425
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 3:
Line 3: − + − + − + Line 14:
Line 14: − The lighting on the 3515 side is poor. We received a lighting assessment from Ener-Light as part of ComEd's energy efficiency rebate program. − As a condition of the lease, the landlord has agreed to "repair or replace" the non-working existing fluorescent fixtures. This likely leaves us with a bunch of old and inefficient lights. − The landlord has agreed to chip in up to $1000, there are conditions. − The Ener-light proposal has a energy savings pay back time of − We need to authorize the full amount so we can be sure we can fulfill the contract terms regardless of what the landlord actually does or doesn't do. + + + + + + + +
Vote to Upgrade 3515 Lighting (view source)
Revision as of 22:13, 14 June 2016
, 22:13, 14 June 2016no edit summary
== History ==
== History ==
* Mailing List Announcement:
* Mailing List Announcement: June 14, 2016
* Officially Proposed:
* Officially Proposed: June 14, 2016
* Voted on:
* Voted on: June 21, 2016
** Quorum:
** Quorum:
** Yes:
** Yes:
== Background ==
== Background ==
*The lighting on the 3515 side is poor. We received a lighting assessment from Ener-Light as part of ComEd's energy efficiency rebate program.
*As a condition of the lease, the landlord has agreed to "repair or replace" the non-working existing fluorescent fixtures. This likely leaves us with a bunch of old and inefficient lights.
*The Ener-Light proposal is for $2587.70
*The landlord has agreed to chip in up to $1000, there are conditions.
*The Ener-light proposal has a energy savings pay back time of 1.42 years.
*We need to authorize the full amount plus a cushion so we can be sure we can fulfill the contract terms regardless of what the landlord actually does or doesn't do.
*It's possible Com Ed could deny our application and it's possible we might need to do some work if Com Ed decides to inspect prior to okaying the application. The contractor says this is unlikely.
== Language ==
== Language ==