Legislative Oversight
description
Transcript of Legislative Oversight
Legislative Oversight
The House Bay Trust Study Commission
Presented by Sandra T. Whitehouse, Ph.D
R.I. ConstitutionArticle 1, Section 17
… It shall be the duty of the general assembly to provide for the conservation of the air, land, water, plant, animal, mineral and other natural resources of the state, and to adopt all means necessary and proper by law to protect the natural environment of the people of the state by providing adequate resource planning for the control and regulation of the use of the natural resources of the state and for the preservation, regeneration and restoration of the natural environment of the state.
Source: Narragansett Bay Estuary Program website
How have we done?
Planning for the use of Rhode Island’s bays and their watersheds
Environmental management:preservation and restoration
Sustainable economic development
240 planning initiatives past 150 years
The past twenty years of planning for Narragansett Bay
• 1985-1992 The Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan (CCMP)
• 2000-2003 The Bay Summit and the Partnership for Narragansett Bay (The HUD/Chafee grant)
• 2003 The Governor’s Narragansett Bay and Watershed Planning Commission
Process for successful planning and implementation efforts:
Chesapeake Bay, Puget Sound
1) Assessment of problems 2) Make recommendations, set goals and priorities3) Develop a plan with strategies to achieve goals4) Implementation of plan: annual work plans, annual
and long-term budgets5) Evaluation of progress toward goals:monitoring6) Oversight: accountability
Fiscal Performance : performance assessment reports
The past twenty years of planning for Narragansett Bay
• 1985-1992 The Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan (CCMP)
• 2000-2003 The Bay Summit and the Partnership for Narragansett Bay (The HUD/Chafee grant)
• 2003 The Governor’s Narragansett Bay and Watershed Planning Commission
History of the CCMP
1) 1985-1991 Scientific Assessment of the bay
2) 1987 Goal setting
3) 1992 CCMP completed (20 year plan)
4) 1992 Implementation committee established
$11 million dollars
CCMP issues
• Nutrient reduction• Habitat restoration: salt marshes,
eelgrass beds• Living resources: finfish, shellfish• Economic development: commercial,
recreational• Toxic pollutants• Health risk to consumers of seafood
What happened with the CCMP?
Successes: nutrient reduction
No discharge zone/marina pump out facilities
Greenwich Bay Initiative
Providence combined sewer overflow project
What happened with the CCMP?
Failures:
Plan deficienciesManagement of living resourcesPublic participationDredged material management planBay governance
Implementation of plan500 recommendations
Monitoring programGuide for agency decision making
History of the CCMP cont.
1985-1991 Scientific Assessment of the bay
1987 Goal setting
1992 CCMP completed (20 year plan)
1992 Implementation committee established
1997 The last Implementation committee meeting held
Why did this happen?
Problems with the plan
Inadequate oversight
Bay Planning process
CCMP
Assess Set goals Plan Implement 1/2
Monitor
Oversight
The past twenty years of planning for Narragansett Bay
• 1985-1992 The Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan (CCMP)
• 2000-2003 The Bay Summit and the Partnership for Narragansett Bay (The HUD/Chafee grant)
• 2003 The Governor’s Narragansett Bay and Watershed Planning Commission
Bay Summit 2000
• Nutrient reduction• Habitat restoration: salt marshes, eelgrass beds• Economic development: commercial,
recreational and research/technology• Dredged material management plan• Long term monitoring plan• Marine Transportation• Land use and transportation• Urban revitalization• Information management• Coordination
The Partnership for Narragansett Bay: The HUD/Chafee Project
2001-2003• Review planning history
• Review economic assessments
• Develop vision/set goals
• Monitoring plan
Goals
• Economic development that conserves our soul
• Restoring fish and shellfish• Public Access• Protecting the landscape (forests,
waterfronts and villages)• Stewardship and community engagement
Monitoring
• Shoreline buffers
• Water temperature, salinity, pH, nitrogen, phosphorous, oxygen, flow and circulation
• Fish, shellfish, benthos
Bay Planning processBay Summit/PNB
Assess
Set goals
Plan
Implement
Monitor
Oversight
The past twenty years of planning for Narragansett Bay
• 1985-1992 The Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan (CCMP)
• 2000-2003 The Bay Summit and the Partnership for Narragansett Bay (The HUD/Chafee grant)
• 2003 The Governor’s Narragansett Bay and Watershed Planning Commission
The Governor’s Commission 2003-2006
Develop a plan for the bay• Nutrient reduction (2010, removal from
WWTFs)• Habitat restoration (2008, 100 acres wetlands)• Economic development • Dredged material management plan (2005)• Stormwater management plan (2005)• Monitoring program (2004)
Same issues defined as problems
• Nutrient reduction
• Habitat restoration
• Economic development
• Dredged material management
• Monitoring program
Long Term Monitoring
• 1992 CCMP not implemented
• Bay Summit recommendation
• PNB: Ten indicators defined
• Governor’s Commission: develop an Interinstitutional Monitoring Council by executive order
Where are we today?
• Same issues• Same people• No workable plan• Shifting and unclear goals/policies/priorities• Lack of multi-year funding strategy • Inadequate monitoring• Inadequate coordination
Bay Planning Process
Ches.
Bay
Puget
Sound
CCMP Bay Summit/PNB
Gov Comm.
Assess √ √ √ √ √
Set goals √ √ √ √ √
Plan √ √ √ ?
Implement √ √ √ 1/2 ?
Monitor √ √ ?
Oversight √ √ ?
Legislative Oversight in other Bays
• Creation of a structure for unified approach and continuity over time that coordinates the work of bay planning
• Setting goals• Annual work plans and associated budgets
required to be submitted to legislative environment and fiscal committees
• Annual performance assessments
How to ensure a successful planning process this time for Rhode Islands bays and watersheds?
• Creation of a structure for a coordinated approach and continuity over time
• Legislative oversight– Setting overall goals for the management of natural
resources– Fiscal accountability: Is money appropriated being
properly and efficiently spent in relation to those goals, missions and purposes
– Performance accountability: Are statutory and/or regulatory goals, missions and purposes being met?
Summary of Responsibilities
• Executive Branch
– Plan development
– Implementation
• Legislature
– Goal setting
– Oversight