News From Meeting with ASU Executive
Thanks so much for your response to last night’s email…I saw many well articulated messages come out of this, and while I have no idea how many letters got sent, I know that it got many people thinking, including the ASU executive. You can still let the executive know how you feel, as they are pursuing Tim Horton’s to be consistent with student opinion, and the more we show that sustainability is a concern to students, the more likely it will play a factor in the decision involving food services in the SUB.
We’d also like to point out that the ASU has done a wonderful job with incorporating sustainability into the student-run grille and market that will open this fall. (I forgot to put this in the email form of this that got sent out, but it is definitely worth mentioning).
People you can contact can be found on the ASU Executive page (SRC representative emails aren’t current since a new SRC just got elected). To keep posted on any information we have, check out our Acadia Environmental Blog.
Today Amy and I met with Jon Cottreau (VP Campus Life and incoming president), Caitlin Regan (incoming VP Student Affairs) and Kyle Stele regarding foodservice at the SUB, and came out of it with a much more thorough understanding of the situation. The four executive/incoming executives have responded our concerns and pledged to include us in coming discussions starting with a meeting next week.
They also raised some issues in the way I contacted the AES mailing list (you guys) with a clearly biased email urging them to contact Kyle before I had discussed the matter with them first. Since there was no information available at the time, we didn’t know how long it would be until the contract was finalized, so I wrote quickly and poignantly, and with some mischaracterization over how the ASU has handled the “openness” issue. You can be the judge on this last point.
Here is the situation as it has been explained to us: Last year, the ASU conducted surveys on food service at the SUB, where students wrote in their first choice for coffee shop. Tim Horton’s came up first with more than 90% of the vote, and over 400 people filled out the survey. In focus groups, Tim Horton’s also came up as the overwhelming first choice over other options. Students were repeatedly told about these options by emails, posters and other media around campus. They also identified the major concerns with food in the sub, which included student employment, price, and consistency. Corporatization of the SUB was surveyed and not found to be an issue by a vast majority of students (around 90%).
Here’s where the fuzziness starts…Tim Horton’s was then approached? and then submitted a letter of intent, and somewhere between the two previous events the ASU was not at liberty to discuss the proceedings with…anybody? The SRC held a closed door meeting to discuss the situation, where councilors were asked to reach out to the students they represent and report back if they had issues, which nobody did (report issues..although I personally was never reached out to…For ex SRC Councilor Tim Hansen’s account of the SRC’s involvement, see this post). Currently negotiations are in progress over the terms of the contract, and only when the contract is finalized will the public terms of the contract be made..well..public. This includes who the contract is with. Shhhhh. Future timeline: no idea.
My criticism of this isn’t impractical, I do have ideas about how this might have been done better, and if you ask me I’ll tell you, but that isn’t particularly important now. The survey results are pretty irrefutable, but I think that survey results are far different than open discussion leading to consensus.
We proposed to them the option of TAN Fairtrade, which seemed to go over well in general, however there were a couple main issues to address: 1. That the year long process it took them to get to this point with Tim Hortons would need to start from square one, which would mean no coffee business in the Perkin’s space until much later in the next school year. Longterm versus short-term needs and goals come into play here. At the next meeting we hope to clarify whether this year long wait would necessarily be the same for TAN fairtrade. 2. They are concerned with what would happen to the business after the student is gone after 3 years time- a valid concern, but one which I think the student could address at the next meeting. 3. Consistency of the products and the satisfaction of the students (adressing the survey results here)- which I think there would have to be another student survey which outlines ALL options, and draws attention to sustainability. As for the quality and consistency of the product, I have heard only good things about TAN fairtrade, and believe that would be a non-issue. On a side note, it’s extremely difficult to have an educated discussion about coffeeshops when you don’t drink coffee.
We will still be pushing for the Alternative, however it looks like the plans for Tim Hortons may be too far ahead to influence the decision of the ASU. We are glad that they are at least including us in the discussion with the contract, and it seems as if there will be much we can outline for sustainability. This greener alternative may just have to wait for future coffeeshop space openings, which would at least be aided by the current “boot” to Chartwells.
We will keep you posted on any news. Do check the Acadia Environmental Blog site for updates, and feel free to forward any concerns or comments to us (sustain@acadiau.ca, aes@acadiau.ca) or to the ASU Executive ( Kyle Steele (asupresident@acadiau.ca), Caitlin (085107r at acadiau.ca) or Jon (asuvpcampuslife@acadiau.ca) ).
-Dewey and Amy
0 comments
Leave a comment
Read more
« SRC Councilor Tim Hansen Explains SRC Involvement in Food Service at SUB
To Kyle Steele, from Alan Warner »