Showing posts with label Pennsylvania. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Pennsylvania. Show all posts

Thursday, December 18, 2014

Governor McAuliffe Signs Executive Order Protecting Virginia’s Coastal Resources

Today Governor Terry McAuliffe signed an Executive Order continuing the Virginia Coastal Zone Management Program, a network of Virginia state agencies and local governments designed to protect the natural and economic assets located within Virginia’s coastal regions.

“From protecting the wildlife and fisheries of the Chesapeake Bay to meeting the threat of sea level rise, Virginia has a responsibility to protect our coastal areas and the vital natural and economic resources they offer,” said Governor McAuliffe. “The Coastal Zone Management Program is a critical framework for our Commonwealth’s stewardship of these important assets, and I intend to give it the full support of my administration.”

U.S. Representative Robert Wittman continued, “For over 25 years Virginia’s Coastal Zone Management Program has helped coordinate the Commonwealth’s efforts to protect  and restore coastal communities and natural resources. Virginia’s Chesapeake Bay, wetlands, and beaches are national treasures; these efforts to enhance coastal communities and ecosystems benefit us all.”

Below is the full text of the executive order:

NUMBER THIRTY FIVE (2014)

CONTINUATION OF THE VIRGINIA
COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

Importance of the Initiative
           
            The Virginia Coastal Zone Management Program's (“Program”) mission is to create more vital and sustainable coastal communities and ecosystems. The Department of Environmental Quality will serve as the lead agency for this networked program and will be responsible for allocation and assignment of all federal funds received for the Virginia Coastal Zone Management Program Implementation Grant.

            By virtue of the authority vested in me as Governor under Article V of the Constitution of Virginia and under the laws of the Commonwealth, including but not limited to Sections 2.2-103 and 2.2-104 of the Code of Virginia, and subject to my continuing and ultimate authority and responsibility to act in such matters, I hereby continue the Virginia Coastal Zone Management Program.

POLICY GOALS

            State agencies having responsibility for the Commonwealth's coastal resources shall promote the Coastal Zone Management Program consistent with the following goals:

Coastal and Ocean Resource Protection

            Goal 1: To protect and restore coastal and ocean resources, habitats, and species of the Commonwealth. These include, but are not limited to, wetlands, subaqueous lands and vegetation, beaches, sand dune systems, barrier islands, underwater or maritime cultural resources, riparian forested buffers, and endangered or threatened species.

            Goal 2: To restore and maintain the quality of all coastal and ocean waters for human and ecosystem health through protection from adverse effects of excess nutrients, toxics, pathogens, and sedimentation.

            Goal 3: To protect air quality.

            Goal 4: To reduce or prevent losses of coastal habitat, life, and property caused by shoreline erosion, storms, relative sea level rise, and other coastal hazards in a manner that balances environmental and economic considerations.

Coastal and Ocean Resource Sustainable Use

            Goal 5: To provide for sustainable wild fisheries and aquaculture.

            Goal 6: To promote sustainable ecotourism and to increase and improve public access to coastal waters and shorefront lands compatible with resource protection goals.

            Goal 7: To promote renewable energy production and provide for appropriate extraction of energy and mineral resources consistent with proper environmental practices.

Coastal and Ocean Management Coordination

            Goal 8: To ensure sustainable development on coastal lands and support access for water-dependent development through effective coordination of governmental planning processes.

            Goal 9: To avoid and minimize coastal and ocean resource use conflicts through research, planning, and a forum for coordination and facilitation among local, regional, state, and federal government agencies, interest groups, and citizens.

            Goal 10: To promote informed decision-making by maximizing the availability of up-to-date educational information, technical advice, and scientific data including the use of new tools such as marine spatial planning.

IMPLEMENTATION AND ENFORCEMENT

            The following agencies, in cooperation with local governments, as appropriate, shall have primary responsibility for implementing the enforceable policies of Virginia's Coastal Zone Management Program as approved by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration:

Responsible Agency and Enforceable Policies

Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ)
Point source water pollution management and nontidal wetlands management
Air pollution
Nonpoint source pollution management
Coastal lands management

Marine Resources Commission (MRC)
            Primary sand dunes management
            Tidal wetlands management
            Subaqueous lands management
            Fisheries management (shared with DGIF)


Department of Game and Inland Fisheries (DGIF)
Fisheries management (shared with MRC)

Department of Health
Shoreline sanitation

The following agencies are responsible for assisting with the program:

Department of Conservation & Recreation
Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services
Department of Forestry
Department of Historic Resources
Department of Mines, Minerals & Energy
Department of Transportation
Virginia Economic Development Partnership
Virginia Institute of Marine Science
Virginia Department of Emergency Management

            In addition, other agencies that conduct activities that may affect coastal resources shall conduct such activities in a manner consistent with and supportive of Virginia's Coastal Zone Management Program. For purposes of this Program, the Coastal Area shall mean Tidewater Virginia as defined in Section 28.2-100 of the Code of Virginia, inclusive of all tidal waters out to the three nautical mile Territorial Sea Boundary.

            The Director of the Department of Environmental Quality shall monitor all state actions that affect coastal resources. When, in the judgment of the DEQ Director, a state agency, regulatory board, or commission is about to act in a manner that appears to be inconsistent with the Program or has established a pattern of actions that appears to be inconsistent with the Program, the Director shall discuss the situation with the head of such agency, board, or commission to determine if a consistency problem exists.

            If, after discussion, the head of such agency, board, or commission and the Director of DEQ are in disagreement about the existence of a consistency problem, the Director will inform the Secretary of Natural Resources of the disagreement. The Secretary shall then determine if a state interagency consistency problem exists.

            If the head of such agency, board, or commission and the Director of DEQ agree that a consistency problem exists, they shall attempt to resolve the problem. If they cannot resolve the problem, the Director shall advise the Secretary that an unresolved interagency consistency problem exists.

            Upon notification of the existence of an unresolved consistency problem, the Secretary shall review the problem, determine how it should best be resolved, and affect such resolution within the Secretariat of Natural Resources or consult with other Cabinet Secretaries to resolve a consistency problem with agencies, boards, or commissions not within the Secretariat of Natural Resources. If unable to resolve the problem, the Secretary shall report to the Governor and recommend appropriate action. The Governor shall have the ultimate responsibility for resolving any interagency consistency problem that cannot be resolved by the Secretary of Natural Resources.

            Any person having authority to resolve consistency problems under the terms of this Executive Order shall resolve those problems in a manner that furthers the goals and objectives of the Program as set forth above and in accordance with existing state law, regulations, and administrative procedures.

Effective Date of the Executive Order

            This Executive Order rescinds Executive Order No. 18 (2010), issued by Governor Robert F. McDonnell. This Executive Order shall be effective upon its signing and shall remain in full force and effect until June 30, 2018, unless amended or rescinded by further executive order.

            Given under my hand and under the Seal of the Commonwealth of Virginia on this 2nd day of December, 2014.





____________________________________________
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       Terence R. McAuliffe, Governor







Attest:

____________________________________
           Secretary of the Commonwealth


(Please note:  This only applies to government entities and those who contract with the government.  Not one area of this applies to the people or to any businesses, unless they contract with the government.  With that said, who cares?)


Wednesday, September 10, 2014

Virginia One of 8 States to Earn 'A' Grade in Center Digital Government Ranking in 2014 State Technology Survey

Map of USA with Virginia highlighted
Map of USA with Virginia highlighted (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
I wanted to make sure you saw the press release below from the Center for Digital Government on their 2014 Digital States Survey. Virginia is one of 8 states to receive an Agrade for how government uses technology to better serve citizens and streamline services. Speaking at today’s Commonwealth of Virginia Innovative Technology Symposium, Governor McAuliffe reiterated his commitment to a modern and innovative government, saying:

“Building a new Virginia economy means building a modern and innovative government that supports growth at the speed of business. Virginia’s A ranking in the 2014 Digital States Survey is an accomplishment for the men and women of state government, and I am eager to continue our work using new technologies to earn an A+ for how this Commonwealth serves its residents, localities and businesses.”




CDG11 logo RGB_4x4


FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE


2014 Digital States Survey Reveals Top Technology States


SACRAMENTO, Calif. – September 3, 2014 – In its comprehensive 2014 Digital States Survey, e.Republic’s Center for Digital Government evaluated the digital technology practices of all 50 states, assigning each state a grade based on quantifiable results in better serving citizens and streamlining operations.

Overall, since the last biennial survey in 2012, grades improved in 21 states, declined in 12 and stayed even in 17.  Eight states earned top grades, with Connecticut, Georgia, Missouri and Virginia moving up to A designations and Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Utah maintaining their A marks from 2012. Connecticut, rising from a C to A- and Idaho, from a D to a B, were the most improved states.

The survey evaluated states based on a set of criteria that included actions supporting state priorities and policies to improve operations or services, hard- and soft-dollar savings/benefits, progress since the last survey, innovative solutions, and effective collaboration. Those states receiving high marks demonstrated results across all criteria.

“Grades improved in 21 states, an indication that smart technology investments made by state government leaders during some very difficult financial times are paying off,” said Todd Sander, executive director of the Center for Digital Government. “In states that performed the best, leaders invested in analytics and business intelligence systems to help them make smarter decisions. They also deployed citizen self-service applications that eased the impact of agency staff cuts.”

The states will be recognized at an awards ceremony on September 28th in Nashville.

To see the State of the Digital States infographic go to www.govtech.com/state/State-of-the-Digital-States-2014-Survey-at-a-Glance.html.
The Center thanks Deloitte, EMC, NIC, Symantec and Verizon for underwriting the survey and for their support of states nationwide.

About the Center for Digital Government

The Center for Digital Government is a government research and advisory instituteon information technology policies and best practices in state and local government. See http://www.centerdigitalgov.com

The Center is a division of e.Republic, the nation’s only media and research company focused exclusively on state and local government and education. Seehttp://www.erepublic.com



Wednesday, August 13, 2014

Anti Federalist Papers No. 47 – "Balance" Of Departments Not Achieved Under New Constitution

I am fearful that the principles of government inculcated in Mr. [John] Adams' treatise [Defence of the Constitutions of Government of the United States of America], and enforced in the numerous essays and paragraphs in the newspapers, have misled some well designing members of the late Convention. But it will appear in the sequel, that the construction of the proposed plan of government is infinitely more extravagant.

I have been anxiously expecting that some enlightened patriot would, ere this, have taken up the pen to expose the futility, and counteract the baneful tendency of such principles. Mr. Adams' sine qua non of a good government is three balancing powers; whose repelling qualities are to produce an equilibrium of interests, and thereby promote the happiness of the whole community. He asserts that the administrators of every government, will ever be actuated by views of private interest and ambition, to the prejudice of the public good; that therefore the only effectual method to secure the rights of the people and promote their welfare, is to create an opposition of interests between the members of two distinct bodies, in the exercise of the powers of government, and balanced by those of a third. This hypothesis supposes human wisdom competent to the task of instituting three co-equal orders in government, and a corresponding weight in the community to enable them respectively to exercise their several parts, and whose views and interests should be so distinct as to prevent a coalition of any two of them for the destruction of the third. Mr. Adams, although he has traced the constitution of every form of government that ever existed, as far as history affords materials, has not been able to adduce a single instance of such a government. He indeed says that the British constitution is such in theory, but this is rather a confirmation that his principles are chimerical and not to be reduced to practice. If such an organization of power were practicable, how long would it continue? Not a day-for there is so great a disparity in the talents, wisdom and industry of mankind, that the scale would presently preponderate to one or the other body, and with every accession of power the means of further increase would be greatly extended. The state of society in England is much more favorable to such a scheme of government than that of America. There they have a powerful hereditary nobility, and real distinctions of rank and interests; but even there, for want of that perfect equality of power and distinction of interests in the three orders of government, they exist but in name. The only operative and efficient check upon the conduct of administration, is the sense of the people at large.
Suppose a government could be formed and supported on such principles, would it answer the great purposes of civil society? If the administrators of every government are actuated by views of private interest and ambition, how is the welfare and happiness of the community to be the result of such jarring adverse interests?

Therefore, as different orders in government will not produce the good of the whole, we must recur to other principles. I believe it will be found that the form of government, which holds those entrusted with power in the greatest responsibility to their constituents, the best calculated for freemen. A republican, or free government, can only exist where the body of the people are virtuous, and where property is pretty equally divided. In such a government the people are the sovereign and their sense or opinion is the criterion of every public measure. For when this ceases to be the case, the nature of the government is changed, and an aristocracy, monarchy or despotism will rise on its ruin. The highest responsibility is to be attained in a simple structure of government, for the great body of the people never steadily attend to the operations of government, and for want of due information are liable to be imposed on. If you complicate the plan by various orders, the people will be perplexed and divided in their sentiment about the source of abuses or misconduct; some will impute it to the senate, others to the house of representatives, and so on, that the interposition of the people may be rendered imperfect or perhaps wholly abortive. But if, imitating the constitution of Pennsylvania, you vest all the legislative power in one body of men (separating the executive and judicial) elected for a short period, and necessarily excluded by rotation from permanency, and guarded from precipitancy and surprise by delays imposed on its proceedings, you will create the most perfect responsibility. For then, whenever the people feel a grievance, they cannot mistake the authors, and will apply the remedy with certainty and effect, discarding them at the next election. This tie of responsibility will obviate all the dangers apprehended from a single legislature, and will the best secure the rights of the people.

Having premised this much, I shall now proceed to the examination of the proposed plan of government, and I trust, shall make it appear to the meanest capacity, that it has none of the essential requisites of a free government; that it is neither founded on those balancing restraining powers, recommended by Mr. Adams and attempted in the British constitution, or possessed of that responsibility to its constituents, which, in my opinion, is the only effectual security for the liberties and happiness of the people. But on the contrary, that it is a most daring attempt to establish a despotic aristocracy among freemen, that the world has ever witnessed. . . .

Thus we see, the house of representatives are on the part of the people to balance the senate, who I suppose will be composed of the better sort, the well born, etc. The number of the representatives (being only one for every 30,000 inhabitants) appears to be too few, either to communicate the requisite information of the wants, local circumstances and sentiments of so extensive an empire, or to prevent corruption and undue influence, in the exercise of such great powers; the term for which they are to be chosen, too long to preserve a due dependence and accountability to their constituents; and the mode and places of their election not sufficiently ascertained, for as Congress have the control over both, they may govern the choice, by ordering the representatives of a whole State, to be elected in one place, and that too may be the most inconvenient.

The senate, the great efficient body in this plan of government, is constituted on the most unequal principles. The smallest State in the Union has equal weight with the great States of Virginia, Massachusetts, or Pennsylvania. The senate, besides its legislative functions, has a very considerable share in the executive; none of the principal appointments to office can be made without its advice and consent. The terin and mode of its appointment will lead to permanency. The members are chosen for six years, the mode is under the control of Congress, and as there is no exclusion by rotation, they may be continued for life, which, from their extensive means of influence, would follow of course. The President, who would be a mere pageant of State, unless he coincides with the views of the senate, would either become the bead of the aristocratic junto in that body, or its minion; besides, their influence being the most predominant, could the best secure his re-election to office. And from his power of granting pardons, he might screen from punishment the most treasonable attempts on the liberties of the people, when instigated by the senate. . . .

Mr. [James] Wilson asserts that never was charge made with less reason, than that which predicts the institution of a baneful aristocracy in the federal Senate. ' In my first number, I stated that this body would be a very unequal representation of the several States, that the members being appointed for the long term of six years, and there being no exclusion by rotation, they might be continued for life, which would follow of course from their extensive means of influence, and that possessing a considerable share in the executive as well as the legislative, it would become a permanent aristocracy, and swallow up the other orders in the government.

That these fears are not imaginary, a knowledge of the history of other nations, where the powers of government have been injudiciously placed, will fully demonstrate. Mr. Wilson says, "the senate branches into two characters; the one legislative and the other executive. In its legislative character it can effect no purpose, without the co-operation of the house of representatives, and in its executive character it can accomplish no object without the concurrence of the president. Thus fettered, I do not know any act which the senate can of itself perform, and such dependence necessarily precludes every idea of influence and superiority. " This I confess is very specious, but experience demonstrates that checks in government, unless accompanied with adequate power and independently placed, prove merely nominal, and will be inoperative. Is it probable, that the President of the United States, limited as he is in power, and dependent on the will of the senate, in appointments to office, will either have the firmness or inclination to exercise his prerogative of a conditional control upon the proceedings of that body, however injurious they may be to the public welfare? It will be his interest to coincide with the views of the senate, and thus become the head of the aristocratic junto. The king of England is a constituent part in the legislature, but although an hereditary monarch, in possession of the whole executive power, including the unrestrained appointment to offices, and an immense revenue, enjoys but in name the prerogative of a negative upon the parliament. Even the king of England, circumstanced as he is, has not dared to exercise it for near a century past. The check of the house of representatives upon the senate will likewise be rendered nugatory for want of due weight in the democratic branch, and from their constitution they may become so independent of the people as to be indifferent of its interests. Nay, as Congress would have the control over the mode and place of their election, by ordering the representatives of a whole state to be elected at one place, and that too the most inconvenient, the ruling powers may govern the choice, and thus the house of representatives may be composed of the creatures of the senate. Still the semblance of checks may remain, but without operation.

This mixture of the legislative and executive moreover highly tends to corruption. The chief improvement in government, in modern times, has been the complete separation of the great distinctions of power; placing the legislative in different hands from those which hold the executive; and again severing the judicial part from the ordinary administrative. "When the legislative and executive powers (says Montesquieu) are united in the same person or in the same body of magistrates, there can be no liberty. "

CENTINEL


Learn More About American History:  Visit Jamestown, Yorktown and Colonial Williamsburg living museums in Virginia.

Tuesday, June 17, 2014

Governor McAuliffe celebrates signing of New Chesapeake Bay Watershed Agreement

Map of the Chesapeake Bay Watershed
Map of the Chesapeake Bay Watershed (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
Governor McAuliffe joined the Governors and other high officials from the Chesapeake Bay Watershed states, the District of Columbia and the federal governments in signing the 2014 Chesapeake Bay Watershed Agreement today in Annapolis, Maryland.

The Agreement, developed over the last two years, lays out clear goals and outcomes for sustainable fisheries, vital habitats, water quality, toxic contaminants, healthy watersheds, stewardship, land conservation, public access, environmental literacy, and resiliency of the Bay ecosystem in the face of changing climatic conditions and rising sea levels.

“We have made great progress in meeting our bay restoration goals over the last 30 years” said Governor McAuliffe, “however, there is always more to do and the pace of implementation must be accelerated.  This historic agreement lays out a path for improved science and policy, greater partnerships with citizens and stakeholders and allows for the flexibility necessary to make measurable improvements to a large and complex ecosystem.”

This is the 4th Chesapeake Bay Agreement signed since 1983, and the first to include full participation by the states of Delaware, New York and West Virginia who join the original signatories of Virginia, Maryland, Pennsylvania, the District of Columbia, the US Environmental Protection Agency and the Chesapeake Bay Commission.

For more information about the signing of this historic Agreement visit:

Our Notes:  Good luck.  We have been saying that the vast majority of the problems are not from the state of Virginia for years.  But we keep getting stuck with the majority of the problems and costs.  The below linked stories confirm what we have already been saying.