CDS Finalists Chosen; Marriot Not In Running
by Alyson Dame and Ariel Whitworth

If you are what you eat, then Oberlin is about to change. Although not all the details regarding when the transition will take place have been decided, students will return next year to a new dining company. After four hours of discussion, the combined Housing and Dining and Request for Proposals committees decided that Parkhurst, Bon Appetit and Chartwells dining companies will be reviewed next week as finalists.
Responding to student protest, the College decided to put the CDS account up for bid a year early.
The committee ranked the seven proposals submitted and chose the top three as finalists. According to Director of Residential Life Kim LaFond, the three companies represent small, medium and large corporations.
Sodexho-Marriot applied for the account, but was not chosen. “We had students who came to the meeting to voice their concerns,” LaFond said. He said that twice during the meeting groups of students came in to explain why they did not want Sodexho-Marriot to be chosen as a finalist. “I wouldn’t call it a protest,” LaFond said. 
A statement from the committees to the Oberlin community outlined the criteria used to select the finalists. It was important to the committee that Oberlin’s dining company “provide students with good value, address the needs of the student community and reinforce the educational mission of the institution.”
When asked about whether the companies’ past histories were considered, Dean of Students Peter Goldsmith said, “The decision to narrow seven to three was based first upon the degree to which the companies addressed the criteria in the RFP. At the same time, we asked and encouraged students to make judgements about these companies on the basis of things that matter to them.”
Senior and committee member Jane Glynn said, “We have to be careful what we’re evaluating companies on because we could get sued.” Glynn did, however, think that the ethical track record of a company should be considered and discussed. LaFond suggested that students raise issues they might have at the open forums next week. “Students are very diligent when it comes to investigating. [They] are going to be asking questions at the open forum,” he said.
The proposals submitted were only an initial blueprint to work from, and all committee members interviewed agreed there was room for changes and discussion. “In terms of big things like renovations, there’s a lot of flexibility,” senior Housing and Dining and RFP committee member Brie Abbe said.
Goldsmith noticed that some of the titles for sections of the dining hall could be offensive. “Cheesy plays on Chinese words will not make it,” he said.
Choices in meal plans and the price of dining were two issues of concern to students. The finance plans have not been completely analyzed, but Assistant Director of Residential Life Michele Gross recognizd the possibility of rising costs. “The two things we’ve heard from students historically are they want better food, fresher food and they also want lower prices,” said Gross, who said the two requests often contradict. “One question we have for students is if it was much, much better, would they pay more?”
Goldsmith said he hoped the new meal plan would create more flexible meal plan options. “We hear repeatedly of how unfair it seems to off-campus students to have to be full participants in the plan. I would hope that this process would enable us to begin addressing this very real concern.”

Glynn was less convinced that meal plans would change quickly. “[The companies] aren’t going to be the ones that decide that, the school is. It’s really something that’s tied to economics. It’s not ‘We want everyone on board so fuck all of you,’” Glynn said, adding that Housing and Dining has worked on the issue for a long time. 
She said she hoped it would become a reality in a few years. “It comes up at every meeting.”
Abbe said that although she did not expect students to be able to go off board next year, more flexibilty was possible. “I think that people will find that the structure of their meal plans will be different,” Abbe said.
Goldsmith, Gross and LaFond were all optimistic that the process will improve dining at Oberlin. “I think we should be optimistic. The purpose of the process was to find a means of bringing our dining service and its quality, value and responsiveness to a new level,” Goldsmith said.
Glynn was also positive about the possibility for real change. “I’m really optimistic about the proposals that were put in front of us. I thought they looked really exciting and really fresh,” she said. 

Abbe was not as positive. She said, “No matter how you cut it, the foods going to be instititutional,” she also was impressed by the proposals and thought dining at Oberlin would improve. Compared to Marriot’s proposal, Abbe thought the finalists, “had a whole different theory about food, and a whole different theory about dining. Hopefully, the improvement will be significant.”
“We want to raise the bar. We want the best dining program possible. We’re taking this very seriously,” LaFond said.