In an open meeting last night with members of the constitution and implementation committees for the proposed Undergraduate Council, several students questioned the need for assured minority representation.

The meeting marked the latest in a series of attempts by the constitution and implementation committees to explain and defend their controversial constitution proposal before various members of the University, and response last night proved another indication that many students remain unhappy with certain planks in the proposal.

Several students at the meeting--which took place directly before the Student Assembly meeting and was attended mostly by assembly members--called on members of the constitution committee to provide evidence that minorities would not be adequately represented in the council without the minority provision, which calls for seven minority groups to share two votes on the council's administrative committee.

Michael G. Colantuono '83, a member of the constitution committee and a Gay Students Association representative, responded to these comments, saying that "it was our experience after several years at Harvard" that minorities would face difficulties in acquiring regular seats on the council.

Several students at the meeting said they did not think that most undergraduates would support such a provision. But Steven C. Perry '85, an assembly member who said last night he favored the proposal, added that much of the negative response by students to the minority provision stems from their own misconceptions about the provision.

"A lot of students I've talked to think [the provision] gives each minority a double vote on the council," Perry said. He added that when students are informed that the proposal actually gives minorities what amounts to largely a symbolic role on the council they "wonder why people are making such a big deal about it."

But Veronica Sarrato '84 said she "philosophically" disagreed with the provision. "As a minority student, I don't see any reason that one group should have special advantages over another."

Despite the number of students at the open meeting who questioned the minority provision, the assembly in a straw vote later last night rejected, 22-18, a proposal calling for the plank to be dropped from the constitution.

Minority Provision

In making the proposal, Kenneth Wexler '84 said the constitution should either strike the minority provision altogether or give minority representatives full voting power on the regular council--a move he said would be "not only undemocratic, but anti-democratic as well."