For those who have 9 a.m. classes, pull all-nighters, row House crew, or were raised on farms, and all other students with the admirable propensity of rising early and eating it hot--for all these stalwart scals the suspense began back in early July.
It was in July that Gov. Michael S. Dukakis signed into law a bill that would several months later reduce the Massachusetts meals tax--a tax that applies to Harvard board contracts--from 8 to 6 per cent.
The suspense began because University financial officers had already prepared this year's term bills by then, so Harvard families around the world had been overcharged by roughly $15.50--just about enough to fund hot breakfasts in the eight Houses where Dean Fox reduced service as an economy measure last spring.
When the surplus became apparent, Fox and other administrators started thinking about putting the money toward hot breakfasts.
Those deliberations came to an end this week when, after a couple of student demonstrations in the interim, Fox announced that, no, he would return the money instead of funding hot breakfasts with it, but yes, the University would provide an additional egg entree during January, and possibly May, exam periods.
A hard-to-interpret vote of the Committee on Houses and Undergraduate Life (CHUL) apparently pushed the teetering Fox in the nobreakfast direction. The committee voted, 10-9, against hot breakfasts for spring term, with CHUL chairman Dean Rosovsky, whom CHUL is supposed to advise, breaking a tie. Fox cited the wishy-washy nature of CHUL's student members' support for the proposal as a reason for his decision.
But the breakfast issue isn't over. In January, CHUL will conduct a poll on hot breakfast, and, presumably, the suspense will start all over again.