Since Brown and Brew unveiled its new patio at the beginning of this semester, students have been sitting in the sun, enjoying their chai tea and sushi. But the addition of the patio has raised questions among the Tufts community regarding the priorities of university spending.
While many students and faculty members appreciate the new flower beds and improved walkways around campus, others believe that Tufts has a growing need to reprioritize its budget toward more pressing problems.
Physics Professor Gary Goldstein advocates an examination of budget priorities at Tufts. Goldstein initially acknowledged that the patio certainly has aesthetic appeal.
"It certainly is attractive, enhances the pleasure of being at Brown and Brew and looks good to participants on campus tours," Goldstein said.
However, Goldstein argued that Tufts did not desperately need this patio to continue university operations. "It is rumored to have cost in the vicinity of $50,000," he said.
"[The creation of the patio] was not a necessity by any stretch of the imagination," Goldstein said. "Then there are the new curbstones and pathways that were installed on the hill, whose cost must be of the same order of magnitude and whose need is purely for appearance."
Similar controversy arose in the spring of 1998 when the Tufts Community Union Senate proposed spending $100,000 of the Student Activities Fund surplus on the patio outside of Hotung Caf?©. The reason for the creation of the patio was the enhancement and cosmetic appeal of the area behind Mayer Campus Center and to provide a new venue for programming events.
Student backlash occurred because the funding for the project would come from the activity fund, which meant that every student was essentially paying for the improvement, whether or not they supported the idea.
Because the money for the Brown and Brew patio came from outside the student activity fund, students may not feel as strongly about the addition.
Goldstein suggested that the Tufts administration focus its attention on more urgent needs for improvement on campus, such as the current plight of its janitors. Due to loss of jobs, benefits, and a dramatic wage cut, the workers are struggling to create better working conditions for themselves through raising awareness among students and faculty.
Junior Josh Grim agrees that the university may need to refocus their budget spending. "[Tufts] is making a lot of aesthetic improvements with the same money that could be used toward the janitors," he said. "The aesthetic improvements could be made in the future - they're not pressing."
Freshmen Chrissy Lo, Crystal Chung, and Angela Chai sat at one of the tables on the patio as they discussed the merits and problems of the addition. While the three agreed that Tufts should ensure better working conditions for its janitors, they enjoy being able to sit outside.
"I'm sure that this increases the number of customers that come to Brown and Brew," Chai said. "But doesn't our school have a lot of money? Instead of spending $60,000 on an elephant head, they could pay their janitors more."
"The bottom line is, we need to pay our janitors," Chung said.
On the other hand, Chung pointed out, you have to take into consideration that the patio will need little money for maintenance and will last a long time.
The janitors hope to acquire higher wages, family health insurance, full-time work opportunities, pensions, and job security - efforts that should, Goldstein said, take precedence over cosmetic campus improvements. Goldstein pointed out that the funding needed to fully address these concerns would be approximately $400,000, an amount easily covered by putting several cosmetic building projects on the back burner.
"It seems obvious to me that the well-being of [the families of the custodians] and the livelihood of a hundred workers, whose efforts are a necessity for maintaining our buildings and environment, are higher priorities than the Brown and Brew patio," Goldstein said.
