SUFAC
Monday February 15, 2010
Meeting Commenced 5:34
Minutes
Approved, No objection
Guest Speakers
Dan Sweetman (Manager of Environmental Health, Safety, and Sustainability)
Photovoltaic System must was considered to be placed on the cooling tower of
Cartwright, on a pole-mounted system south of Cartwright, or on Cartwright’s south
wall. System must be placed on PR buildings as necessary by Green fund rules;
Residence Life buildings were not options by rules. Additionally Whitney Center was
looked at but all aforementioned locations were not optimal. The Optimal Placement
would be a ground system on the West side of the REC (roof top systems may result in
problems with warranties). The System would be a 2.88 kilowatt system pushing energy
into REC; it would generate about 1% of REC power consumption per year.
Could System be placed offsite?
State Mandates require that that funds for such systems be spent on site.
Dual Access systems are likely the only long term problem and system is likely to
be paid off in 31 years resulting in a net benefit. The panels are supposed to last
about 50 years. Direct to alternate current conversion system is a $2500 cost
about every 10 years. There will be grants of 50% from a DOA grant and
possibility for other grants. Focus on Energy Grant seems likely.
Educational supplement programs are 2000 dollars per year after start-up costs; it is
for a 5 year program. All equivalent educational supplement programs are in proximity
to that amount.
Green Fund Allocations
SUFAC’s Place
Place is to make Fiscally Responsible choices. Should balance economic portion, Fiscally
Responsible portion, Visual portion. Support projects with most impact.
Funds not proportioned will be put back into fund.
Should our goal to be fund projects to the limit?
Should we save some of the money?
There is a concern if the money isn’t spent but there is also a concern that we
are not spending it wisely. Maybe we need to decrease the amount of the seg.
Fee. We should approve these on merits and take a holistic view on what is
being accomplished.
What is the Reserve right Now?
142,000 as of last week with money still left to collect.
General Discussion
Bike Powered ConcertA lot of money for a one -time thing but there is a high visibility prospect that
could by good for ad vocation of the Green fund; Very innovative.
How much of this is symbolic of showing what people should try to do? It would
be symbolic to have a sound system run off of bike power.
Sometimes we do PR to generate a growing knowledge and put the
environmental thought in peoples conscious.
Doesn’t Really fit into the long term; it’s a one-time event not to be recognized
by future students.
Visibility and Educational aspects were main reasoning for JCES approval.
We may want to say we like the idea but would recommend lasting ideas.
$2500 for Chicago firm to come in and $400 for educational speaker
Motion for approval for $2900 and a recommendation to look for more hookups
for the bike s in the REC. Cappozzo/ Polzin Approved
ZimrideThe Public can use Zimride for free. 10,000 just buys a private network not limits
access. It would be easier for UW-L Students to have the program. Is it free
temporarily or not? Site says it is free to the public. Zimride would assist in
offering its service. Are they advertising? It may be Zimride targeting ads
through Facebook. Students are looking for something like this. $10,000 per
year is a high price tag.
Motion to Not to Approve… Bennett/ Gietman Approved
Electric TruckOriginally it was a smaller, cheaper van they were looking into ; it wouldn’t
really work in our situation. It will be used for composting. Matching funds will
come out of
Motion to approve at 10,000 and request that “paid for by the Green Fund” be
placed visibly on the truck . Cappozzo/Nicklaus Approved
PV SystemConcerns have come up about any possible additions to be placed on the South
and west sides. Concerns have also come up from the daycare as the Children
use the hill to sled. SS&B met and everyone was opposed of this idea. There was
a concern over upkeep costs, tampering, and future additions. There were
concerns about cost effectiveness but this is more clearly a symbol rather than a
cost effective act.
Why can’t these go on building?
Emphasis from the committee on high upkeep costs and cost not relating to
initial cost. What is the value of green space?
There is a PR aspect to this as well. “Greening” is possible that can help us
toward substantive changes in the future.
Is expanding the REC likely in this area? Not by the plan that was given to us.
We should do what’s fiscally responsible. We have the money to fund it.
Number one focus was the carbon footprint.
Motion to approve $52655 Lauderdale/ Nelson -Division -Approved 6/5
Steam Traps –
Motion to Approve $3,000 Cappozzo/Gietman … Fails 5/6
This would cover equivalent of 1 residence Hall spread around Campus.
They only approved 1 residence life approval. They would eventually be
repaired. Not the Best Use of fees paid by the entire campus.
Recycle Bins
Motion to Approve Recycle Bins at High Traffic area at $3700 with “Paid for by
Green Fund … Cappozzo/Lauderdale … Approved 9/2
Committee denied this because it should be built into facility’s budget. Are
these going encourage people who don’t recycle, to recycle? There is a
convenience factor for people who don’t recycle and more visibility may have a
positive outcome. There will probably be a chargeback associated with these
bins.
Motion to Approve Document as a Whole with “Paid for by Green Fund” cited visibly when
Possible … Roland/Schmidt … Approved 10/1
Developmental Grant Request
Off-Campus Housing Resource Center
(Presentation re-explained from previous week)
Motion to approve $2780 and requesting a presentation next fall… Nicklaus/Roland Approved 10/0/1
SUFAC Publicity Update
They are Working on a poster with Pie chart and Definitions with insert in trackers. Pamphlet
idea also being worked on
Forms Committee Update
Meeting next Week
Policy Committee Update
Working on Capital Items
Contingency Funds are broken down into Capital Requests and Budget Request. There is
an emphasis put on the budgeting for items that can be foreseen to be requested. We
want to know what groups are looking to buy in the future.
Contingency Requests:
There will be fall budgets and one-shots only; no more spring one-shots but there will
be emergency funds available.
Discussion:
Definitions concerns
Capital requests- volleyballs are technically not capital items- we may want to say
durable or tangible
This may hold groups more accountable, good ideas.
This will be mailed out to the groups for feedback.
Job Discussions
Secretary
This is the description of what the secretary has been doing that was not previously defined
Budget Analyst
Description is as the culmination of previous week discussions and SUFAC Summit Discussion in
document formed.
Notes
Requirement to be part time student
Chair and Vice Chair will be hire positions
May want to raise salary of Budget Analyst
Other Discussion
Bylaws – Will be done by the end of the Semester
Adjournment: 8:46 : Schmidt/Bennett