UNFORTUNATELY, this episode is symbolic of a trend in council politics under Chair David A. Aronberg '93 to exclude many representatives from an inner circle of council members.

As one council member told The Crimson last week, there's a move toward "an old-boys network" in the Canaday basement. Increasingly, some members "feel excluded" from the top decision-making echelon.

Indeed, the Finance Committee, which makes crucial recommendations about UC grants, has nearly come to dominate the leadership--Aronberg and Beys, two of the four council officers, are both Finance Committee members.

Beys' ability to push his pork barrel measure through the council represents the control this group has acquired over the decision-making process. And the other members are doing little to reverse the trend. Beys, for example, has gained personal popularity in the council--he won the support of 60 percent of the voting members for his "concert." And Aronberg ran unopposed last week for a second semester-long term.

SINCE THE COUNCIL has such little power on campus, its shenanigans should per haps not command much attention. But as Lyndon B. Johnson used to say of his own presidency, it's the only thing we've got. So we offer a few recommendations:

Obviously, the council should refuse to support any other personal projects that are not beneficial to the larger community. We also encourage students to ask their UC representatives whether they supported Beys' party and why.

More broadly, council officers should work to ensure that some council members do not feel excluded from important decisions about the grants process or the agenda. A decision-making hierarchy is necessary, of course, but it need not be cliquish.

As for the rest of the council, thanks again for your diligence. We anxiously await your next angry letter.