In a last-minute bill not on the Undergraduate Council’s (UC) official agenda last night, a core group of representatives called for “free speech and open academic inquiry” in a nod to the controversy surrounding University President Lawrence H. Summers’ leadership of Harvard.

The bill stated that Summers’ remarks were “made in the interest of free and open inquiry.”

The UC took a vote three times over whether to hold an official vote on the bill, including a “roll-call” vote where each representative’s name was called out and his vote recorded.

The motion failed by just one vote, intensifying the already-contentious atmosphere. For a bill to be considered, two-thirds of the UC must vote for it.

Justin R. Chapa ’05, a sponsor of the bill, said after the meeting that he had hoped it would send a message to the Faculty that they have not handled the situation “appropriately.”

“I’m very disappointed in my fellow Council members who voted not to consider this bill,” said another sponsor, John A. Epley ’07. “I think council members are very apprehensive to get involved in this contentious issue.”

But former UC treasurer Clay T. Capp ’06, who voted not to consider the bill, said that the issue was not the UC’s reluctance to get involved in the controversy, but faults of the bill itself.

He said the bill implied a criticism of the Faculty for speaking out about Summers.

UC President Matthew J. Glazer ’06, who said before the meeting that the UC would not be making a statement on the Summers debate because the campus is “significantly mixed on the topic,” said after the meeting that the bill did not get voted to consider because there is no campus or UC consensus.

“They don’t need us to pass the bill to have the debate,” said Glazer of the bill’s emphasis on open and free speech.

Epley said he will try to get the bill on an upcoming docket through the Student Affairs Committee (SAC).

The full Faculty of Arts and Sciences will meet today to continue the discussion of Summers’ leadership that began at last Tuesday’s meeting.

Last night’s meeting was held in the Winthrop Junior Common Room, with the intention of encouraging non-UC members to participate.

At least one non-UC member, Leah M. Litman ’06. attended and spoke against an amendment to increase the amount of party fund grants—from $100 to $150—at the expense of grants to student groups.

The UC did not vote to increase the value of each grant, but it did increase the total number of party grants awarded from eight to 13 per weekend. The lengthy debate over whether the UC should consider a vote on the increase included another roll-call vote. Twenty-three representatives voted to consider the amendment during the roll-call vote, while only seven had voted the same way during the traditional hand vote.