years long past. But the UCSC steering committee is only a memory. Davies, who was the chair of the committee, explained that it disbanded. "The student members simply stopped showing up, but the faculty [continued]," Davies said. "The students did not even vote to nominate new members. There was no point in keeping on the committee. One thing about students is that they often lose interest." Davies also said there was no longer a need for a committee, since the Science Center protest had already ostensibly met its goals of giving the land back to the community, building low-cost housing and preventing classified military research. (continues)
(03/02/92 10:00am)
Editors at college newspapers across the country said last night they are pleased with a Georgia court ruling allowing college newspapers access to student organizations' judicial records. Editors at both private and public schools said their school administrations frequently cite the Family Educational Records Privacy Act of 1974 to deny them access to files concerning disciplinary action taken against organizations. "We were waiting for this decision," Rutgers University The Daily Targum Editor-in-Chief Rebecca Quick said last night. "We are looking into the case." The Red and the Black, the independent student newspaper of the University of Georgia, won a partial victory last month in its lawsuit aimed at gaining access to the school's Organization Court -- the body which investigates student groups, specifically fraternities and sororities. Fulton County Superior Court Judge Frank Hull ruled the FERPA, which the University says is the backbone of its general records policy, does not apply to disciplinary records, Red and Black Editor-in-Chief Lance Helms said last month. Hull ruled that FERPA, which is commonly referred to as the Buckley Amendment, only applies to academic performance records, Helms said. Under the ruling Red and Black reporters will have access to all judicial records concerning organizations in both past and future cases, but are not allowed to attend the meetings. Helms added the paper will appeal the decision to the state supreme court to gain access to meetings. "It is implicit in the term educational institution that a university will educate its students about what constitutes appropriate and acceptable behavior," the College junior said last night. "Only through opening judicial records will this crucial aspect of education be successfully fulfilled." Currently, the University's judicial records are confidential and can not be viewed by reporters or anyone else not directly involved in the case. Indiana Daily Student Managing Editor Bruce Gray said his paper does not have access to judicial proceedings concerning organizations. He noted that Indiana University claims the records are condsidered an interdepartmental investigation which is protected by state law. "But there is an arrangement [under which] they will tell us what's going on," Gray said last night. "And they have been pretty good." Gray added that his independent newspaper, however, may use this case to demand more information through the Freedom of Information Act. Daniel Restrepo, editor-in-chief of The Cavalier Daily, the University of Virginia's independent newspaper, said his paper has "had trouble in the past" gaining access to the records. But UVA students will vote today on a school-wide referendum to open all of the judicial records that are "nonpersonally identifiable," Restrepo said. Restrepo said the referendum may open up judicial files at UVA, but noted that Cavalier Daily will still look into the Georgia decision and see how it applies to their state school. (CUT LINE) Please see EDITORS, page 5 EDITORS, from page 1
(02/28/92 10:00am)
Resolution passes 14 to 3 City Council members passed a resolution yesterday calling for a Council investigation to determine whether the University has violated a 1977 city ordinance in computing the number of Mayor's Scholarships it awards to Philadelphia high school students. The resolution calls for a series of hearings to decide whether the ambiguous ordinance calls for a total of 125 scholarships in any given year, as the University claims, or 125 new awards each year for a total of 500 in any given year, as many of the University's critics maintain. The resolution, sponsored by Councilman Angel Ortiz and signed by 14 of the 17 Council members, also stipulates that Council will determine what steps it should take "to secure the University's compliance" if the inquiry finds that the University has failed to meet its scholarship obligations. Only Council members Thacher Longstreth, Joan Specter and Joan Krajewski did not sign the resolution, Ortiz said. With the decision, City Council becomes the latest public entity to join the debate over the scholarships since the Public Interest Law Center of Philadelphia filed suit against the University on behalf of several plaintiffs last fall. But Council members said while the investigation was spurred by a local law center's class-action suit against the University over the number of scholarships, any conclusions City Council reaches will have no effect on the suit's status. Several members who voted for the resolution, including Ortiz, said yesterday that they think an investigation will affirm their belief that the University is not living up to its obligations. Other supporters of the resolution said they are still undecided and just hope an inquiry will uncover the facts. Councilwoman Happy Fernandez said she was "not going to jump to some conclusion" in the case and stressed that she considers the University to be "a very important and positive influence" in the city. She added that she hoped the hearings lead to a compromise between PILCOP and the University, and ultimately draw more attention to the "broad issue" of how the city gives students opportunities to develop "a skilled and competent workforce." Councilman Herbert DeBeary did not hesitate to blast the University's stance, saying that he sees "no ambiguity" in the language of the ordinance. "I strongly believe the University of Pennsylvania should honor the 125 new scholarships annually, which means that at any given time, there should be 500 [scholarship recipients] at Penn," he said. Councilman David Cohen concurred, adding that he felt the University had forgotten Philadelphia students during its quest in recent years to become a more prominent and prestigious national university. Cohen also criticized the city by suggesting that City Solicitor Judith Harris' finding last week that the University was in compliance with the ordinance was "somehow influenced" by the University's "close relationship" with the city. He suggested that the University's participation in a loan to the city last year and its prepayment of taxes to a strapped city treasury in October 1990 contributed to Harris' ruling and the city's subsequent decision not to join PILCOP's suit. "My experience is whenever a private corporation renders services to the city, there is almost always an element of payback at some future time," he said. David Cohen, Mayor Edward Rendell's chief of staff, could not be reached for comment yesterday, but he has vigorously denied Councilman Cohen's assertion in the past. Councilman Longstreth also could not be reached for comment yesterday, but his Chief of Staff Jon Weinstein said the councilman considers the planned investigation "ridiculous." "He agrees totally with Penn's position, the position of the city solicitor, and the position of the mayor," Weinstein said. "This is something we feel strongly about." After Harris agreed with the University's interpretation of the ordinance last week, Chief of Staff Cohen stated that the city would not be joining PILCOP's suit against the University. And last month, a group of 20 state representatives sent President Sheldon Hackney a letter in which they threatened not to help the University retain state funding this year due to its alleged failure to provide the proper number of scholarships.
(02/28/92 10:00am)
A state Republican leader yesterday vowed to support the University's efforts to retain state funding -- despite threats from other local legislators not to fight for the University. But the executive director of the Senate Appropriations Committee said the unpopularity of Gov. Robert Casey's proposed tax increase may further complicate the University's chances to retain state funding. Ryan said Casey's budget proposal announced earlier this month -- which ignored the University's request for $41.2 million -- surprised him. Ryan, whose role has been pivotal in arguing the University's case in past state budget battles, added he is upset with Casey's choice to eliminate the University's allocation entirely rather than phasing it out gradually. "I don't think under any set of circumstances it is morally right for the Governor to cut off the [University's] financial head with one fell swoop," he said. The minority leader added that the Veterinary School, the only one in Pennsylvania, is instrumental to the University's case for securing state funding. "[The Vet School] is far easier to sell than is the University," he said. Casey's proposal is the beginning of the state's six-month budget process. Both houses of the General Assembly will consider the proposal before devising the final budget for fiscal year 1993. Currently, the state Senate Appropriations Committee is conducting hearings and reviewing the details of the Governor's proposal, Executive Director of the Senate Appropriations Committee Bob Bittenbender said yesterday. Bittenbender said it is too early to tell how different the final budget will be from the Governor's proposal. He added that although he "support[s] the University," he is not optimistic about the University's chances of receiving funding. "I'm not sure how realistic it is at this point in the process that we'll be in the position to restore that [funding]," Bittenbender said. Bittenbender added "certain members of the General Assembly" will not support Casey's proposed tax increase, which would add $76.5 million to the state's annual income. If the taxes are not passed, this amount would have to be cut from Casey's proposal in order to balance the budget. He added that many Republicans support an unfinalized program to "repair the business tax climate" which could cost approximately $30 million. If passed, an additional $30 million would have to be cut from the rest of the budget to compensate for the program. "After that, additional cuts could be used to start to restore some of the cuts of the Governor, including the University of Pennsylvania," Bittenbender said. In the past, the state legislature has consistently increased the University's appropriation level over Casey's proposal. But this support was threatened when President Sheldon Hackney received a letter from 20 local state legislators saying they will not help the University regain its funding due to a controversial lawsuit. The legislators said they believe the University should provide more Mayor's Scholarships to needy Philadelphia schoolchildren.
(02/26/92 10:00am)
Representatives of the University's next sorority introduced themselves and their organization to the University last night in Houston Hall. Pi Beta Phi sorority, which will become the University's ninth member of the PanHellenic Council, stressed its strong support nationally and its focus on sisterhood during an hour-long presentation. The presentation in Bodek Lounge included a slide show and question-and-answer session and capped off the sorority's three-day long visit to campus, which featured display tables and a constant flow of prospective members into the room. "The representatives have been very impressive," Anne McGowan, chairperson of the PanHel expansion committee said. Pi Phi is one of the largest PanHel sororities nationally, boasting 129 chapters as well as the one colonizing at the University in the fall. They have chapters on several other Ivy League campuses, including Cornell University and Princeton University. Kim Barker, a resident graduate consultant for Pi Phi at Marquette University in Wisconsin, told the group they could shape the process the Pi Phi colony would undertake. "You can shape [the new chapter] from the ground up and make it what you want it to be," she said to the audience of about 150 women, a mix of prospective Pi Phis and members of other PanHel houses showing their support. Barker added the chapter is looking for "go-getters," and that "diversity is key." McGowan said the new sorority is being welcomed with open arms. "During rush, it became apparent that there is a demand for more houses on this campus," the College senior said. "Every chapter had a say in this, and the chapters overwhelmingly wanted a new sorority." Jane Russell, Pi Phi's national expansion director, said in her speech that the University's PanHel is eager to have the sorority come to campus. Pi Phi will be conducting a colony rush in the fall and will join the other eight PanHel houses in regular rush in the spring. Pi Phi's representitives said they will not, however, have a house next year. Carolyn Lesh, Pi Phi's national vice-president for membership, said that finding a chapter house is a priority. "[We will] try very hard to get a house," she said. Tricia Phaup, director of the Office of Fraternity and Sorority Affairs, said she was pleased with the turnout. PanHel President Debra Frank said that she is happy to welcome the new sorority to the University community. "I am very excited to extend to Pi Phi a warm welcome on behalf of the entire system," she said.
(02/26/92 10:00am)
Faculty and students reacted with dismay to Assistant History Professor Dain Borges' tenure denial, saying the refusal makes the future of the Latin American Studies program tenuous. Borges, while recommended for tenure by the History department, was recently turned down for tenure at the level of a School of Arts and Sciences personnel committee. "I think it's a tragedy for the department . . . he's the smartest young Latin American professor there is, and it's just a grotesque mistake of the personnel committee, and a slap in the face to the Latin American Studies program here," History Professor Michael Zuckerman said yesterday. Romance Languages Professor Jose Miguel Oviedo said Borges' denial would be a loss to the University. "I think that we are losing a valuable young professor and scholar," Oviedo said. Romance Languages Associate Chairperson Peter Earle said that Borges' extensive work in organizing colloquia on Latin American topics of many disciplines, as well as his assistance in organizing the University's Latin American Cultures program, proved his qualifications as a scholar. Earle added that the lack of Latin American faculty and courses throughout the University calls into question the University's commitment to Latin American studies. "It seems very contradictory at a time when the importance of strengthening the Latin American program is being discussed, not to have people representing those fields," Earle said. Earle also said that the current hiring freeze in the School of Arts and Sciences could jeopardize the University's ability to find someone to replace Borges. Pamela Urueta, president of the Asociacion Cultural de Estudiantes Latino Americanos, said she is disappointed that Borges has been denied tenure. "I am very disappointed that he was not given a positive recommendation from the personnel committee," Urueta said. "I think that was a big oversight on their part." Urueta said that without Borges, completing a Latin American Studies minor will be "very difficult." "This is symbolic of what Latin American Studies means to the school, or what it doesn't mean to the school," Urueta said. "That's really frustrating because the history of Latin America and its people is important to everybody in the United States, not just Latinos."
(02/25/92 10:00am)
Requested that Goode wait The City of Philadelphia was preparing early last month to join a local law center's class-action lawsuit against the University, when incoming Mayor Edward Rendell requested that then-Mayor Wilson Goode hold off on the move. In a letter dated January 6, Goode assured Rendell that he would let the new mayor decide whether to add the city as a plaintiff in the suit, which claims the University provides needy Philadelphia high school students with only one-quarter of the Mayor's Scholarships that a city ordinance requires. "If I had not received your request I would have filed the Motion [to intervene]," Goode wrote to Rendell. "Accordingly, I do urge you to file the [motion] once your City Solicitor has had a chance to review this matter." Last week, Judith Harris, Rendell's acting city solicitor, agreed with the University's stance on the controversial scholarship program, concluding that the lawsuit challenging the University is unfounded. And David Cohen, Rendell's chief of staff, wrote in a cover letter attached to Harris' opinion that, based on the solicitor's finding, the city would not join the Public Interest Law Center of Philadelphia in its suit against the University. Neither Harris nor Cohen could be reached for comment yesterday. Thomas Wamser, a former deputy city solicitor who drafted Goode's motion to intervene, suggested yesterday that the Goode and Rendell administrations reached opposite decisions on whether to join the suit because the "roles were different" for Wamser and Rendell's Harris. He said he simply decided at Goode's request that the city could intervene in the suit and defend its position reasonably well. Harris, by contrast, did not receive "directions from above" and based her opinion solely on whether the city should intervene for legal reasons, Wamser said. Although the city's intervention clearly would have bolstered PILCOP's case, Goode said yesterday that he had not taken sides in the case and wanted the city to intervene only "to get to the facts in the case." "My interest is to find out precisely what the truth is," Goode said. "I'm not reaching any conclusions as to what the facts are, but I think it's very, very important that the city be a participant in the overall process -- not to take sides but to let the facts come out." Goode added that his decision was not politically motivated, saying, "No one pressured me at all and no one called me at all." But Wamser said that Goode did take PILCOP's side and told him last fall he would like the city to join the suit "if at all possible." "The mayor's concern was that local high school students get everything they are entitled to under the law," Wamser said. "Having the city in the suit as plaintiff would help PILCOP because then the court would have both sides of the agreement there and we would be on PILCOP's side." The city's participation also probably would have damaged the University's argument that the plaintiffs' suit lacks standing because there was never any intent to give third parties the right to enforce the agreement between the city and the University. "As none of the plaintiffs to this action are parties to the contract between the City and the University, the interests of the City are not adequately protected by the current parties," Goode's unfiled motion reads. But Wamser said he had "some reservations" about recommending that the city join the suit because previous city administrations and Handsel Minyard, a former solicitor under Goode, had determined in the past that the University was in compliance with the ordinance. Minyard did not return a phone call placed at his home last night. The suit alleges that a 1977 city ordinance requires the University to provide 125 new four-year scholarships each year, for a total of 500 at any one time. The University maintains that the ordinance calls for a total of 125 scholarships at any one time.
(02/25/92 10:00am)
Some members of the Faculty Senate Executive Committee are seriously considering leaving University Council, representatives said yesterday. "The probability is that the faculty will withdraw [from Council]," said City Planning Professor Anthony Tomazinis. Tomazinis and Faculty Senate Past Chairperson Almarin Phillips said SEC would be least likely to remain on Council in its present form. They sit on a three-member SEC subcommittee headed by Phillips which has been examining the structure and function of Council. Phillips added that his subcommittee's report will include "constructive" suggestions for Council reform and said that ultimately SEC "might continue to participate." But other SEC members have mixed feelings about whether SEC should withdraw from Council. Faculty Senate Chairperson-elect David Hildebrand said last week he has still not decided where he stands. "[My position reminds me of] a sign in [Deputy Provost] Dick Clellend's office -- 'the answer is maybe and that's final,' " Hildebrand said. "That's where I am on Council right now." Some SEC members have criticized the atmosphere at Council meetings, saying that many student members are only interested in furthering their own agendas, while others have suggested the problems lie with the large size of the body. Hildebrand said he finds Council meetings "frustrating." "Nothing works," Tomazinis said. "[It's the] administrators dueling with two or three students -- that's not a University Council." Hildebrand added he does not blame Council members, although the structure causes a lot of the problems. Phillips said the SEC subcommittee will "recommend significant changes" to the existing Council by-laws. He would not specify which by-laws the committee would suggest changing in its plan, which will be presented to SEC next week. "As I perceive it, it's time that something be done," he said. Two years ago, Council members attempted to reform the format of the body's meetings by creating the role of moderator, a job that had been previously assumed by President Sheldon Hackney. Most Council members said they agree the atmosphere at Council has improved since the addition of an independent moderator. But SEC members disagree over whether the situation has improved enough to make Council an effective advisory body. "[Council members] have been better behaved in the past two years," Phillips said. He added he is unsure whether to attribute the improvement to the moderator or to changes in what Council discusses and the consituencies' representatives. Finance Professor Emeritus Jean Crockett said she hopes SEC members remain in Council because the changes made in Council have "greatly improved, if not solved" any problems in the body. While students leaders do not take the faculty members' threat of Council withdrawal very seriously since they discuss it annually, student Council members said yesterday they hope faculty members will not desert the body. Undergraduate Assembly Chairperson Mitchell Winston, who in the past has urged SEC members to remain on Council, said yesterday the format has improved the meetings and he is willing to discuss possible structural changes with SEC members. "I don't think they'll leave this forum," Winston said. But he added that he can understand faculty members' complaints because "no one gains from a waste of time." Graduate student activist Elizabeth Hunt said she is angered by SEC's "remarkably childish" threats. "Students are using University Council to its fullest advantage," Hunt said. "[If we have to,[ we will continue the forum as best we can without them. The faculty should quit [threatening to] take their toys and go home."
(02/25/92 10:00am)
The University Police Department's new policy of releasing the race of suspects to the media prompted a broad array of reactions from minority communities at the University. Police and University administrators offered only vague explanations for the rationale behind the decision, but students yesterday reacted to the decision either with harsh criticism or qualified approval. "I'm skeptical at best, and I'm very wary of this issue. I feel scared because of the negative effect [the decision] can have on race relations," Wharton junior and Black Student League President Martin Dias said last night. United Minorities Council Chairperson You-Lee Kim said releasing racial descriptions of suspects is appropriate only in certain cases. "My general sense is that as long as the information is released very carefully, that it can be useful for safety and security purposes. I think it can be harmful when suspects who have been caught are identified by race," she said. "I don't think that a person's race should be revealed unless it is crucial for identification purposes," she added. Dias, however, said that releasing the race of a suspect is never beneficial. "I'm very suspicious -- it will not tend to alleviate the crime situation. All it is going to do is fuel the fire of racial insensitivity," he added. But University Police Commissioner John Kuprevich said last week that "based upon questions from The Daily Pennsylvanian, this department took a look at its standing policy and decided it was appropriate to change what we felt was no longer appropriate. It was as simple as that." Wharton freshman Brian Gilliard said the decision is "kind of a good idea -- it will be beneficial in trying to apprehend people." On the other hand, he added that although the decision "might decrease the crime somewhat, it might cause the University community to look down on blacks in the neighborhood as well as in the University." Wharton junior Onyango Adija said he does not think race is a helpful factor in descriptions. "If you want a description that's going to help a person be identified, you have to give more than just race," he said. "I don't think race is such a unique feature. Unless a description sets a person apart, I don't think it helps that much."
(02/21/92 10:00am)
I was very pleased to read that University Police has decided to begin providing the race of suspects (DP 2/21/92). Not only is the decision logical in helping to apprehend suspects, but it was about time the University Police matured enough to deal with the issue of race instead of just ignoring it. I assume the University did not report race previously because it assumed it would be seen as fostering prejudice by reporting that most of the criminals were black. Yet, this theory was greatly flawed because by not reporting race, the University Police enhanced racism. People simply assumed that the criminals were black, not because of prejudices, but simply because of the demographics of West Philadelphia. Outside of the University, most of the residents are black, thus most of the victims and criminals are black. ADAM COHEN College '95
(02/10/92 10:00am)
I just read the column by Sarah Goldfine and Theresa Weir (DP 2/10/92) and I wanted to comment on it. It contained so many distortions and false statements that at first I didn't know where to begin. Then I realized that there was no need to. Don't get me wrong: I really believe that they are sincere in their efforts to help. But my heavens, what planet did those two grow up on to come up with such distortions and actually believe them? I do want to respond to some of the allegations that were made in the column. There are some innaccuracies that may not be perceived as such by the public that I'd like to set straight. You stated that there is no concrete evidence to support store clerk Kevin Dales story of what happened. I was there personally to watch about 15 detectives take my store apart while they examined every last detail. They even cut open the wall to retrieve the projectile, took blood samples and took fingerprints. Every last bit of this evidence fits with Dales' story. You stated that there were no witnesses. You forgot Andre McNatte's accomplice Antoine, who pleaded guilty to armed robbery in family court on the day your column was printed. He corroborated Dales' story completely. In case you were interested, the probability of his being sent to prision is very small: so much for your theory that the court is intent on railroading him into prison. You stated that Sam's is a "hip white" store. Kevin Dales, Daryl and Dave Willis, who all work at Sam's, would be quite suprised to hear that they are white. Together they make up about 40 percent of the hired man-hours put into this store. Why do you always forget to mention that Kevin Dales is a black man, anyway? You stated that Sam's was closed by a successful boycott. Actually, the more flyers that your organization handed out, the better business got. I closed Sam's temporarily -- two weeks is the plan -- in response to a fifth armed robbery. I will reopen as soon as I have installed security systems that will prevent a holdup from ever happening again at my store. You stated that Sam's is a Yuppie store. If by "yuppie" you mean "white," you are mistaken. Sam's clientele is approximately 50 percent black, 50 percent white, possibly leaning towards a greater percentage of blacks. You stated that we are part of a process of gentrification. Sam's has been in the neighborhood for at least 25 years. When I bought Sam's in 1986, the majority of business occurred during the school year. Now, five years later, business is best during the summer, when students and other "yuppies" have gone home. You stated that the blacks who come into my store can't afford it. Why then do they keep coming back, especially when Acme and Thriftway are much cheaper and only two blocks away. Why is 50 percent of my clientele black if I am such the evil oppressor that you make me out to be? Why do black persons continue to be employed at my store? Any who are you to make a statement telling the approximately 200 to 300 blacks a day who come into my store what they can afford and what they can't? You treat a whole race of persons like they can't make their own decisions and need you to look out for them. You are ethnocentrists of a most insidious type. You stated that I was a vigilante. That implies that I took the law into my own hands. You seem to forget that I wasn't even there the night of the incident. I don't want to imply that I wouldn't have done what Kevin did. Andre McNatte came in intending to do Kevin harm and Kevin did what any other being would have done and has a right to do: he protected himself. I would have done the same thing. And I dare say that you, Sarah Goldfine and Theresa Weir, would too. If someone came at you intending to hurt you badly, you cannot convince me that you would stand there and let them go about their business without attempting everything in your means to stop them. Andre McNatte was shot because he came at someone with a knife. He didn't get shot because he was black, and he wasn't force to rob Sam's because of his economic situation: he had food on his plate every day, new clothes on his back, and a beautiful row house on Larchwood Avenue to sleep in every night. It's true that he didn't have a father around, but that situation is by no means an limited to any race in our society. And it certainly is no excust to hold up the local grocery store. You stated that I care more about property than about life. The fact of the matter is I was so concerned that someone else was going to get shot at Sam's that I closed the store down until such time occured that I was sure that it can't happen again. Theresa, you are a homeowner. Since you decry the use of dogs in back yards and block watches, surely you don't have a lock on your front door do you? I also would like to print your address so that persons wanting to take your belongings know where you live. We all know that charity begins at home, right? Oh, about this gentrification thing: I know that you will be moving out of your house soon and donating it to a deserving person of the proper race. It's clear from what you say that it is wrong for you to own it since you are white. My point is that you two have spent an awful lot of time tearing down, working to divide and fostering hate when in fact you don't even practice what you preach. They made up a word just for you two and that word is hypocrite. In conclusion, I want to say that despite all of your divisiveness, you have not succeeded in turning this into a racial issue and you have not closed Sam's. People like you only remind us that we have a great thing here in University City and it will continue to be that way because of the people who make this place their home. Simpletons like you cannot even begin to touch it. So please take your hate and your desire to destroy somewhere else. There is no room for it here in University City. Sam's will be back with its multi-racial clientele and it's multi-racial staff and this neighborhood will be all that much stronger for it. DAVE GRAVES Owner Sam's Place
(02/10/92 10:00am)
I am very confused by a recent column entitled "Sam's Place and the Evils of White Gentrification" (DP 2/10/92). Are Sarah Goldfine and Theresa Weir trying to say that the young boy who robbed the store at knife point was completely innocent? Granted, shooting the 14-year old might not have been the best solution, but we certainly cannot call Andre McNatte an innocent victim. After all, he was committing armed robbery. Second of all, it seems that two DP articles in the same edition conflict. In the aforementioned column, it is insinuated that Sam's Place closed due to a successful boycott. Flipping to the front page, the DP reports that Sam's Place was closed due to a second robbery attempt the previous Thursday. Which reason is correct? Additionally, why aren't there more black business owners? And why are blacks forced to shop at white businesses where "the prices are high, the merchandise is poor, and the owners are at best rudely racist"? How can such a business survive in a black community? There must be some kind of demand for their goods or wouldn't the store go out of business? Maybe I don't have the same business sense as the authors, but who is buying these expensive goods in all of these depressed black neighborhoods? According to the owner of Sam's Place, the store had a mixed clientele. I've never been there, but you describe the sale of fresh pastries and exotic coffee. These items are hardly a necessity in an economically depressed person's life. Besides, Acme is just a few blocks away. Also, what exactly are "block watches"? In my neighborhood they are used to deter crime -- I hardly think this is a form of vigilantism. And I think that the owner's statement about being on the "winning side this time" -- please correct me if I'm wrong -- could possibly refer to the war against crime. After all, he does say "this time." How was he defeated "last time?" And where did you find your facts? The "1990 Uniform Crime Reports" published by the FBI -- which falls under the Department of Justice -- lists violent crimes per 100,000 people up 23.1 percent since 1981, not zero percent as was erroneously reported. You can check it yourself in the 1992 edition of The World Almanac on page 954 -- if you need help finding it, I'm sure the librarian at Van Pelt can help you. In your last sentence you state that you want to "protest the media's lies" and that's exactly what I am doing. Please get back to us when you have some solid, accurate facts and some arguments that are rational and justifiable. Until then, keep alienating the white community and increasing racial tension. STEPHEN EULER Veterinary '93
(02/07/92 10:00am)
Could mean slashed programs The Morris Arboretum will have to slash its programs drastically if it does not receive the funding it requested from the state, officials said yesterday. Gov. Robert Casey ignored the arboretum's request for $400,000 in Wednesday's budget proposal -- an amount equalling almost twenty percent of its annual budget. "We can run, but it would cripple our operation," Arboretum Director Paul Meyer said yesterday. "The Arboretum will survive at some level . . . but to lose this kind of support it would affect its ability to be a world-class botanical garden." The University-managed Arboretum has recently been plagued by state-caused financial problems in addition to being left out of Wednesday's budget proposal. Last month, Casey froze $250,000 of the Arboretum's appropriation for this year as a precaution should the state not take in enough money to pay its bills. Meyer said the Arboretum is still trying to have this year's funding restored. The Arboretum's annual budget is $2 million, generated by a combination of grants, endowments, memberships and admissions fees. The Arboretum was also ignored in Casey's original budget proposal last February, before securing its $400,000 appropriation in the Pennsylvania state legislature's budget in August. "It is not rare for them not to be [included in the governor's proposal]," Executive Vice President Marna Whittington said yesterday, adding that the Arboretum usually receives its money from the legislature. Whittington added that the University has strong ties to the Arboretum which it has does not intend to abandon. "We have an obligation [to the Arboretum]," she said. But, "we all have to figure out a way to get through this." Casey's budget proposal, announced Wednesday, allocated no state funding to the University. The University, which received $37.6 million last year after heavy lobbying, asked for nearly $41.2 million in state funding.
(12/09/91 10:00am)
A University student and a University employee were victims of a rape and a sexual assault in a robbery of their home on the 4500 block of Spruce Street Saturday, according to University Police. Commissioner John Kuprevich said the two roommates were robbed and assaulted at knifepoint and gunpoint. Kuprevich said both University Police and the Philadelphia Sex Crimes Unit are investigating the incident. A Philadelphia Sex Crimes official declined to comment on the case. The incident comes in the wake of five robberies and several burglaries this weekend in the University area. University Police said they could not give out any description of the assailant, say what was stolen from the apartment, how the assailant gained entry, how long he was there, or if they had any suspects. University Police also declined to say if the two victims were injured and if so, how seriously. Police also did not say if the victims knew their assailant.
(11/25/91 10:00am)
When Robert Zemsky talks, buildings collapse. Then, ground is broken for new facilities in a half-dozen places on campus. And new paths are paved, and the streams of cars and people flowing through the University are diverted in new directions. The chaos doesn't actually begin today, or even tomorrow. Probably not even this century. But in some distant future, as the University's chief planning officer talks, you can hear skyscrapers crumble. Small bombshells like these, each potentially reworking the face of campus, drop from Zemsky's mouth at an alarming rate. He is heading up design of the University's 30-year plan, a document which won't even be written until next fall. In the meantime, however, Zemsky is testing out some of the plan's potential bombshells on University officials. Take October's University Council meeting, for example. Zemsky, pointer in hand and a computer graphic slide presentation in tow, tried to suggest that the University will purchase the Civic Center as a place to expand the Medical Center. We need to acquire the Civic Center. I want to say that quietly -- I don't know how we'll do that. Bombs away. Not only could the acquisition potentially cost the University $60 million, but the city hadn't even put the building up for sale. In a private conversation in his office at 42nd and Pine streets, the bombs continue to drop. We probably made a mistake in building the high rises. In retrospect, they're stupid. Boom. Because the bombshells are dropped with an understated delivery and constant reminders that changes will happen "not today, not tomorrow, probably not this century," somehow the wildest, most whimsical, most earth-shattering suggestions seem a matter of course, even destiny. We need to see ourselves as much as a Philadelphia university, as well as a West Philadelphia university. · The 30-year plan revolves around what is referred to as the Pedestrian Core of campus, an area that theoretically expands outward from a location near the center of Locust Walk, but slightly northward toward the site of the future campus center. Surrounding this epicenter of campus activity are five overlapping districts: the Center City Gateway, the South Street Gateway, the Civic Center, the Woodland Gateway and Hamilton Village. In terms Zemsky borrowed from music, he said each of these districts should be designed as architectural planning "variations" on the pedestrian core's "major theme." "That's the way you build integration," he said. An additional district included in the plan, dubbed the Riverfront, lies outside the Pedestrian Core. The goal in the Pedestrian Core, according to Zemsky, will be "to increase activity at all times, but disperse it better." "We've got to have traffic flow more evenly across the pedestrian core," he said. The construction of the Revlon Campus Center, which many administrators hope will pull the center of campus northward, will help accomplish these goals. Zemsky hopes the 37th and 36th Street Walks and the shortcuts through Stiteler Plaza will become more important student arteries. Zemsky also insisted that this may require changes in automobile traffic flow along Walnut Street to encourage people to cross over more easily. "I'm always going to say convert vehicular [streets] to walking," Zemsky said, but added that in the case of Walnut Street, more realistic goals might be to "not close it, reduce it," and "divert the tributaries." He said the University should monitor the city and lobby it when it makes traffic routing decisions because decisions made during far-off-campus road construction can direct traffic onto or away from campus, he said. Vice Provost for University Life Kim Morrisson, the chairperson of two committees planning the campus center and the future of Locust Walk, said the proposed 30-year plan meshes well with plans made in these committees. "I think it's an ambitious plan, very exciting," Morrisson said. "I think it is actually quite consistent with the Locust Walk plan." Zemsky and others also hope to accent the Woodland Avenue spur that intersects Locust Walk. This now-paved walk enters campus at the southwest corner of Hill Field, crosses 34th and Walnut, continues as a diagonal of Locust Walk until it passes between Steinberg-Dietrich Hall and the Wistar Institute, and runs between the Quadrangle and Stouffer Triangle. The University is already planning to extend Woodland Walk across Hill Field and replace Hill Field's grass with astroturf to allow continued use as a recreation space. However, according to Vice President of Facilities Management Arthur Gravina, who serves as the trustees' liaison to the 30-year planning committee, this could mean some changes in freshmen orientation activities in future years. "You wouldn't want to bring barbeques onto an astroturf field," Gravina said. "You don't [want] ashes to drop." Another goal for the pedestrian core is to "poke holes" through psychological walls along Market Street, where the pedestrian core meets the so-called "Northern Interface" with local neighborhoods. This "wall," some administrators say, was intended to shield the University from the outside world, and may have done more harm than good. "Thirty years later it does not work exactly as it was intended," Zemsky said. · A person who was last on campus 30 years ago might not recognize the University today. The campus of 1961 was about half the size of the campus of 1991, confined to a triangular area stretching east to the Women's Dormitories (Hill House), south to the Hospital complex, west to the tip of the Men's Dormitories (the Quadrangle) and back down the Woodland car-and-trolley transit line. A circular path ran in front of College Hall and between the two libraries, Furness and Van Pelt. Meyerson Hall didn't exist. Hillel and the Christian Association were in their present-day location, but they were across 36th Street, not 36th Street Walk. West of College Green, Dietrich Hall existed, but Steinberg Hall had not been built around it. (Present-day Trustee Saul Steinberg graduated from Wharton only two years before.) The new Annenberg School was nearing completion, but Annenberg Center didn't exist. The Hare building, which was connected to Logan Hall, housed the Music and Psychology departments and the Philomathean Society, but was soon torn down to build Williams Hall. Locust Walk was still Locust Street from 36th Street to 40th Street. Cars still drove down 37th and 39th street, traversing Locust Street. But there was no Superblock, no high rises or low rises, no 1920 Commons, no McNeil Building, no Stouffer Triangle, no Vance Hall, no Aresty Institute, no Book Store at 38th Street and no bridge. This western area of campus was dominated by houses and rowhouses, many of them housing the fraternities now at the center of the Locust Walk controversy. "When you realize how much has changed in the last 30 years, you realize how much can change in the next 30," Morrisson said. · Ironically, much of the new construction that occurred over the past 30 years has been singled out for possible change in the next 30. In the Hamilton Village area -- what is traditionally known as West Campus -- the high rises stick out, in more ways than one, as a possible site for future change. Zemsky said that 24-story apartment buildings aren't generally designed for hundreds of students who all have to go to class at 10 a.m. "They're not great historic monuments," he said. "We could think next century [of] reengineering Hamilton Village without them. Those are towers in the wrong place." The alternative Zemsky describes is a "return to the past" -- a smaller scale, "urban village" that interfaces with the rest of West Philadelphia. "We don't want a hard line because we have a sense of community and neighborliness," Zemsky said. Morrisson also said she likes the idea of a "much more small scale, Locust Walk-like environment." In this district and the Woodland Gateway areas of the campus map, administrators say they want a kinder, gentler relationship with West Philadelphia than when the University pulled its weight to have whole blocks condemned, pushing residents and businesses west to allow for new construction. But although one community leader said the plans sound like an improvement, he said the University may not be able to convince local residents. "Those are certainly laudable sentiments," Spruce Hill Community Association President David Hochman said. Hochman said the fact that the University did not tell the community of the plans makes him skeptical. "It's difficult to believe they're realistic [when they do not] even to reach out with that plan," he said. "It's difficult to take those sentiments seriously."
