The Business of Healthy Food

When it comes to food, the University of Denver does not normally stand out. In mass-producing menu items from Sodexo many students feel the food to be bland, as well as over or under cooked or seasoned. Many students also feel that the food produced at the cafeteria is worse for them than most alternatives in spite of the self-proclaimed dedication to healthy cooking that Sodexo makes. This is a huge problem when it comes to student-cafeteria relationships. While the cafeteria does give students “healthier” options, many students find these options unappealing and are willing to settle for the pizza or hamburgers present at most meals, or in some cases go off campus for fast food. While these foods are more appealing to students, they are nowhere close to being better than the alternatives for maintaining a healthy lifestyle.

Students feel that the cafeteria underperforms because the people who work there cannot cook. Sodexo refutes this and occasionally opens up the cafeteria to the general public in order to showcase the talents of their chefs. In spite of the skills of the chefs, they still do not appear to be successful in producing food that is both appealing and healthy for the student body.

I’m not normally a picky eater, as a student athlete I normally consume a ton of food daily. But even I’m grossed out by the food sometimes in spite of the fact that the Menu on DU’s website is supposed to be healthy and actually sounds appealing. As someone that needs to process a several thousand calories a day while maintaining a diet I don’t feel Sodexo necessarily has my best interests in mind when I sit down to eat. I also question the amount of fried food produced on a daily basis as well as having pizza and hamburgers present at every meal, as we all know the amount of fat in all those foods. I think these foods are good alternatives for students if they really don’t like the other options that they have, but it seems to me that many students subsist on these items alone.

This should be disturbing to not just Sodexo but the student body, who not only are required to pay upwards of $1,000 a quarter their first year because they don’t have the option to cook for themselves, but who have to live with the consequences of eating food that they don’t like and may be bad for them.

It is not unusual to hear students grumbling about the poor quality or appeal of the food at the cafeterias on campus. Comments such as “the chicken is too dry,” and “look at the grease dripping off this pizza” are part of daily cafeteria conversation. To some cafeteria food and the employees who make it have become a joke, “I wonder what _____ (employees name omitted) has cooked today.” On some days when cafeteria patrons are particularly unimpressed with the food, they simply say, “I can’t take any more of this ____ (your choice of expletive)” and leave to go to Noodles & Co, Chipotle or another restaurant.

Some of this is to be expected with first year students in college as they can’t make their own food and it’s definitely not home cooking. However, to the extent that people can’t bear to eat at the cafeterias because they hate the food is bad business. If the cafeterias were real restaurants that didn’t have their customer base supplied to them, they would probably be out of business if they didn’t improve their food.

Now before you think I’m blaming the employees in the kitchens for the food available at the cafeteria, I’m not. They are saddled with the unenviable responsibility of feeding several thousand college students a day for most of the year. They are not necessarily the problem. They don’t make the menus and are tasked with efficiently producing as much food as they can for the hungry stomachs that don’t have much of a choice in where to go to eat. They make do with what they have and actually eat the food they make believe it or not.

No, the heart of the problem is really that Sodexo and the administration believe that it is OK to produce a poor product and give it to a captive customer base. The reality is that it isn’t. By producing healthier food that actually tastes good on a regular basis Sodexo and the school could make a killing in meal plan subscriptions from upperclassman who had good experiences with the cafeteria food and are happy to come back for more. The school and students both benefit from having better food that is healthier and appetizing in turn, worth paying for. That’s good business.

DU's 2-Year Live-In Requirement

As the University of Denver prepares to raise tuition for the second year in a row, I have to ask why DU still has a 2-year live-in requirement for its students? We pay just under $45,000 per year to attend here, which is enough money as it is. So I propose this change to the DU Board of Trustees: If the Board wishes to raise tuition, it should reduce or retire the 2-year live in requirement. The requirement forces students to live in rooms that are too small, uncomfortable to live in, and may hinder a student’s opportunity for academic success.

Think about it: we pay eleven thousand dollars total to live on dorm. Living on dorm requires that the student have a meal plan, which in itself is thousands of dollars for food that is not that good.

Interviewing off campus living DU students, they say they pay an average rent between $450 and $650 per month. So a nine-month lease can, in total, cost at least $4,050 and at most $5,850 plus around $500 for deposit, which will be returned if the student maintains the house properly. That’s saving money already. Then if you average in the cost of food and other house hold items, that comes to around $200 a month, and that’s usually split between house mates, so maybe a $100-$150 a month. That’s $1,350 for the whole nine-month lease. In total, that is $7,700 for everything including deposit, which will be returned. And that, when matched with DU housing and meal plan costs, saves over $2,000 a year.

An administrator may argue that it will loose too much money in shortening or abolishing the requirement, but that is not true. It costs the school money to have us live here. If people could move off of dorm, the school will save loads of money on utilities (such as water and electricity), cleaning essentials (toilet paper), food costs, and labor (cleaning and dining staff). Also, a student will have that extra money to pay for the tuition hike during the 2010-2011 academic school year. OR, as people move off of dorm, the University can accept more students to fill the rooms vacated by people who wish to get off of housing.

I went to Halls, Towers, Nagel, Nelson, and J-Mac and asked two questions: If given the chance, would you move off of housing? And would you continue to have a 2 year requirement or just 1 year, or no requirement at all. Of 56 people asked, an overwhelming 47 said they would move off of housing. A sophomore Nagel resident, Patrick, said simply, “while, yes, Nagel and Nelson are nicer dorms than freshman year, living on dorm sucks.” I, personally, couldn’t agree more. But answers to the second question were interesting. Out of the 56 people asked, only 13 said they would completely retire the requirement, I thought it would have been higher. 3 people said they would continue to have the 2-year requirement. Freshman Kristen said that she “believe[s] having the requirement forces studying and preaches good work ethic.” The rest, 41 people, said they would reduce the requirement to 1 year. Sophomore Kyle, who lives on Nelson, says that “1 year is enough, it is nice to have the experience and all, but 2 years? We don’t need that. I’ve signed my lease for next fall already.” The results from my mini-survey seem to dictate a general consensus that DU’s 2-year live-in requirement should be reduced.

Just recently, I received a pamphlet regarding the 2^nd-Year Room Selection Process. It is a how to guide for choosing our rooms for next year. After a quick glance, I saw on the back page a section titled: “Two-Year Live-on & Meal Plan Requirement”.

The paragraph states this: “The University of Denver is proud of its two-year live-on requirement and realizes that students who live on-campus are more likely to stay enrolled, graduate on time, and feel connected to the campus community. In line with the live-on requirement, all current first-year students will need to sign up for both a room and a meal plan for their second year. The meal plan is a required portion of the live-on requirement regardless of the room configuration.”

Really? Stay enrolled? Graduate on time? Both of these, like housing, should be totally up to the student. I think living on my own will provide me with more responsibility, which will build my work ethic and encourage me to “stay enrolled” and “graduate on time”. A student can participate in the campus community to his or her heart’s content. Honestly, I don’t go to that many campus events anyway because they aren’t appealing. If the school wants us to go to campus events, then they should focus on their student relations but that is a different argument.

Are the Enforcers Enforcing? By Michelle Nguyen

Residents or Residence Assistants, who is controlling who? As first year students arrived on campus everyone was required to sign a code of conduct about the rules and regulations of each Residence Halls. After everyone settled in, there was a mandatory floor meeting for each student to attend in understanding the rules and regulations. Some of these rules include, Minors are not allowed to possess, consume, or have the presence of alcohol in their rooms, quiet hours on weekdays, and not damaging items in the room such as the Microfridges.

As time passed, more residents noticed what rules were not being enforced which gave them the mindset to do whatever they wanted. Rules are getting broken from right to left in the first year residence halls. Students drinking under age and smoking illegal drug in their room is unacceptable. So why aren’t these students not getting penalized for these actions but are passed by those who are supposed to enforce them? With considered students, they feel these rules need to be enforced before it is too late and something unsafe happens.

With high cost in living expenses for these residence halls, rules are not being enforced causing DU to be a non-safe living environment for students. Student Kiara explains “I do not feel safe at two o’ clock in the morning when under aged intoxicated students are trying to get into my room when they are unaware that they are trying to open the wrong door.” She also states, “These rules need to be enforced more because of the tacit “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” where the Residence Assistants do not do their jobs in enforcing the rules unless it becomes a bigger issue.” Another student living in the residence halls believes that these rules should be enforced more. Students Alex and Cassidy state, “These rules should be enforced because people are getting away with asinine behavior but these rules do make people more responsible.”

So why is DU covering the real story of the lives in the residence halls? With the reputation of the University of Denver they should not let these rules be unbroken. So are these rules really being enforced? Resident Assistant Jenna explains, “These rules should be enforced more because these rules promote a safe and inclusive environment to allow students to feel safe with living here in the residence halls. Also, I feel that some of these broken rules do go undocumented because as an R.A. we cannot be everywhere so it will help if residence can tell us if there is an issue so the problem can be resolved.”

Many students feel that these rules should be enforced more because they have to live here for at least a year. From my experience living in a residence hall, I feel that rules are broken all the time and no one does anything because no one knows. People are not doing their jobs in making students feeling safe and they are promoting drugs and alcohol to students by allowing them to do it. But I also feel that these enforcers are trying but they do not see those that are unnoticed. R.A. Annika states that “Rules are necessary for freshman for a healthy living environment but it is also hard to be a bad guy but things have to be done.” What more can be done for students to feel safe?

On the other hand, some students feel that the rules are being enforced and should be a little more lenient. Student Jack states, “I think rules should be more tolerable because we are in college. So people should be more tolerable but respectful.” Another student states “Some should be enforced like the smoking rule but lessen the rule about alcohol because realistically everyone knows that we are doing it so no there is no point in stopping it.” Even though these students feel that they should be allowed the freedom, I think that everyone is entitled to having fun in college but we are also here for an education and to get what we want in life and not throwing it away on parties.

There are many students for and against the rules but there are those that feel that the rules are just right. Student Hunter explains, “I am satisfied with the rules they give us space and the R.A.’s do their job by enforcing the rules when they have to.” So are these rules actually being enforced or are the R.A.’s being too lenient?

I do not think leniency should be an excuse for the R.A.’s or the resident directors because if they allow problems go unnoticed and escalate then these problems will become more dangerous and a liability to the University. Since we are in rape awareness week I should bring up the issue that some of these dangers do lead to life threatening events. For example, on September 15, 2009 The New York Times published an article called “Four Arrested in Rape Case at Hofstra Dorm,” this article explains that a 18 year old girl was trying to retrieve her phone in the men’s restroom in the dorms because someone had taken it from a local dance club in Hempstead, New York. At 3 o’clock A.M. police found her lying on the bathroom floor in which she was sexually assaulted. They arrested 4 men for rape. So where were there R.A.’s or anyone helping this girl? I am not saying that this can happen here at the University of Denver but we need to be more aware of things that can happen or will happen.

Reading this article, I feel that I would not want something like this happen at the University of Denver. But I feel safety is still an issue. From reading the school’s news paper The Clarion, they have a section about the police reports on campus. Majority of these reporting are from first year residence halls. One report states, “On Wednesday, Feb. 20 at 2:38 a.m. an underage student was severely intoxicated and in possession of an alcohol container at Johnson-McFarlane Hall. Campus Safety confiscated the contraband and Denver Police transported the student to a detox facility for treatment.” With news in our own school’s news paper everyone knows that these issues are happening and yet nothing is getting done. Wouldn’t you think the housing directors or someone would try and fix these problems if they are getting publish for the whole world to see?

So I see you’ve read this far which means you know there is a problem with the safety at University of Denver. I’m not writing this blog to scare you but to find a way to fix this problem. To the directors of housing: Be more involved with the people living on campus and when you know that there is an issue that has occurred, make sure the problem is resolved. Also, when you are selecting the R.A.’s, find students that are willing to do their jobs and are willing to enforce the rules. To the all R.A.’s: This blog is to tell you that you need to do your job. You have all rights be friends with the residences but you need to know your job from professorial to recreational. And finally to the students: If your safety is in danger, don’t be afraid to tell someone. Most of the R.A. and the directors do not see the things unnoticed. It will also help the directors find those students that are causing all the chaos in the residence halls.