Union renovation vote failure may not kill project

After years of planning and months of campaigning, the push for the UCommons renovation has come to an end — at least for now.

But Don Luse, director of the Student Union, said he doesn’t think the plans are going away for long.

“I think — we still think — it’s a really good plan. There is no doubt that we need to reach out to some groups of students,” he said.

“Our graduate and professional students were pretty vocal. We need to connect with them and find out more from them.”

Luse also said he wants to meet with other officials, architects and students to decide the next step.

Without the UCommons referendum paying for the second phase of the renovation, only Phase 1 of the plan will be completed.

This phase includes new meeting rooms where the Union Cabaret currently stands, a Wendy’s and numerous code updates. Phase 2 would have added a performance space to make up for the loss of the Union Cabaret, along with further meeting rooms and other features.

Without funding for that phase, Luse said he and his staff will have to find ways to provide a student performance space in the meantime.

“We’ll have something,” he said. “It won’t be nearly as good, but I think that’s our challenge now.”

“Something” might mean a makeshift performance space in the upcoming meeting rooms or a low-cost project in the former bowling alley area, Luse said.

The other option, he said, is to regroup and try again.

Tyler Mills, president of the Carolina Union Activities Board, said he hopes to see the UCommons proposal reappear on the ballot as early as next year.

Megan Johnson, head of marketing for the UCommons, said she is disappointed by the referendum’s failure.

“What I would foresee is that we come together with students, with Union staff members, with some other key people that were involved when we did surveys,” she said.

Though students resisted the fee increase, Johnson said it is the only feasible option to fund the project.

“There might be some private fundraising we could look into,” she said. “But that would be major, major fundraising.”

The referendum, which proposed a student fee increase of $16 a year for the next 30 years, reached the Feb. 8 ballot by way of a student petition but was voted down by about 54 percent.

“I think there were a lot of reasons it didn’t pass,” Luse said. “I think if you are not informed as to what’s in it for you, you have no interest in it. I think the controversy that got created was a part of it, too.”

Student Congress member Adam Horowitz filed a complaint Feb. 7 that delayed the release of the results. The complaint cited the Union’s petitioning and posting campaign materials in dining halls and academic buildings, areas prohibited under the Student Code.

Union officials did not deny Horowitz’s claims but argued that the Union is not subject to the Code.

In response to the discrepancy, Horowitz and Student Body President Hogan Medlin are co-sponsoring a bill that will clarify Title VI, the section of code in question.

The bill will also give power to the Board of Elections to actively regulate campaigns, which could drastically change the atmosphere of future attempts by the Union.

“Basically all Andrew Phillips can do right now is go to the Union and ask them nicely to take the posters down,” Horowitz said.

Contact the University Desk at university@dailytarheel.com.