Many are optimistic about the council's proven potential, but few believe that the coming years--the most crucial in the life of any new student organization--are going to be easy ones. And Epps, who ran this year's highly successful fall elections, cautions that first year turnouts are usually deceptive as indicators of student interest, primarily because there are always a number of people who will run "just because it's something new."

While the long-term visibility of the government seems to be the central question, this year's council will likely not be deterred by the plethora of procedural questions that devoured much of last year. They should expect to benefit from the first council's extensive work on developing the body's internal rules and procedures, considered by many a "necessary evil."

Even more important, though, will be the record of work that never made it into the council's minutes. By year's end, council leaders had quietly developed a set of guidelines for the council to handle controversial "political" issues. These aimed at insuring that hot issues receive the uniform scrutiny and treatment ideally accorded to the more standard council business of grants and a range of issues related to the residential, educational, and extracurricular lives of Harvard students. Those guidelines--while not binding on this year's representatives--will join an extensive set of internal memoranda and recommendations designed. Pratap says, to give the council an "institutional memory" that insures against the potential discontinuity that has hindered previous student governments.

But Pratap and others realize that internal memos and precedents can only go so far. They say that this year's council may have to sacrifice some of its own ambitious goals just to guarantee that tangible benefits are garnered and visible to undergraduates. With greater satisfaction outside the chambers of a student government perceived as a way toward a happier--and more efficient group of council members, many will also be looking in next year's council for leaders who can provide the kind of decisive direction that, at times, was noticeably lacking this spring. Without it, the council may never be able to attract any more than a small core of dedicated students.

No one seems willing to deny that the latest attempt at undergraduate governance holds promise. But, unlike other undergraduate groups with healthy traditions that help support their new endeavors from year to year, the council is working under a deadline. Its predecessors have not lasted long--the previous Student Assembly lasted four years and its fate had become clear long before its final meeting.

At the same time that council members try to effect real change and influence, they feel compelled to keep a perspective on their structure's fragility. Says Epps: "My theory is that new arrangements of this sort last about a decade. We always have to be flexible and willing to look at it again." Saying "there's really no reason for the council to exist if it doesn't have the support of students." Pratap suggests that a yearly referendum asking students if they approve of the council's performance might be useful.

Another question in the Crimson poll found that 75 percent of undergraduates say they are "better off with" the current form of student government. With 14 percent unsure, only 11 percent wish the Undergraduate Council was not in place. But the downfall of the Student Assembly provides a chilling reminder of how quickly plans for effective College governance can sour: With an initial voter turnout of more than 50 percent and three times as many candidates as seats, the government met with great enthusiasm, but within two years it had become a volunteer organization.

In the eyes of some officials, the only way to make sure that things never reach that point is for the council to reach out beyond its membership. The key, these officials say, is to seek out students not necessarily interested in the weekly obligations of council membership but who would willingly support the government's efforts on particular projects or activities.

Only a few students were active in that way last year. The number who choose to supplement the work of the 89 elected representatives in the future may be the best gauge of the council's attempt to assert itself as an important part of mainstream undergraduate life. To succeed at Harvard, last year's participants agree, the council may have to become the student organization.