When I first read that the Courtyard Cafe at the Hopkins Center would not be open this summer, I wondered how I could ever go through my entire DBA during a term when Food Court and Collis, both with limited hours, were my only dining options. I love the occasional chicken parm or breakfast sandwich, but they just aren't enough to sustain me for an entire summer. Variety is, after all, the spice of life. Dartmouth Dining Services' food is already repetitive enough, and it seems criminal to force us to consume so much of the same food every day.
I'm normally satisfied with DDS, but when our options are so significantly reduced,
we lose the important freedom to choose how and where to eat. In some cases, the DBA system forces students to eat at DDS facilities more often than they want to.
Why can't we, therefore, just get rid of the DBA system entirely and allow students to simply pay for what they eat? We could start at a "zero" balance each term, and work our way negative.
I realize that the economic downturn is affecting the College, and that student dollars are needed to keep DDS running. If we did not have DBA that we were forced to spend eventually, we probably wouldn't eat on campus as much, and the DDS revenue numbers would take a hit. But instead of making its money by forcing students to eat at its facilities, DDS should pursue a more capitalistic model and use efficiency, low prices and high quality to attract students, just like any other dining establishment. That way, we could freely decide where and what to eat, which would be best for our wallets and our taste buds. The goal of the College should be to provide us with the best possible undergraduate experience, so I think it's fair to be greedy and ask it to provide us with the best possible food options.
There are many ways in which the current system hurts students. Let's consider a student who wants to keep kosher. It is only because of absurdly high prices at Pavilion that a student would possibly be able to use up his entire DBA budget each term, and he would inevitably suffer from a lack of variety of food options and Pavilion's limited hours. If the student had complete freedom over his spending, he could eat at Pavilion when the food appealed to him, and use his newly liberated money to buy and cook kosher foods on his own. The same idea applies to students with any sort of dietary needs, whether they are vegan, lactose intolerant, or allergic to gluten, etc.
Students without any dietary restrictions would also benefit from the plan. If we like what DDS has to offer, then we will eat there. If we don't like what they have to offer, or if their facilities aren't operating when we're hungry, we should have the freedom to either eat somewhere in town or cook for ourselves, without worrying about a balance. Many Greek houses and some of the newer dorms have complete kitchens. Still, their residents have to pay for a full term's DBA, even if they want to cook for themselves all the time. Under my proposed plan, students could purchase the ingredients for this cooking at Topside, or they could shop at the Co-op. If Topside and the other DDS establishments had to work hard to make us spend our money, then maybe they would elevate the quality of their food and inspire us to keep frequenting them.
This policy change could have two outcomes. Either DDS gets on its game and gets competitive enough to stay in business, and we get higher quality, cheaper food more quickly. Or DDS becomes unable to keep up and has to downsize; this wouldn't be the worst thing in the world. As much as I enjoy a tender melt at the Hop, I love the chile verde burrito at Gusanoz even more.
