Dean of Students Ann Quinley, Director of the Campus Center Neil Gerard and President Peter Stanley met with a group of students Monday night as part of an open forum to address student opinion regarding the Smith Campus Center.

Turnout was poor at the senate-sponsored event; the crowd being composed mostly of campus center task force members, senators, and TSL staff.

The design of the campus center has been met with mixed reviews since its opening at the beginning of the school year with students citing small meeting places and a poorly placed recreation room among its many problems.

The Office of Student Affairs and Quinley in particular have created an ad hoc committee, or task force, composed of students and administrators to address student concerns about the campus center.

The task force suggested the forum. The Task Force is comprised of two faculty members, two staff members, and 15 students–including representatives from each class.

Some students, however, have suggested that the Office of Student Affairs restricted its consideration of students for the task force to those who would work most easily with the administration.

Both administrators and task force members have responded to these accusations by citing the limited number of applicants to the committee itself, as well as the poor attendance at the open forum.

Senior Class President Gabriel London, a task force member, endorses the forum as a way to ensure that the voices of all concerned students could be heard.

"The forum was a kind of response to Dean Quinley’s committee, which is much more of a select representative committee," said London.

He continued, "The forum seemed like a good idea because it was open to everyone – anyone could voice their concerns to some of the administrators most responsible for changes in the Smith Campus Center."

London believes the task force and ASPC Senate have been effective in creating solutions for student concerns about the campus center, and reported Wednesday that the administration had promised several reforms in the coming weeks.

Among these are the conversion of two ground level meeting rooms into recreation rooms and lounges, the addition of patio lights and greenery, bike racks, a mural in the downstairs social room, and extended Café hours on Weekends.

During the forum itself many issues were discussed, including concerns that freshman would be unappreciative, and hence unwilling, to take an active role in voicing their suggestions about the campus center.

Other complaints related to the functionality of the center.

Many students felt that the placement of the game room on the upper level of the Campus center, away from the main walkway of the center, makes it an undesirable destination for students and explains the desolate nature of the room thus far.

Students also felt that there were not enough student spaces throughout the center (citing the 17 rooms dedicated to meetings, and the lack of prominent places where students could relax, save the courtyard.)

"I think you’ll see that we are going to be extraordinarily responsive," Gerard said, "The things that you will see in the next couple of weeks, many did not come from forum. We discussed them in the student Task Force. Many of the ideas suggested were really reiterated by the forum–I can’t think of anything we’re not exploring apart from tearing down walls."

However, according to London, the removal of the wall between meeting rooms 132 and 133, where the temporary student lounge will be, is being considered for the long term.

"The stuff that you’ll see next week is all short term stuff that we wanted, and we eventually got after being persistent," said London, continuing, "We’ll probably even start talking about the costs for tearing down the wall for next year."

Gerard admitted that students have suffered from the building’s setbacks for some time.

"The building was supposed to be done March 7, but it was actually done in September. This was six months behind schedule. Because of that, students were subjected to additional delays that they shouldn’t have been," said Gerard.

Over the next few months improvements will be made to the campus center. The forum, however, was in some ways disappointing.

London said, "The forum was effective in the sense that if we want things to change, it’s important that we keep reiterating students complaints and suggestions. The only reason the forum was a slight let-down was because turnout was not quite as good as it could have been. A larger turnout lets administration know that students are concerned. I know people are upset, but larger turnout expresses that."

London explained that it seemed that a lot more students voiced complaints to the senate than actually showed up at meetings.

Most students, though, just want the long process of building to be over with. Michael Herman ’02, said, "I wish all the problems would be done with, because the students aren’t getting full use out of the building as it is right now. I think we’re just tired of all the delays."