Last night the board approved the "Guaranteed Energy Savings Agreement" portion of the contract with McKinstry. This agreement will enable the district to finance up to $2 million dollars and use the money to perform energy upgrades to our schools. The money saved of our energy bill will be used to pay back the financed sum. McKinstry will guarantee that the savings are realized, and if they aren't will make up the difference. The projects will have an average simple payback time of about 10years.
This program has two primary goals. First, over the long term this will place the district in a superior financial condition, with reduced operating costs. Currently we spend over $850,000 each year on energy costs - something that is sure to rise and can be unpredictable. Second, it will reduce the "carbon footprint" of the district. The total decrease in CO2 emissions is estimated to be 2 million pounds per year. Reducing our emissions will provide a positive example for our students and community and sends the message that we can and will take positive steps toward a sustainable future.
Quite a number of students turned out as an expression of their concern for this issue, and got to witness slow motion excersize which is progress. Maury Smith (HS Math teacher) eloquently argued the environmental importance of moving forward with this issue, and Rob Everhart spoke of the need to move forward now.
The district energy budget was an issue I raised in my campaign as an important place we could make a little contribution to the budget outlook. I am pleased that we have been able to take this small step.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Was Maywood included?
Last year the board made the decision to create an ad hoc committee to make recommendations concerning future grade configurations including the disposition of Maywood. Pending the conclusions of that committee and considering the desire to not make this contract larger than necessary and avoid investments that may not be paid off it was appropriate not to include investments in the Maywood or Nichols properties.
I believe once that group reaches its conclusions we will (and should) add Maywood to this project (that is relatively easy). However in the meantime I believe there is need to show respect of the process and the work of the people we have put in place to advise us on these decisions. It is appropriate that we wait for the outcome of that process before making decisions that may be affected by that outcome.
I personally think Maywood should be included because we will use that building at least at times in the future. However, in the interests of moving this forward and respecting the process I am content to wait.
Post a Comment