The Diamondback has devoted two editorials (“All-Campus disaster” Nov. 27 on and “Dining Services must change convoluted plan” on Aug. 31) to the All-Campus meal plan offered by Dining Services on a trial-basis for the past two semesters. To most students who have only heard about the meal plan through the reporting and editorializing of The Diamondback, the All-Campus meal plan must sound horribly confusing and complex and not in the best interests of the students. I will briefly explain the other side of the story.
The All-Campus Plan primarily gives resident students the flexibility of eating at a variety of dining locations at the university. While the popular Campus Plan gives residents a set amount of resident points (accepted at the two dining rooms) and TerpBucks (additionally accepted at a variety of cafés and shops), the All-Campus Plan gives residents the ability to use their allotted points as they wish at more locations.
The complexity and confusion The Diamondback talks about comes from the fact that the cost of the All-Campus plan is a combination of a base cost that represents the labor, supplies, maintenance and utility costs for operating the dining rooms (that every resident with a meal plan helps pay) and a point cost that represents how much food and beverage a resident may purchase. While The Diamondback seems overly concerned with price ratios and number crunching, most students will realize the greatest savings with the All-Campus plan come from eating in the dining halls because the base cost for the dining halls is paid up front for the entire semester. This savings is seen in the 66 percent discount off the cash price residents get. Understanding the nature of base costs and how Dining Services operates and runs at its various locations will easily explain the 50 percent discount at café and quick food venues, the 30 percent discount at the various shops on the campus and the lack of a discount at the food court in Stamp Student Union. The plan was set up not to be confusing, but to give residents a new array of choices and possibilities when considering the financial and budgetary actuality.
The All-Campus plan was never meant to be an eat-at-The-Diner-every-day plan or a plan that allows a resident to avoid eating at the dining halls. It was intended to give residents who would primarily eat in the dining halls the ability to eat occasionally at other locations such as Footnotes Café and Panda Express without having to put money in a Terrapin Express account, buy an add-on to their meal plan such as the Stamp Plan or simply use credit or cash. Include the fact that the All-Campus plan allows you to transfer points between semesters, provides six possible point levels (for all types of diners) and does not have focus dates, and I believe this is an attractive option for many residents.
Similar to its editorial calling for the privatization, The Diamondback’s suggestions for improvement are extremely flawed. Terrapin Express seems to be an attractive alternative to meal plans except for the fact that it does account for the facilities fee paid by residents that supports all the operations of Dining Services, which does not receive funding from the university or state of Maryland and actually gives back money each year to the university. Eliminate focus dates? The Diamondback must have completely disregarded the fact that residents can now opt out of focus dates (even though some students every semester still run out of points and spend recklessly). Finally a new call – eliminate mandatory meal plans – something very few schools similar to Maryland have done or even are considering.
The Dining Services Advisory Board and the Residence Halls Association are dedicated in advocating for meal plans and choices that best meet the needs of the resident population. The All-Campus meal plan isn’t for everyone but I believe it is a great option for those students who want to maximize their dining flexibility and can handle the responsibility of self-regulating and budgeting their points.
Should Dining Services “cut its losses” and give up? Absolutely not. The plan should be perfected and offered to students who want it, and work should continue on feasible ways to enrich residents’ dining experience.
Matthew Verghese is a junior electrical engineering and economics major. He can be reached at mmverg@umd.edu.
