President’s Advisory Council for Sustainability PlanningFebruary 14, 2011
Present: Jessica Bilecki, Jill Carlson, Beth Clodfelter, Lynnette Clouse, Ed Newman, Michele Morrone, Matt
Rapposelli, Harry Wyatt
Absent: Geoff Buckley, Sujit Chemburkar, Erin Dame, Mike Gebeke, Chris Knisely, Wendy Parker, Steve
Scanlan, Ben Stuart, Erin Sykes,
Minutes: Mary Leciejewski




Housekeeping & Announcements
Moving Forward in the Interim
o Position description and hiring update
 Harry Wyatt will share Human Resources’ screening electronically with group
 No firm estimate on hiring date, hope within by next few months
Update from President’s Executive Council Meeting
o Reviewed with Sonia’s notes
o Advice from Council
 More vetting is necessary before meeting with board of trustees
 Must meet with EEC again and have written comments from them
DECISION: By end of March, Sustainability Council will have compiled written
feedback from additional vetting in order to present to April board meeting
 Terminology Concerns
 Beneficial to include “social justice”
 Cost of Plan
 How would we determine this? And how important to determine?
 What costs are associated with actions that would occur without sustainability
plan?
o Ex. heating plant costs
Implementation Priorities
o Council would like to compile list of first year priorities and first five year priorities
o Criteria for prioritizing implementation
 DECISION: Prioritize by benchmark, not strategy
 Factors to rate benchmarks
 Cost
o Short term (up front) verses long term
o Savings
o Investment return
 Ease of Implementation
o Activities which are already in progress
o Stakeholder acceptability
 Low cost does not necessarily translate to low resistance
 Sustainability Impact
o Benchmarks which achieve multiple objectives
 Benchmark Sequence
o If benchmark needs to be accomplished before others are met
 Mandates
o Discussion of possible benchmark mandates
 Only benchmark I. is state mandated under House Bill 251
 D.D. Hazardous waste is mandated but not for our purposes
 Need to reword this benchmark
o “ reduce generation”?



o Mandates would relate to ease of implementation
 DECISION: Create spreadsheet this week to attempt to rate each benchmark according
to cost, ease of implementation, sustainability impact, and benchmark sequence on a
scale of high, medium, or low. Comment column will be included.
Update on Vetting Process
o Reviewed new timeline
o Vetting materials and presentations
 Send draft documents to groups before meeting
 Include cover letter
o Include the process of Sustainability Council
o Request feedback before and after meeting
 Taylor presentation to particular group, due to time limitation
 Ex. Faculty senate will be concerned with curriculum, administrative senate will
be concerned with pest management, etc.
 Peers should present to student senates, faculty will present to other groups
 Ideally, facility, students, and administrators will be present at all meetings
 Add graduate student senate and classified senate to vetting groups
 Vetting materials
 Yes to PowerPoint presentations, but no handouts
o Michelle will draft PowerPoint before next meeting for review
 Update website
o Are we able to post draft document on website only available to those with
an ohio.edu email address?
 Visits with vetting groups
 Michelle will set up visits with groups, so this process can be complete by midMarch
 After vetting, then we will take presentation to pubic
 At this point, we will call another brainstorming sessions, similar to the one at the
beginning of process
Budget Savings Initiative Discussion
o Group attempting to save paper and manage copiers is looking for synergy and support
o Sustainability Council is absolutely supportive, though direct support will not come from us
o Budget savings group can use sustainability plan to develop initiatives, find funding, etc.
Adjourned