The University of South Alabama is rapidly improving its image, and it’s truly an exciting time to be a Jaguar. Among the new buildings on campus, the residential dining facility has been surrounded by controversy.
A mandatory meal plan goes against everything that we Americans feel as being near and dear. We are the land of the free and home of the brave (emphasis on the FREE); however, as we all know, matters in life are not always determined by what we want.
Instead they are sometimes determined by what is deemed “for the greater good.”
As I close the fall semester in my fourth year as a student and resident here at USA, I reflect back on my freshman year and think about all the money that I wasted on the mandatory meal plan. I was plagued by going all the way to the Student Center for the chance at some mediocre food.
However, I truly believe that I would have used that meal plan to its fullest had the facility been in the newly designated location and if it had delivered the quality food that they are promising for the future dining hall.
Some details for those who may not have heard: There is going to be a new dining facility opening next fall that will be focused primarily on serving the needs of those living in the residence halls. The facility will be LEED-certified, sport a new “fresh food concept,” have no blackout hours, and will even have a coffee shop on the bottom floor.
Everyone living in University housing will be required to purchase a meal plan. The proposed mandatory plan for freshmen runs in the neighborhood of $1,350 a semester., while the original proposed plan for upperclassmen was going to run $1,250.
Vice President for Student Affairs Dr. John Smith has since met with a committee deemed the “food advisory board” and with SGA to get our feedback. The product of this feedback and his cooperation has been a newly lowered $700 plan for upperclassmen. The majority of the people that I have spoken to have expressed that a $500-$700 plan would be manageable.
Bottom line: Fighting the meal plan at this point is a fruitless endeavor. I was enraged when I heard the initial price at the first meeting this semester, and I have been on a personal mission to get all the information possible at subsequent meetings of the food advisory board.
However, I have come to terms with the inevitable, and I feel that much has been accomplished in regard to price. I have also come to terms with the fact that the construction of this new facility requires that it be self-sufficient and the only way to accomplish this is through mandatory participation.
Several other schools in state are known to require the participation of all enrolled students. However, in light of the fact that this is a “residential facility,” the administration saw it fit to only enforce this policy on those who will most benefit from it.
I do not foresee a mass exodus from the dormitories (we had 3,000 at USA Day), but I could be wrong. Instead, I see a new facility that is going to allow the housing community to come together.
It will be a place where people study, socialize, and, most of all, get a good meal.
Is the word “mandatory” a hard pill to swallow? For most people it is. However, it seems that this will be a positive thing as long as the product is as good as they say it will be.
4 comments Log in to Comment
I left the first meeting shaking with rage because Dr. John Smith had just told us that all upperclassmen who lived on campus would be required to purchase a $1250 meal plan. I left that meeting determined that this would not fly.
I showed up to every meeting with a grimace on my face and a typed agenda of clear concise questions that I wanted answered and demands that I wanted met. I put them out on the table in a professional manner but in a way that got my point across. The point was that this was unacceptable. Why was it unacceptable? We have residents who pay extra for kitchens, the food in the current market is awful and it was way too expensive.
Well through meeting with the food advisory board and his meeting with SGA (which I was at even though I am not in SGA) Dr. Smith has lowered the price to $700 which is pretty average for mandatory meal plans which almost every other major school in the state have!
By the way, I was just told to write an article about the meal plan. I was given no guidance as to what it should say and the fact that the cost has been lowered (which is "hard news") is the main point that I was trying to get across. That is the only thing that we really have any kind of control over besides operational hours and what to do with the delta deli.
Do I think that students should just lie down and take it? Absolutley not! Please, voice you opinion! I would love for the price to come down even more! However, it has been made abundantley clear to me and the other committee members that this meal plan is not optional for those in the resident halls. The contracts to build this building have been signed and it is going happen. Which means that there must be funds to keep it going. You cannot use state dollars or tution to pay for this kind of facility. So as a level headed person who can see both sides of the equation and has the capacity for complex thought I am satisfied for now that the administration has listened and has lowered the price.
I ask, where have you been during this process? Has your voice been heard? If not, I am sorry for that. If you would like to talk further about this feel free to shoot me an e-mail. owengusa@gmail.com
If The Vanguard's staff was going for "shock and awe," I think it probably would have come up with a headline like "The administration is screwing the student body with mandatory meal plans."
Owen's overall opinion in this article is one that tells people to get over the situation with meal plans, as he said in the article, "Bottom line: Fighting the meal plan at this point is a fruitless endeavor." Yellow journalism? Really?
I think I can actually hear William Hearst laughing at you. Right now.
If anything, Owen is on the administration's leash. He doesn't even encourage the students to voice their concerns and complaints to administration; he tells them to suck it up and pay for a meal plan they never signed up for.
I don't think this headline even comes near "shock and awe," which according to you, inevitably leads to yellow journalism.
If you call this headline a "soapbox," I'd hate to see what you call opinion article that voice a view you don't agree with. Try not to let those types of articles make you cry too much; it might leave you with a continued feeling that the writer doesn't try to accommodate people who think all journalism that borders on taking a stand against corporations and administrations is a bit "yellowed."
You must be logged in to comment on an article. Not already a member? Register now