Fee Transparency Project

Present: Gabrielle, Andy, Jherau, Marshall, Bara, Charlene, Mel, Lydia, Lisa

Guest: Dan

Welcome & Check-In
1. Check-In Prompt:
  1. Name, Space, Year, Pronouns and Major (if comfortable/applicable)
    1. Cowell, Crown, Merrill, Porter, Kresge, Oakes, RCC, C9, JRL, GSC, GSA, Provost, SUA, Lisa, Lucy, Lydia
Approval of Agenda and Minutes: SFAC_Minutes_022323
1. Marshall motions to approve the agenda, Mel seconds. Motion passes.
2. Marshall motions to approve the minutes, Mel seconds. Motion passes.
TAPS Meeting with Dan Henderson:
1. Referendum review
  1. Per the transit referenda requirement:
    1. The end-of-year operating budget for the Transit program for the previous fiscal year,
    2. Demonstrated service delivery and ridership demand during the previous Fall quarter, and
    3. Plans for possible transit service adjustments for the next academic year.
  2. Measure 73 was passed in 2019, as an extension of Measure 9. The measure supports buses, shuttles, and other TAPS goals.
  3. Dan reviews the FY22 transit operating budget. Carryover from 2021 was 1.6 million, was a carryforward from reduced Metro services during COVID. Budget included capital reserve, return to aid, and salaries.
    1. End operating balance was 1.4 million. Will introduce new pilot programs, increased gas costs, etc. Can transfer to working capital reserve.
    2. 4% positive variance.
  4. Jhertau asks what TAPS considers “zero emission”. Dan says anything that does not have emission. Primarily electric and fuel cell. Relatively green with natural gas, biodiesel, but still have emissions.
  5. Lisa asks about the procurement timeline? Early stages of study with experts in field on how to change fleet to zero emission. 10 month study. Process for how to procure electric buses for campus, test pieces and training, but year-plus timeline for acquiring bus. One of Dan’s goals is to electrify fleet or make it hydrogen powered — whatever consultant recommends as long term solution for university vehicles.
  6. Student leadership - presentation will go to campus leadership and ACTAP, the advisory committee.
  7. Service delivery - ridership 933,000 total on campus transit and metro (entire county). 58% of rides through metro. UAW strike impacted ridership.
  8. Plans for possible service adjustment, starting July 1 - still TBD. Working to add capacity and frequency to new services as resources allow. Prior to M73 there was a deficit. Limited by drivers. Challenge for students and staff, working with Metro to bring their campus routes to pre-Covid levels. Nationwide commercial driver shortage, countywide service reduction. Metro notified TAPS that they are introducing 7 more articulated (bendy) buses to campus by fall, doesn’t increase frequency but adds capacity. 5 of 7 will come into service during spring quarter. Reallocation of resources. Campus routes are the heaviest routes in county, over half of total Metro ridership. Finances are over half of their fair box revenue. Piloting interface vehicle locator from Clever Devices vendor, if this works TAPS will try to adopt technology as well. Want one interface for all options, show metro vs loop arrivals. Slugroute discontinued, looking for replacement since then.
  9. Focus on retaining drivers, same license as truckers and metro drivers. Driver shortage. Used to be primarily retired Metro drivers. Developed training program to maintain full driver roster, have retirements upcoming. Can introduce new routes as needed provided demonstrated demand, did that this year with Westside connector - correlates with start and end times. Silicon Valley connector, 3x round trip in Santa Clara. 1 electric bus is about $1 million, looking into grants and federal funding to accomplish this. SUA and GSA representatives on ACTAP. Dan happy to talk more.
    1. Lisa asks if other campuses have electric bus plans? Dan says that not every campus has a transit program, but UCLA and Irvine, etc have adopted different ways. ie. Irvine campus is different than UCSC. Metro has electric buses on campus routes, can take data from them to help understand best approach for efficiency. 3 main vendors, all being used in municipalities.
    2. Andy asks what would happen to old buses? In short term, fleet would be supplemented. Eventually mostly away from internal combustion. If electrical is adopted, power can sometimes be shut down. Lower campus does not have grid to charge electrical buses in timely manner. Would keep gasoline powered for emergency situations, ie campus evacuations.
Announcements & Updates:
1. Meeting time extension for this week (only): 10am - 12pm.
  1. Andy proposes extending the meeting to get through proposals.
2. Proposed week 8 weekend meeting poll: https://www.when2meet.com/?19016133-1PFG9
  1. One more weekend meeting!
3. Rating sheet:
  1. Proposal materials
  2. Documents for reading are ready till proposal #72.
  3. Proposals are hyperlinked to the folders
4. Final weekend meetings:
  1. Sundays, March 5th, 2023 11:00am-1:00pm
    1. Location: Baytree Bookstore (Hybrid)
    2. Poll:
5. STARS funding reallocation:
  1. Lucy information with the unit:
    1. STARS sent over the budget breakdown for the $12,500 that they are asking to reallocate (from last year's funding call). This follows the agenda item that we discussed last week. If there is room to add to tomorrow's agenda, I wanted to share.
  2. Email
  3. Original proposal
  4. Requested budget sheet
  5. Bara and Mel don’t see a problem with reallocating, there is still positive impact for students.
  6. Charlene notes this office is helpful for retention, is supportive of this modification. Last year the committee did not fund any/many travel requests, wants the funding to have an impact to the students this office supports.
  7. Mel motions to reallocate the 12,500 for travel to selected conference, Bara seconds. Motion passes.
Review rating worksheet tabs
1. Motion to approve suggested amount for proposal #43 - #60
  1. Marshall motions to approve the recommendations, Bara seconds. Motion passes.
2. Continue discussion for proposal #61 - #67
  1. 61 - FRED
    1. Gabrielle asks what they do? Student education program through AARCC.
    2. Jhertau is open to funding the minimum, but would want to see an alternative plan for the future. Charlene says this can be noted in the award letter.
    3. $19,882 for one SPC, 4 facilitators, one social media coordinator. Stipulated exactly.
    4. Mel agrees that it would be a great proposal for equity an inclusion
  2. 62 -
    1. Gabrielle supportive of 25K. Folks agree that this would be important for retention and 6,600 for minimum programming and fully fund elections.
  3. 63 - KZSC
    1. Charlene shares that KZSC has come to SFAC in the past as part of the referendum process.
    2. Gabrielle gave the minimum, but wouldn’t mind allowing for 2 years of wages.
    3. Charlene is supportive giving one year since it has been difficult to pass referenda in the past few years.
    4. 635
  4. 64 - DRC
    1. Lydia clarifies that compliance operations cannot be funded through SSF and M7, but identity and community programming is eligible.
    2. Jhertau is supportive of fully funding, since it is an underrepresented group and many students don’t know about the DRC.
    3. Gabrielle suggests funding all except the student stipends 14917 for fully funding all except career staff due to class 1 in appropriate funding.
  5. 65- SWANA
    1. Many members agree to suggest minimum programing plus student stipends at 14,917.
    2. Students believe this would be important for retention for AAPI folx on campus.
  6. 71 - LSS
    1. Unclear what can and cannot be funded.
  7. 66- Veterans
    1. folx would support funding them their full minimum budget.
    2. The amount that members support 36,770.
  8. 67- VSA Event Funding
    1. Members want to fully fund but are awaiting confirmation of attending.
    2. Folx see the benefit to VS community on campus
  9. 68-Building of a resiliency ecosystem at Crown College
    1. Members strongly oppose funding due to class 1 inappropriate to fund any funds due to purpose to fund new course.
  10. 69- Funding For UCSC Model United Nations Travel Team
    1. Members want to suggest to fully fund their travel since they depend on travel as an elective student org on campus. $3333
  11. 70-
3. CSF limitations document
If time permits: Brainstorm future guests and topics
1. Andy suggests bringing in past units that submit proposals, preferably in spring.
2. Discuss units/ fees with large carryforwards, shouldn’t have more than 15-10% of their budget amount, spring week 3
3. Meeting with the Chancellor Cynthia Larive.
4. Meeting with Vice Chancellor Akirah Bradley-Armstrong
Adjournment

Motion to adjourn Mel second by Jhertau