Letters Page: Food Court

June 5, 1992

Dear Most Honorable Trustees,

I would like to take this opportunity to share some initial reflections on the restructuring process by offering three goals that will place my contributions to this Board into some context. These goals are:

1.) To provide the necessary resources for rigorous academic study for all students, being especially sensitive to the needs and offerings of a diverse multicultural community of students whose needs include adequate daycare facilities, culturally engaging programs and events, and consistent economic support.

2.) To use the knowledge and resources found within our University to assess our role within the local Syracuse community and beyond.

3.) To promote internal practices which lead to ecologically sensitive production and consumption of human and natural resources. You are presiding over the major restructuring of Syracuse University. Though restructuring is a painful process, it is also an opportunity for invention and vision. The word “restructuring” implies a commitment to change beyond provisional budget cuts. It is a hope of the graduate students that you will demand the highest of academic standards as you guide the process.

An initial issue that I would like to introduce at this meeting is the proposed fast-food court to be located in the Kimmel Dining Hall. Considering the goals I have just outlined let me offer a few concerns regarding this project.

1.) How will this affect the academic atmosphere of the residence hall? What message does it send to the graduate students living in Kimmel regarding the University’s attention to their learning environment?

2.) How does a franchised fast-food court meet the mission of this non-profit institution? Does Taco Bell produce food for thought?

3.) Have the nutritionists and other health-related faculty been consulted regarding the long term health effects of fast food? Has a socio-economic analysis been conducted regarding student budgets, lifestyles and the ultimate expenditures driven by a fast-food economy?

4.) What will be the environmental impact of these vendors? Will they be held to standards sensitive to the over-production of obsolescence which is endemic to fast food production?

5.) How will this affect the local food service community? Do we, as an institution concern ourselves with our relationship to local vendors?

This project leads to a cheapening of this institution. It is doubted that prestigious institutions such as a Cornell or Berkeley would turn a dining hall into a fast-food court.

It would be helpful to invite the graduate students to offer solutions. We recognize that the campus lacks a graduate student food center, and would like to see an aesthetically developed coffee shop at which students and faculty could gather to exchange ideas in an atmosphere that is conducive to thoughtful discussion. The University would be taking a progressive and community-nurturing stance if we opened bids for student run ventures to provide food and beverages that have been chosen according to ethical, cultural and environmental concerns. These alternatives would require a philosophical and ethical commitment that supersedes a commitment to the profits that will be turned at the fast-food court.

Sincerely,

Mary Keller,

Graduate Student Representative to the Board of Trustees

Postscript: This paper was delivered to the Board in June. In September I told the Trustees I did not wish to revisit the Food Court issue (the Chancellor spent several minutes explaining the bad press to them), but I noted that our June presentation had practically predicted the furor that did arise when the campus suddenly opened up with its new food court.

But, on the harsh reality side of the equation I also heard some Trustees reassuring themselves that it was a minor issue that would soon blow over, and besides, “Everybody in America want this kind of food. Why not give the kids what they want?”