A semesterly fee will collect about $180,000 from students each year if the Office of Sustainability referendum passes on Thursday.

The referendum, a joint effort between Go Green Alliance and the Student Government Association, proposes to create an Office of Sustainability to be funded by a $3 student fee each semester.

The money would go toward the salary of an officer who would promote sustainability, organize an operating budget and provide student internships and grants from the office, said University senior Andrew Durso, co-chair of Go Green Alliance, in a phone interview Tuesday.

Durso said the $3 cost was chosen based on calculations averaging the cost of similar offices at other universities.

The HOPE Scholarship would not cover the fee because it would be assessed as a Student Activities charge, Durso said.

Referendum voting is open on Oasis through Thursday.

The office would coordinate all the University’s efforts toward environmental sustainability and promote “education pedagogy,” Durso said.

Education pedagogy would teach “students in all colleges that their major has an impact on sustainability,” he said. The efforts would also extend into faculty research.

The Office of Sustainability originated in an open forum sponsored by the Go Green Alliance. After approaching administrators and learning there was no funding for such an office, Go Green Alliance went to SGA with their proposal.

“The initiative itself, and trying to make the campus more sustainable, is something SGA has been involved in,” said Ed Mirecki, the associate director of student affairs and SGA adviser, in a phone interview Tuesday.

Mirecki explained two processes for adding a referendum to the SGA ballot.

The first option, he said, is to petition 10 percent of the student body and present the proposal and student signatures to SGA.

The second method, used by Go Green Alliance, is to propose the referendum to the SGA Senate, and achieve approval by a two-thirds majority vote.

Odum School of Ecology Senator Chris Morphis proposed The Office of Sustainability referendum, which SGA passed Feb. 17 – but not without debate and careful consideration, Mirecki said.

“The version on the ballot is actually the second version,” said SGA President Connor McCarthy in a phone interview Tuesday. “The Rules Committee initially voted against it.”

McCarthy cited the down economy as one reason for the vote, and said the Rules Committee did not feel the original referendum proposed was developed enough to appear on the ballot.

Apart from the new referendum, the University already has some sustainability initiatives in place.

The Physical Plant has a “Go Green” division that includes a recycling coordinator.

“[The Physical Plant] is also doing things in energy and water conservation. We are working with custodial areas for green cleaning,” said Ralph Johnson, associate vice president for the plant, in a phone interview Tuesday.

Johnson said all cleaning chemicals are being transitioned to green seal-certified products.

Kathy Pharr, assistant vice president in the University’s Office of Finance and Administration, is president of an ad hoc Working Group on Sustainability Issues. The group’s primary responsibility is to “pool collective minds” about what the University is doing to promote sustainability, Pharr said in a phone interview Tuesday. The group’s charge is to “try to put together a big picture of what’s going on at UGA,” Pharr said, and tries to make that big picture readily available both on and off campus.

This year, the group plans to report on the University’s sustainability initiatives and problems, and offer recommendations for how these issues should be coordinated in the future.

The group “has no stake in what happens with this referendum,” Pharr said.

Johnson said he didn’t think an Office of Sustainability “would assume any of our Physical Plant responsibilities,” but they may be centrally coordinated.

If the referendum passes the student vote, it will go to the University’s Mandatory Fees Committee, Mirecki said. The Mandatory Fees Committee will choose whether to assess the fee or not, and from there the referendum will continue “going up the chain” to President Michael Adams and subsequently to the Board of Regents.

Mirecki said the earliest the possible $3 fee could be implemented would be fall 2010.

Several students also had their say on the possible fee.

“I support the fact that we’re allowing students to decide what they want to do with their own money,” McCarthy said.

Jamie Perniciaro, a junior from Jacksonville, Fla., said the referendum “sounds like a good idea.”

“I mean it’s only $3,” she said. “I definitely like being able to choose.”

Aliya Naim, a sophomore from Atlanta said, “I’m down with $3 of my parents’ money going to sustainability.”

Naim said she hopes the fee will “actually be used in that direction” and that the Office of Sustainability will do as it promises.

Other students said they were not aware of the University’s green initiatives, but they appreciate the opportunity to vote on the proposals.