Dining options for Hopkins students are just about as great as India's gold medal chances in the 2010 Winter Olympics. Well, maybe India's is an exaggeration, but definitely France's. For years, Hopkins has stifled and suppressed the local food industry by way of its de-facto culinary monopoly. In the face of such a monopoly, students are lucky to have the holy trinity of dining — Uni Mini, Chipotle and Subway.
Hopkins contracts Aramark to provide food for students. All freshmen as well as all sophomores and upperclassmen who live in residence halls other than the Bradford or Homewood apartments are required to purchase pricy Aramark meal plans. In effect, Hopkins has coerced its students. Hopkins mandate on dining parallels the individual mandate on health care being discussed by Congress – except worse because
there is no alternative of simply paying a fine and incurring the cost
of dining on one's own.
Undergraduates are the primary consumers in the greater Homewood area. Since nearly half of this population is forced to buy Aramark meals in advance, demand for local eateries is severely suppressed. That is to say that few hungry undergraduates are willing to venture beyond an Aramark cafeteria.
A few months ago, an entrepreneurial Baltimorean who goes by the name Mark tried to supply students with an alternative lunchtime meal by opening a hot dog stand at the corner of N Charles St. and E 33rd St. However, lunchtime is Aramark's prime feeding time as Levering, Fresh Food Café and Charles Street Market are all open.
Only a few students ate Mark's hot dogs and within a few weeks Mark was forced to look elsewhere for employment. Mark's story provides a micro-level insight into the way in which the local food economy is thwarted by Hopkins' draconian policies. This is ironic considering the fact that Hopkins is the largest employer in Baltimore and Aramark is one of the biggest employers in the U.S.
Hopkins and Aramark not only engage in economic suppression, but they outright lie about it. Unabashedly, Hopkins's dining website reads, "Did you know about our commitment to the local community? . . . Did you know that we only buy bread from local bakeries?" Signs at Pura Vida Café boast, "We provide you with the freshest products possible and local businesses with financial support."
While Aramark may buy local, the costs that the local economy faces due to Hopkins' policies are much greater than any given support. As a private university, Hopkins has the right to impose whatever demands it wishes on students. However, it is reprehensible that the University misleads us about its contribution to the local economy.
Furthermore, not only does the local economy pay the costs of Hopkins policies, but students are forced to pay for meals that are less economical than the alternative. The price of dinner at Fresh Food Café is inflated to $14.63 in U.S. dollars. A meal at a fast food restaurant, if there were any around, would be half the price and twice the flavor.
Sophomore Nicolas Salzman is the kind of individual who very carefully analyzes how much he spends on food and groceries (he even knows the dining dollar to U.S. dollar exchange rate). He lives in Homewood and opted out of a meal plan. He said, "Although there are not many options around campus, it is cheaper pretty much anywhere else than on a meal plan." He added, "If you are on a meal plan, you are budgeted to eat a number of times at Nolan's, FFC, etc. If not [on a meal plan], you are not committed to spending money that night."
In the course of a year, Salzman estimates that he saves around $1,000 on food, not to mention the priceless value of his culinary freedom.
The Hopkins cafeterias' high prices and low quality comes down to fundamental economic principles. Mandates forcing people to supply a business with customers give the business the ability to charge an artificially high price and reduces incentives to cut costs and improve quality — a truth that no amount of good will can overcome.
