TO THE EDITOR:
Your fluff piece in Monday’s paper, “13 UNC leaders will advise administrators on the future of Student Stores” reads like pure window dressing and is full of contradictions.
Two questions that have not been addressed in this ongoing saga by The Daily Tar Heel are 1) Is there a level playing field among the submissions regarding the debt service that the current store is paying toward the building renovations from five years ago? How will the competing private parties cover the debt service in addition to earning a profit for their shareholders and still make a larger contribution to the University than the current management?
2) Why has the Chancellor not recused the Vice Chancellor from the selection process since there is clearly a perceived conflict of interest since he has privatized two previous campus stores before coming to UNC? What is Follett paying him under the table?
All the studies and committee suggestions are meaningless if the final decision is ultimately made behind closed doors in South Building, if it hasn’t been made already while we go through this charade.
F. Marion Redd
Class of ’67
