Present: Tracy Artley, Alec Cooley, Mark Darling, Jack Debell, Dana Donatucci, Judi Dunn Gray, Judi Gard, Rob Gogan, Deb Hanson, Mary Jensen, Ed Newman, Erica Spiegel, Christine Von Kolnitz Cooley

 

Absent: Karyn Kaplan, Becky Valentich

 

1. Election Results, Welcomes & Goodbyes

Christine Von Kolnitz Cooley, Tracy Artley, Judi Gard, Judi Dunn Gray, Ed Newman and Mary Jensen were reelected to the CURC Steering Committee. Becky Valentich from the University of Texas at Arlington was also elected. Mike Planton chose not to run do to increased job responsibilities. Mary will send him a thank you on behalf of the Steering Committee. Thirty CURC members voted out of a possible 130. Mary suggested brainstorming on how we can get a higher percentage of the membership to vote in upcoming elections. Christine suggested that the candidates promote that they are running to the listserves. Mary also expressed surprise the Karyn wasn’t aware of the CURC listserve, raising concerns that many others may not be aware of it either. Discussion ensued on overlaps between the CURC listserve and the RECYC-L listserve. Dana and Erica are working on this.

 

2. RecycleMania

Ed reported that they are still wrapping the competition up and Alec has been a big help. Rob stated that while the RecycleManiacs listserve will be down until next fall, the RecycleMania MySpace page will continue to be active. Additionally, the wrap up survey is available to participants. Mary inquired about the survey question regarding the fairness and accuracy of the competition. Alec stated that he has been watching the comments as they come in and that 30% - 40% of the respondents expressed strong concern over this. Survey results will be taken back to the RecycleMania Steering Committee to be reviewed and incorporated into next year’s competition. One of the more important aspects of this will be a peer-revision of conversions and standards. Ed reported that there are a number of issues needed to be addressed now that the competition is as large as it is and that it is under the purview of NRC. 

 

Rob stated that the last week of the contest “was wild.” He sent out an email to RECYC-L promoting a zero-waste focus for upcoming RecycleMania competitions. He contended that zero-waste is a very important mission for CURC to seize and that the term “zero-waste” pushed some explosive buttons in people. He was excited to see the vigor with which discussion ensued around this concept.

 

Ed reviewed items that are pending for next year’s competition. These include the RecycleMania trademark, sponsorship, benchmarking and trying to jazz the competition up. Alec is working on a staffing report for NRC related to the competition and is framing up some issues that need to be addressed. 

 

Ed and Rob next reported on a recycling competition being sponsored by Abitibi Price in the Boston Public School District that is using the name RecycleMania in the exact same way that it is used by the original competition. Abitibi has not approached anyone associated with RecycleMania about using the name and they have not stepped up to be a sponsor of the collegiate competition. While both are supportive of inter-institutional efforts to recycle more, for a for-profit company to utilize the RecycleMania name without contacting the RecycleMania Steering Committee is a “rip off.” If they do it, then others can as well and may profit from it. Alec spoke with Kate about this and they will be contacting Abitibi and the school district about the trademarking issue. 

 

Mary next brought up benchmarking. Erica reviewed the current benchmarking information that is on the website. It is an Excel spreadsheet that CURC members put together a few years before. The hope is to resurrect some interest in it, especially in light of the popularity of RecycleMania. Mary expressed her hope that someone on the Steering Committee would collaborate on this. Rob suggested that a call could be put out on the RecycleMania MySpace page for volunteers. The Steering Committee was encouraged to join MySpace and make RecycleMania their “friend.” The Steering Committee revisited the RecycleMania survey and the thought of having standards be peer-reviewed. Jack recommended connecting with AASHE on this. He pointed out that AASHE omitted waste metrics from their latest report. His feeling is that if CURC can concentrate its efforts on standardizing data issues with AASHE, it would be a positive step. He also mentioned that solid waste metrics were omitted from their Presidents Climate Commitment. Steering Committee members were encouraged to send comments regarding this to Jack by May 4. By September, Jack is hoping to consolidate the benchmarking work done by ERG in conjunction with RecycleMania and by CURC and send it to AASHE and others for peer-review.   Mary inquired to Erica about her role in this effort. Erica stated that she needs more time to think about it. Her thoughts include using the existing tool but tweaking it and having it peer-reviewed or made verifiable in some other way.  Mary stated that when Erica is ready, a message will be sent to RecycleMania participants soliciting them to help with this project. This is viewed as a great way to get them involved. Discussion ensued on the need and specifics desired from benchmarking work including comparing similarly-sized and peer schools. Rob mentioned the concept of a Division 1 RecycleMania League. Participants would have to use only certified weights, volumes and peer-reviewed conversions. 

  

3. Congress Update

Jack solicited for comments on the proposed workshop format he sent to the Steering Committee. He noted that zero-waste was prominently featured in the roundtable sessions and stated that this theme could work by encompassing what CURC attendees want to see in a workshop. He proposed setting zero-waste in a less confrontational and more understandable format. Rob noted that the phrase is a hot button and expressed concern about the amount of support the workshop would get for featuring it. The fear is that zero-waste will drive people away. Mary suggested that the wording be modified. She noted that the strong response the concept received over the RECYC-L listserve indicates that people are interested in the topic in some way. Erica wondered why there is an assumption that if the phrase “zero-waste” is used, you are aligning yourself with a particular person or group. She stressed the need for something “engaging and sexy.” Christine noted that this is a concept that 80%-90% of member schools are nowhere near – many do not even have recycling programs. We encouraged the continued provision of the operational information that they need. Mary said that if the phrase causes too much controversy at this point, we may be losing the argument before we’ve had it. She expressed her support of the workshop format and different categories as well as her desire to be cautious about using “zero-waste.” Rob proposed having at least half of the topics on the nuts and bolts of recycling and having the other half geared towards those who’ve mastered these issues. He suggested having “Recycling 101 and Waste Reduction 404.” Steering Committee members supported the idea of having basic and advanced tracks for the workshop. Jack will reformat the workshop agenda and send it out.

 

Christine reviewed the details for the workshop and potential cost. Biodiesel buses will be used for the tours and a breakfast will be provided. The cost is estimated at $40/person for the tour, $40/person for the workshop or $75/person for the entire day. Judi is working on the CURC booth and contacting furniture companies in the Denver area about donating items for the dorm room set up that will be featured at the booth. Jack is also working on details of the Saturday night meet-and-greet.

 

Jack next inquired about the scholarships for the conference. He solicited for volunteers to help review applications. Alec stated that he will be sending out the scholarship information this afternoon. Discussion ensued on what did and did not work from the previous year’s scholarship program. Mark, Rob and Dana volunteered to help review scholarship applications. Jack also inquired about the NRC-sponsored Murray Fox scholarships for disadvantaged youths in the host-city’s area. Alec will follow up with Kate on these scholarships.

 

Jack stated that Karyn is continuing to work on the track sessions for the Congress. Jack will put together a CURC-specific Congress agenda once he knows more of the details. Rob suggested having a collegiate musical group at the Congress.

4. Green Press Initiative

Mary reported that not much work has been done on this to date. She reported that the NRC Board of Directors chose not to endorse this initiative. Mary will forward the letter to the entire Steering Committee. She also informed the group that as NRC members, they can write to the Board to express dissent on this issue. 

 

5. Rubbermaid Letter

Mary stated that she did not inquire about putting this letter on the CURC webpage but will do so next week. The letter encourages Rubbermaid to include recycled-content in their products. She suggested that if the letter template on the CURC site is nixed, then perhaps a Steering Committee member could host it on their website and send information out to the RECYC-L and CURC listserves.

 

6. Rapid Response Project & Other Upcoming Projects

Mary suggested revisiting this topic on the next call. Ed noted that this project could benefit from the benchmarking effort. Jack mentioned that the Rapid Response letter includes a great list of campus recycling resources. 

 

7. Online Manual Project

            Hold until next call.

 

8. Changes at the NRC & Alec’s Role

Mary reported that Michael Alexander has left the NRC. Alec reviewed the current NRC hierarchy. Ed inquired about any resolution to the CURC membership issue. Mary stated that they have yet to decide on a membership database to purchase. Ed requested that Alec follow up on the membership database and CURC membership issue. Alec clarified that he has time available through his position to support CURC efforts. 

 

Mary mentioned an email Christine sent regarding adding teleconferences to the list of CURC-provided services. It was suggested that a student move in teleconference be assembled. Mary inquired if Alec could assist with this. Mary went on to suggest doing something like this every 6 months. 

 

Mary requested that the Steering Committee review the work plan and determine what they would want more NRC involvement in. Christine suggested that they help CURC get contacts to other organizations such as APPA. Jack mentioned that some links on the website do not work. 

 

9. Adjourn

            The call was adjourned at 1:31 pm.