1977-02-16; Central Michigan Life

              ■WW
Volume 58 No, 57
Mt.Fleasant, Mich. 48859
Wa^nayd.ay> February 1 ffi, 1 973*/
CMU seeks funding
System could cut utility bills
by HOLLY HAYHJS
LIFE Managing Editor
Central could save about 25 per cent of its annual energy bill with
the implementation of a Central Control Panel, according to Ed
Naretto, superintendent of utilities for the Physical Plant.
The computerized system, which has been under scrutiny by
Central's administration for about six months, would be able to
monitor and make changes in any heating, ventilating or cooling
equipment on campus automatically. The system would be operated
! from a central control room.
Currently, administrators are looking for funding for the project
"from every state, federal and local area we can," according to Jerry
| Tubbs, vice president for business and finance. *
"There's just too much savings to gain not to look into every angle
we can find," Tubbs said, adding that as the country's energy
i situation grows worse each day, the system "looks better and better
[all the time." ( ■ ■
Cost for the energy monitoring system is in the range of $1.2
million, Tubbs said.
According to CMU administrators, funding from the sale of
bonds, as in the case of Central's proposed ice arena, is not a very
j good possibility for the installation of an energy saving system.
Arthur Ellis, vice president for public affairs, said Tuesday the
state legislature is unlikely to okay such a bond sale because "if
there's justification for CMU to have it, there's justification for
every institution to have it. I just don't think that there's that type
j of priority in this state."
Tubbs added to get authorization for a bond sale "you've got to
have a source of income; what we've got here is a source of savings
in the eyes of the legislature - and there's a difference there.
Naretto estimated the yearly savings to CMU with the system
[installed at about $500,000, which would be achieved by turning off
[energy in certain buildings as indicated by the monitor.
The system would print out summaries on building temperatures
I which were too hot or cold and allow employees to spot check
buildings for their temperatures.
Naretto said the system would ensure that "the air conditioning
wouldn't come on in 65 degree weather or the heat in 80 degree
weather."
He added the current Physical Plant j6b of turning temperatures
[down to 65 degrees has "required an unbelievable amount of
| manpower,"
Naretto explained that other than finding fundingrfor the project,
the rest is not too difficult, explaining each building at CMU already
has some sort of control panel in its maintenance room which would
need to be altered.
"The new Central Control Panel would tie into the present
system with four wires and would then be hooked to about 1,200
different places all over the campus. If something was one degree
off anywhere on campus, it would tell you," he said.
In addition to monitoring temperatures, the system also would be
capable of reporting on water temperatures, level of humidity and
lighting in buildings. He added there is a possibility a security and
fire alarm system could be tied in, although the University
currently is not looking into that area.
A report on a system similar to this was presented to CMU's
Board of Trustees in April, 1976 by officials of Hoyem Associates of
Bloomfield Hills. In a 20-page document, feasibilities for such a
system were explored.
At that time, engineers from Hoyem had looked into every major
campus building with the help of Physical Plant employees to
determine which type of system would be most efficient. Ralph
Steels, of Hoyem, recommended the University adopt the entire
package presented to Trustees.
The item was not, however, an action item for the Board as it
requested a follow up report be done at a later date.
"Boy it's a long way up!" must be the thought of little Tonya
Watts as she climbs the steps of the University Center Tuesday
afternoon. Tonya was with her parents, Carl Watts, Sanford
junior, and his wife Kathy (LIFE photo by Steve Fecht).
City, township differ about
joint waste treatment
byPAULRAU
CM LIFE Reporter
The community growth policy
agreement between the city of
Mt. • Pleasant and Union
Township will remain a major
issue when officials from both
sides meet to negotiate a
possible joint waste treatment
facility Thursday night.
The growth policy is an iii-
-formal agreement between th#*
Mt. Pleasant City Commission
WMHWfs "Big Cart Giveaway" draws, CMU students to the Woldt-Emons lobby Tuesday. The cart
contains such items as albums, 45s, bumper stickers, a T-shirt and Ronald McDonald tot-spotters. To
win, simply guess the correct number of items in the grocery cart when you see the cart on campus.
Registration is free and each student may register up to three times. The winner will be announced Feb.
25 (LIFE photo by Rob Deming). .
and the Union Township Board
of Trustees to develop a plan for
urban growth. It includes the
extension -of a single water
supply and waste treatment
system for Mt. Pleasant and
Union Township. The agreement
was made Sept. 14, 1974, but
little progress has been made in
implementing the plan since
that time.
The growth policy has become
the major obstacle between the
two parties because it stipulates
hQW and when parcels of land in
Area Two will be annexed to the
city to receive water and waste
treatment services. Area Two is
the land immediately
surrounding the city except for
a small section on the northeast
boundry.
The city wants the delivery of
water and waste treatment
services to be contingent on
annexation to the city, as in the
growth policy, but the township
desires the services without
giving up land to the city.
' The township has blocked the
annexation of several parcels of
land in Area Two which total
more than 100 acres. One owner
filed an annexation petition in
1972. The growth policy, supposedly in force but not legally
binding, says "lawful petitions
requesting annexation in Area
Two properly submitted to the
city and to the township for joint
approval, will be approved."
The latest development in the
rift between the city and the
township came last week when
township officials surprised the
city by revealing the' Department of Natural Resources
(DNR) told the township a
segmented  grant  is  available
which wduld allow them to build
their own sewer system. The
grant would provide money for
both the city and the township,
but would circumvent the annexation requirement of the
growth policy.
"This latest communication
from the township could be
interpreted as throwing out the
growth policy," City Manager
William Barrons said. "The
township would not lose
anything by annexing these
areas to the city. In fact, they
would save money because the
township pays more for fire
protection on these parcels than
(See"Water agreement-"page5)
Board considers
medical fee hike
• Approval of an office call fee
increase for the University
Health Services is expected at
today's meeting of the Board of
Trustees beginning at 9:30 a.m.
in the President's Council Room
of the University Center.
The proposal will call for an
increase from $2 to $3 for a
regular office call at the Health
Center and an increase from $5
to $8 for an after-hours office
call.
The proposal stems from a
recommendation by the Student
Association Board of Directors.
Trustees also are expected to
approve an architect for CMU's
proposed ice arena.
The project needs an architect
to draw up technical plans
before a use and finance
statement can be filed in Lansing to receive approyal for
bond sales for the arena.
Other Trustee business will
include authorization for the
sale of University-owned lots on
Glen   Avenue   and   two .con
dominiums. The condominiums,
located on Torch Lake east of
Traverse City, were donated to
the University last year by
Helen Dow Whiting. Each is
assessed at approximately
$55,000.
Trustees also will appoint
members to various Board
committees, approve fellowships
and accept a variety of gifts and
grants to the University.
President Harold Abel also
will report to the Board. The
meeting is open to the public.
tiiside
— Chamber study shows
buying habits—page 3
— Program     aids
language skills—page 9
— "Mac"        to        be
honored—page 10
Divorce
'stigmas'
change
v.
Editor's note: The traditional stigmas attached to divorced
persons are undergoing examination with the changes in society.
These stigmas and the problems of divorce are examined in this
article, the first of a two-part series. Part two will examine the
problems of child support and the effect of divorces on children.
by KELLY KOLHAGEN
CM LIFE Reporter
When Tom and Jane were divorced 10 years'ago, Jane received
the house, the car* the furniture, the appliances and the children,
while Tom was left with a stack of bills and visitation rights.
However, Jane suddenly was faced with the stigma of a "swinging
divorcee" being "hot to trot," regardless of whether she was or not.
Of course, Tom and Jane are not real people, but their problems
are. Until recently, both men and women have been shortchanged in
a divorce; men on the economic end and women on the social end.
Today, however, divorce and attitudes about divorce are
changing. According to Jerry S* Strouse, assistant professor of
home economics, family life and consumer education, the United
States carries the highest divorce rate of any country in the world.
The national average stands at one divorce for every three
marriages.
But, in places like California and Florida, where divorce is much
more common, statistics show one divorce for every two marriages,
Leslie Lieberman, instructor of home economics, family life and
consumer education, said.
"Because of the increase, divorces are more common, and
therefore, more acceptable," she explained. "Faculty members
barely raise an eyebrow when they learn that friends who have
been married for 15 to 20 years are getting a divorce."
Why such an increase in divorce? Both Lieberman and 'Strouse
agree the Michigan no-fault divorce law, established in 1972, has
made divorces easier to obtain.
Lieberman also cited other problems leading to the increase in
divorces.
"The expectations for what marriages should provide have
changed from what they used.to be. It used to be if the husband
supported the family, managed to come home sober and handed
over the paycheck and if the wife kept up the home and managed to
feed the children* then the marriage was okay," she said.
She also^blamed the young ages at which couples frequently
marry (18, 19 and 20) as a major factor in divorce. She said young
couples who marry before they find out who they are and what they
can do often find that one spouse may outgrow another in time.
Lieberman also said young couples who have children may be too
young .• for the parental role and therefore strain their own
relationship.
"The trend of college-educated people marrying and delaying
child-bearing is a healthy sign in our society," she said.
Leslie Wilhelm, a counselor at Family Counseling Services of
Central Michigan, 124 E. Broadway, handles some marriage
counseling. She said that most of the people who come to her for
marriage counseling have been married from one to 10 years.
"People come in all different stages of splitting up a marriage,"
Wilhelm said. "A lot of times, they have already made the decision
to divorce and just need someone to say 'oka£.'"
Factors she sees leading to divorce, include differences over
money, degree of freedom, child<-rearing, sex, personal growth and
family involvement.
"People usually have their own answers," Wilhelm said, "I don't
give advice. I'm not an Ann Landers."
Although divorce rates may be increasing, stigmas against those
people who are divorced seem to be diminishing*
(Sefr "Divorce attitudes—" page 5)
!■>