End the Transfer Freeze

THE COMMITTEE on Houses and Undergraduate Life (CHUL) has twice rejected efforts to lift the House transfer freeze it imposed on sophomores last spring. Yesterday, without admitting that the freeze has been lifted, CHUL took an action that essentially will have the same effect. The committee decided to allow twelve sophomores to transfer and fill existing vacancies, but to keep the freeze in effect for all other sophomores.

The disclosure last week of vacant sophomore suites in several River Houses added a new dimension to the debate over the freeze, reducing that debate to a strikingly pragmatic level. With rooms available in several River Houses and sophomores still expressing to housing officials a desire to leave the Quad, a rigid continuation of the freeze would have been an untenable position for CHUL.

By claiming that the decision is intended to relieve crowding in South House and Currier House, CHUL avoids the difficult philosophical questions created by the imposition of the freeze. From its inception the freeze has denied students the freedom to alter an undesirable housing assignment. The vast majority of sophomores still must wait until February jsut to have the opportunity to attempt to improve their present situation.

CHUL's decision, while commendable for providing a temporary solution to the problem of vacancies that presently exist, fails to establish a firm policy to be applied, if future vacancies should arise. Will sophomores be allowed to fill those vacancies as soon as they occur, or will the transfer freeze still apply? CHUL will clearly be imposing an undue hardship on students if they have to wait for the monthly CHUL meetings for approval of their desired transfer on a case by case basis. However, such a situation can only be avoided if CHUL finally does what it should have done last spring, lift the transfer freeze.