THE TUFTS DAILY
Light Snow 33/30
TUFTSDAILY.COM
Monday, January 28, 2013
VOLUME LXV, NUMBER 5
Where You Read It First Est. 1980
Pinkberry tries for Davis Student group presents divestment location, with opposition proposal to Board of Trustees by Shana
Friedman
Daily Editorial Board
Following two failed attempts last year, national frozen yogurt chain Pinkberry will apply next month for the third time to expand to Somerville’s Davis Square with a new location. Pinkberry’s application to attain a special permit is pending approval by the Somerville Zoning Board of Appeals at a February hearing, according to junior Sherry Albert, a former Pinkberry intern. The Board denied Pinkberry’s previous permit applications because of concerns about keeping Davis Square from being taken over by large chains, according to Albert. Pinkberry has applied for space at 263 Elm St., the former offices of Massachusetts Insurance Agency, placing it within 320 feet of frozen yogurt sellers iYo Cafe and Orange Leaf and in close proximity to ice cream shop J.P. Licks. iYo Cafe and Orange Leaf both opened shops in Davis Square just last year. Pinkberry sees a market for its allegedly unique and higher quality products as justification for opening a location in Davis Square, according to Albert. An online petition on iPetitions.com supported the opening of a Pinkberry location in Davis Square with 184 signatures. The company collected an additional 200 signatures in person in the square,
Albert said. Davis Square gets enough pedestrian traffic to support a third frozen yogurt shop in the area, Albert said, referencing studies done by Pinkberry in similar neighborhoods. “Based on the foot traffic, there are actually plenty of areas in the U.S. similar to Davis Square that currently support three or more frozen yogurt or ice cream stores,” Albert said, pointing to Harvard Square and Newbury Street as local examples. A Change.org petition to deny the permit application for Pinkberry in Davis Square had gained 36 signatures as of press time. According to the petition’s online page, the petition’s writers noted the area’s already-limited parking and argued that the square had no need for additional frozen yogurt outlets. iYo Cafe employee Jesse Slade said she sees no place for Pinkberry to open a site in the square. “Davis Square is in a small area with a lot of locally owned businesses,” Slade told the Daily. “At this point there’s iYo, which is a locally owned business, and then Orange Leaf just opened, so to have a third frozen yogurt place in such a small square would be a little ridiculous.” Pinkberry has more than 170 stores around the world. Orange Leaf is a national chain see PINKBERRY, page 2
Four members of the student group Tufts Divest for Our Future met last week with the Board of Trustees at the Tufts School of Dental Medicine’s Boston campus to present a by
Daniel Gottfried
Daily Editorial Board
Brandeis University, Boston University, Harvard University and Tufts, according to Tufts Divest Co-Founder Anna LelloSmith, a junior. “Students in Boston don’t just want their university to see DIVEST, page 2
Zhuangchen Zhou / The Tufts Daily
Boston-area students stood with pro-divestment signs outside a Jan. 24 meeting between Tufts Divest For Our Future and the Board of Trustees at the Tufts School of Dental Medicine campus.
TCU Senate passes twin anti-CSL resolutions The Tufts Community Union (TCU) Senate last night passed two resolutions protesting last semester’s Committee on Student Life (CSL) decision to create a protocol for the University Chaplain to give student religious groups (SRGs) “justifiable departures” from the university’s nondiscrimination policy. The CSL policy was the subject of intense debate in the Senate last semester, prompting several senators at one meeting to volunteer to sacrifice their jobs in order to pass a resolution condemning the decision. The first resolution, submitted by TCU Judiciary Chair senior Adam Sax, Senate Vice President senior Meredith Goldberg and sophomore senator Andrew Núñez, claimed “an irresolvable rift in the spirit of the TCU Constitution” caused by the exception of SRGs from the nondiscrimination policy. Citing the university’s mission statement and the “Pachyderm” student handbook, the submitters claimed that the changes to the constitution rendered it both contrary to existing university policy and internally inconsistent. The resolution passed with only one dissenting vote from Senator Stefan Schwarz, a senior. The second resolution, submitted by Senate President Wyatt Cadley, claimed that “an effective and sustainable nondiscrimination policy must be
proposal for the university to divest from fossil fuels. A crowd of about 40 students stood with pro-divestment signs outside the meeting, Tufts Divest Co-Founder Emily Edgerly said. The students came from various Boston area schools, including
absolute.” Unlike the first resolution, which claimed that the CSL’s decision was an invalid policy, this resolution would affirm the Senate’s belief that the decision was an act of bad policy, according to Cadley. Debate on the latter resolution lasted for nearly an hour. Students and senators argued over whether SRGs ought to be able to make discrimination against others a matter of explicit policy and whether the Senate has the power to refuse to fund such groups despite their recognition by the Judiciary. After three calls to question, the resolution passed by roll call, with Schwarz again casting the only dissenting vote. The body also unanimously passed a resolution supporting the usage of Brown and Brew as performance space after closing time. The space is intended to be used for gatherings of over 40 students, allowing performance groups to have larger crowds without needing to hire extra staff for security. Though the idea had been under consideration for some time, it had not been accepted due to concerns about the potential for damage to the food equipment. The resolution suggested a security gate might be installed to avoid accidents without the ongoing cost of staff. — by James Pouliot
Inside this issue
Ecologist Allan Savory discusses restoring grasslands by
Denali Tietjen
Contributing Writer
Restoration ecologist Allan Savory, president and co-founder of the grassland restoration organization Savory Institute, evoked the importance of reversing global warming at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy Friday. The Center for International Environment and Resource Policy (CIERP), the Friedman School of Nutrition Science and Policy and Planet-TECH Associates sponsored the event. “Reversing Global Warming while Meeting Human Needs: An Urgently Needed Land-Based Option” was the first in a series of “Creating the Future We Want” events that will continue throughout the semester. President of Planet-TECH Associates Seth Itzkan, who worked with Savory at Savory Institute’s sister organization Holistic Management, gave opening remarks to introduce Savory. Savory received the Buckminister Fuller Award in 2010 for his research and methods of reversing desertification through incorporation of livestock and is currently a finalist for the Virgin Earth Challenge, Itzkan said. The Virgin Earth Challenge will award 25 million dollars to a recipient who proposes a viable design and method of decreasing greenhouse gas concentration in the atmosphere and is the largest award of
its type given in history. Savory began the lecture by describing the role of agriculture in society. “Agriculture is the foundation of all society,” he said. Savory argued that pressing social issues such as poverty, social breakdown and immigration to overcrowded cities are all symptoms of agricultural mismanagement. He then said that climate change is rooted more in agriculture than in fossil fuels or any other factor. “We cannot just mitigate climate change, we must address it,” Savory said. Savory explained that his “Holistic Management” approach to reversing global warming involves re-introducing animals to desertification-affected areas to restore soil quality. Previously, standard methods of land restoration have included resting land by relocating or killing livestock and burning grasslands, Savory said. He argued that both of these methods worsen desertification in the long run. “Resting the land is the cause of desertification,” he said. “Resting the land is highly dangerous. To maintain life we must maintain a cycle of birth, life, death and decay.” Previous approaches to agriculture management and land restoration see SAVORY, page 2
Today’s sections
Student exhibition highlights Burmese daily life.
Career Services staff encourage using social media in the job search.
see ARTS, page 5
see FEATURES, page 3
News Features Arts & Living Editorial
1 3 5 10
Op-Ed Comics Classifieds Sports
11 12 13 Back