While the life of a college student can be demanding at times, we do have luxuries like the meal plan that help make our lives a little easier.

As hard-working students, it’s nice to know we can get food by a simple swipe of our ID card. Even better is the existence of the rollover policy, which takes unspent meal plan money at the end of a school year and carries it over to the next semester for further use.

Well not anymore.

Apparently the University has decided that starting next year, extra money left over from a meal plan will be taken away, as if it never existed in the first place.

While students that already have meal plans will not be affected by this change, incoming freshmen will be subject to these new policies immediately, forcing them to spend each and every penny of their investment or lose it at the behest of the University.

Where is the money going, you ask?

The answer: Into the pockets of the University to help pay for new dining halls across campus while revamping the old ones.

Apparently this revamping includes renovating McDonald, which will enhance the student eating experience.

We at The BG News believe the University is wrong to impose these restrictions on its students. It seems as though this institution is putting itself in a position whereby it would inadvertently be stealing from its contributors; perhaps not intentionally, but principle counts for a lot here.

Just as bad, this new policy would adversely affect those students who eat less food while rewarding those who eat more. But worst of all, this new plan seems to reveal a real problem with the University controlling it’s excessive spending tendencies.

Do the University dining halls really need to be completely revamped? How much money will this cost, and if they reach their quota will the roll over plan be reinstituted, or will this body continue to extract our money for other endeavors?

If the University really feels it’s necessary to fix the dining situation on campus, it should seek other methods of obtaining the money. Certainly this academic body can think of a better, less deceptive process in which to raise the necessary funds.

This institution needs to re-evaluate it’s goals and remember that it exists to serve us; not the other way around.