Meeting with ASU Exec goes down not unlike a staring contest between two sheep
Do sheep blink? I’m not sure, but if they don’t, that’s about how the meeting went down.
We learned some new information, and I’ll try to summarize it the best I can. First, we learned what “legal issues” were preventing the ASU from telling anybody…anything? They articulated that in business contracts are generally confidential because companies give different kickbacks in different situations. The letter of intent contains financial information which can’t be disclosed. Since they’ve been talking to Tim Horton’s since August, they haven’t been able to say anything, including who they were negotiating with.
They reiterated their position that the process they used to make the decision was legitimate and consistent with their democratic mandate. We reiterated our position that surveys and focus groups are important steps, but are no substitute for forums and debates, where not only opinions but reasoning get shared. These forums were never held (see next post), and there still exists the gap in time between the focus groups and the SRC meeting that the executive made anything public. They conceded very little, only that there could have been a few more things done to publicize the results.
We also have new insight into the data of the survey, although we have neither the survey (although they told us it will be posted as soon as they find a copy) or the results (they think they may have them written down somewhere. I don’t have the confidence to put that in quotations, but that’s what was said). I understand the website was eaten by a virus, Rideshare got eaten too, but in a decision on a 10 year contract based on a survey to claim overwhelming student majority, survey results and research methods are important. Since they were apparently sent out to the facebook group and posted online (although not published in the Ath, and maybe in an all-student email?), they should be around somewhere.
The executive expressed intrest that we be involved in contract negotiations going foreward, but reiterated that they are not in a legal position (unless there are terms of the contract that neither side can agree on…like sustainability?) to back away from their current position. This means the ASU is not considering alternatives, and will not be facilitating public discussion.
0 comments
Leave a comment
Read more
« Letter of Intent Mentioned in March 10th Email
In ‘08, Steele Runs on Transparency, Foodservice »