During the past two weeks, the Empower Poly Coalition polled Cal Poly students via the MyCal Poly Portal to better understand the views of creating a student-led sustainability fund for projects on campus. On Friday, the poll closed with a total vote of 5,528 votes, which equals 30 percent of the student population. The breakdown was 43 percent in favor, and 56 percent opposed to the fund. As the author of this question, I must say that I was quite frustrated by the results, mainly in part of how sure I was that Cal Poly students wanted to develop a higher breadth of knowledge for sustainability throughout their studies as students of a polytechnic university.
All considered, the fight for sustainability at Cal Poly urges forward with more propulsion than ever before as sustainability grows in the topics in the classroom, senior projects that test real world strategies, and the change in lifestyle that students are making across campus towards living in a more responsible manner.
With such a strong movement underfoot, how then did the poll return such low numbers? One presumption several students have mentioned is that the question itself was phrased in such a way that automatically shunned voters from agreeing to the vote, due in large part to the first segment of the question. The poll read, “Would you be in favor of a five dollar increase in fees per quarter to support student-led sustainability projects on campus?” After speaking with a polling specialist, it was suggested that if the words “five dollar fee increase” and “student-led sustainability project” were changed, the results literally may have been flipped.
So the question that arose was whether or not the results that the MyCalPoly Poll revealed are an accurate assessment of Cal Poly students view on funding student-led sustainability projects. Another belief is that students who voted were in some regards uneducated as to the full implications of voting “yes” or voting “no” for a sustainability fund. Last year, the Empower Poly Coalition polled more than 500 students with a paper survey that had six questions that provided detailed information about what, where and how money would be spent in relation to the sustainability fund monies. The results were quite different, with more than 80 percent of students in favor of an increase in fees for a student-led sustainability fund.
With two fairly different results, the Empower Poly Coalition has determined that a third and final method for capturing votes is still needed in order to fully understand the desires of funding student projects on campus.
During the week of Feb. 8, the Empower Poly Coalition will be out on Dexter Lawn collecting our final method of data. We will have a large poster board with a question related to sustainability. Students are welcome to enter a tally mark either for or against the fee. These results will be collected and will then determine if Cal Poly students are willing to pay an increase, and at what amount.
Please come out to Dexter Lawn and make your pledge as we truly value the students opinions about sustainability at Cal Poly. The future of sustainability at Cal Poly is in your hands.
The future simply cannot wait.
Here’s my opinion, that you say you “truly value”: I already gave my opinion in the Poly portal poll and you seem to not like the way the results came out, so you’re holding another poll. That seems horribly disrespectful of the poll that you already conducted.
As for the poll that you did previously on paper, perhaps students involved with a sustainability club would be more inclined to approach like-minded students. In any event, you should quit with the polling and repolling.
I think a Poly portal poll is the best method, and people who visit the portal and vote are likely to representative of the Cal Poly student population, at least much more so than students who are going to walk up to a sustainability booth on Dexter.
If you think you messed up the order of “sustanability” and “fee” in the portal poll, well then that’s unfortunate, but it should have been thought of before the poll was posted.
If you want to know my personal feelings on the subject of sustainability, I’m all for it. What I’m against is the idea of believers of anthropogenic global warming using the guise of “sustainabilty” to mask their agenda. If you don’t understand I suggest you do some research on “climategate” and how the Nobel Peace Prize-winning IPCC report has been recently discredited by one of it’s own scientists.
Aaron,
I agree with everything you are saying. As a columnist, would you consider using a weekly column to shed more light on the “climate gate” scandal and tie it into how ambiguous climate treaties that reduce America’s sovereignty are both unconstitutional and thinly-veiled power grab by an inept organization, the UN?
I agree with Aaron.
Three things:
1. Re-wording the survey might give you different results, but that’s solely speculation. Call it like it is. It’s a fee increase. Period.
2. Face-to-face surveys are proven to not yield accurate information. To avoid conflict with the surveyor, anyone being asked a question would give an answer they know is favorable to the individual or group conducting the survey.
3. Also think about when the survey was taken: LAST YEAR. Last year, when fees to attend a CSU were 30% lower than they are now. This year, that $5 is viewed a little differently than it might have been last year.
If you are so adamant about pushing sustainability around campus, why don’t you try another avenue that does not include raising fees? I’m not an expert, but I know that there are many other options that can be considered. For now, stop conducting surveys in an effort to get a result that is favorable to you and your club.
Or, it could simply be that an additional $5 fee/tax is just as bad an idea at Cal Poly is at a state or national level right now. Listen to the voters. The result makes a lot of sense.
I’m sorry everyone’s comments were so negative. I can’t see the point of that.
I really care about the environment and sustainability, but I didn’t know what the proposed sustainability programs would do for the campus, or what they’d consist of. You might have more success by making it more personal to us, and/or detailing specific programs you’re going to implement with our money.
I support your goals, though, and I agree with the urgency of global warming. Since politics has already been invoked, you should also remember that many conservatives here are highly dogmatic, and they’re less likely to support a cause like this, simply because of their ideological opposition to being taxed for “greater good programs”. You’re facing the same battle as I have been fighting for the past two years. It’s no fun, but keep holding on! 😉
I’m sorry everyone’s comments were so negative. I can’t see the point of that.
I really care about the environment and sustainability, but I didn’t know what the proposed sustainability programs would do for the campus, or what they’d consist of. You might have more success by making it more personal to us, and/or detailing specific programs you’re going to implement with our money.
I support your goals, though, and I agree with the urgency of global warming. Since politics has already been invoked, you should also remember that many conservatives here are highly dogmatic, and they’re less likely to support a cause like this, simply because of their ideological opposition to being taxed for “greater good programs”. You’re facing the same battle as I have been fighting for the past two years. It’s no fun, but keep holding on! 😉
Stephanie,
Your comments are anything but a surprise.
“conservatives here are highly dogmatic, and they’re less likely to support a cause like this, simply because of their ideological opposition to being taxed for “greater good programs”.”
Yea I forgot, liberals here are not dogmatic at all. Its not that conservatives or libertarians aren’t in favor of the “greater good,” its simply that the “greater good” is something different for everyone. You shouldn’t be able to force me to pay for yet another one of your welfare plans or stimulus gimmicks b/c YOU think its for my betterment. I don’t want to impose myself on you, your life, or lifestyle choices; and I expect you to return the favor.
To all you bleeding heart liberals….the road to hell is paved with good intentions and that is exactly where our state and our country are heading. All of these “greater good” programs that punish hardworking people by taking their money and reward people for making poor decisions and not working are bankrupting are nation at all levels of government – and I’m speaking of programs implemented by both the right and left.
If you want student led sustainability projects on campus then put your money where your mouth is and pay for it yourself or ask for people to voluntarily contribute. Stop forcing everyone to pay for your “greater cause” project.
Personally, I am tired of agreeing to pay for new programs, only to have those programs not implemented and the money seemingly taken regardless. I don’t even know what those programs consist of, and because of that, even though I do think sustainability is important, I could not vote yes.
Instead of making a survey more confrontational by setting up people on dexter (where I would be uncomfortable myself in going to vote), draw up a plan and ideas, and maybe poll up what parts of the plan students like. Then see if they’d pay an increase in fees. Maybe do one of those polls where you can choose more than one option with each option being one idea to spend money at, and the last idea to be clicked is not wanting to pay. That way you can find out who is unwilling to put money to it outright, and for those who are willing, in what areas do the students (whose money you require) want to have focused. If there was something like that, I would have given more thought to paying a fee increase. But as it was vague, ambiguous and I’m through with getting milked of money by Cal Poly, I could not vote yes.
Be sure to leave a “tally” spot open for me on the side marked NO…see ya on the Lawn.
Be sure to leave a "tally" spot open for me on the side marked NO…see ya on the Lawn.
I too voted no on this, it’s not because I don’t support sustainability, I do, but some of the so called sustainable things really aren’t. Take for exam dimmable fluorescent ballasts, not sure how they are now, but when i visited a leed gold certified building about 6 years ago, they were swapping out their dimmable ballasts for conventional ones. Why? Because the dimmable ones were lasting 6 months to a year, while conventional ones are good for 5-10 years. The building supervisor said he figured it was more sustainable to not be tossing these ballasts ever 6-12 months. I think he’s right.
For every 3 good things that come from sustainability, I’d bet there is one bad.
Cal Poly students are tired or getting nickled and dimed with fees, and this just came as another one. How the money would be used is also vague, as the definition of sustainability is in itself vague. Like AM said above, green washing can be a problem when it comes to things like this. If students want to donate to causes, more power to them, but forcing a low-to-no-income group such as students to pay for a luxury fund that would contribute little if nothing to the value of their degree is not just.
I think you are confusing sustainability for greenwashing, which comes from what the green movement is trying to fight against, consumptive capitialism, or convincing people to buy products they do not need through false advertising.
However, this $5 increase will go to university level research for sustainability based projects. There WILL be an advisory board to approve each project so this money will not be given out for free or for pointless, greenwashed projects. That was the whole point Tyler was trying to make, he was voicing your concerns that the question was poorly worded so people in between would not want to vote for it.
It comes as a surprise that students who are concerned about paying for their education would vote 75% for a new gym and UU but not towards something that would benefit their education. Sustainability is something that we WILL HAVE TO ADDRESS in the future: climategate or not, liberal or conservative. Unsustainable means NOT POSSIBLE in the long term and many of the activities we currently partake in are scientifically proven as not sustainable. Cal Poly has the potential to be a leader in sustainability and already has been in the past and passing this initiative can help us be a leader in the future through student run, environmentally conscious, learn by doing research
Any initiative should be funded voluntarily, not forced. (This applies to the UU and Rec Center projects as well. But what about those who voted no and still use the new facilities? Note who they are and charge them accordingly for their usage.) The correct way to start this is for you to research on your own first (put in your own blood, sweat, and tears). Put together a plan of action and determine costs where you can. Show proposed benefits. Learn how to create a prospectus, then pitch it to the public. It’s easier for people to support you if they can see a detailed plan of action. I’m sure the YES voters will support your initial attempts. Once you have a little success, plan more projects and show a cost-benefit analysis. People will get on board if they see success, but they have to know that there are real results. The more successful plans you implement, the more financial support you will receive from students, funding future projects. A majority of people don’t want to throw their money into a black hole of good intention, they want a return on their investment.
For a first project, go after the low hanging fruit first. This might be high volume human actions. For example, a lot of students drink coffee and eat salad. In the case of coffee, it’s sold in disposable cups. Why? People don’t want to lug around dirty mugs when they’re done. Here are a couple possible solutions. Let entrepreneurs set up wash stations on campus and charge a small fee ($0.25?) for cleaning a mug/cup. (Maybe a senior project will involve designing an efficient mug/cup washing device) Students will seek out the “greenest”, most sanitary stations while the poorly run stations go out of business. An alternative or supplement to this is to invest in durable reusable cups, which we’ll call CP cups. Let the vendors sell coffee in these for a very small additional fee ($0.05 to recover the initial investment as well as cover lost cups) and when it’s empty, they can be dropped off at one of the wash stations. Another way of collecting the CP cups is to place a third bin next to all the trash and recycling bins around campus for convenience which the washing stations will own. The same thing can be done for salad containers.
Before you can do this, you need a plan that lists all the costs and makes a net profit within a reasonable time. Your value add is going to be psychic reward for being “green” as well as convenience for students. If you can do this, you will get investment from students and, likely, local businesses. However, if your plan can’t make a profit, then nobody invests in your future projects, which means your plan is UNSUSTAINABLE.
-Slapstick
Your comment seemed a little too openly inflamatory not to respond to. I won’t address your actual views because obviously you’re entitled to your opinion and most of your points seem to be valid. I do have a problem with you bringing in a larger issue like some conspiricy theory “UN power grab” that has nothing to do with this issue, but to speak to this grand scheme example, it sucks being the political underdog doesn’t it? Now you know how I felt the for almost a decade…
As for the survey, this whole thing can be seen as selective surveying to get an intended response. None of the survey methods named are statistically accurate because none of them are actually random but the my.calpoly one probably has the largest pool so just run with it. We’re in tough times ecenomically so use that to your advantage. If the student body doesn’t want to pay for a special program right now just come back to it later and focus your efforts elsewhere. Look for ways to make sustainablility cost effective or even profitable (check out RMI.org)
-cheers