Water planning law and government.

Water planning efforts typically identify problems and needs. But simply calling attention to issues is usually not enough to spur action; the end result of many well-intentioned planning efforts is a report that ends up gathering dust on a shelf. Vague recommendations like “Water conservation measures should be implemented” usually accomplish little by themselves as they don’t assign responsibility to anyone. Success is more likely when an implementation strategy — who can and should do what — is developed as part of the planning process. The more detailed and specific the implementation strategy, the greater the chance that something will actually be done. The question then becomes who has the legal authority or responsibility to do what? Are new laws and programs needed or can existing ones be used to implement the recommendations? ... This document is divided into four main parts. The first, “Carrots and Sticks” looks at two basic approaches — regulatory and non-regulatory — that can be, and are, used to carry out water policy. Both have advantages and disadvantages that need to be considered. The second, “The powers of federal, state and local governments…,” looks at the constitutional powers the federal government and state and local governments have to carry out water policy. An initial look at the U. S. Constitution might suggest the federal government’s regulatory authority over water is limited but, in fact, its powers are very substantial. States have considerable authority to do a number of things but have to be mindful of any federal efforts that might conflict with those state efforts. And local governments can only do those things the state constitution or state legislature says they can do and must conform to any requirements or limitations on those powers that are contained in the enabling acts. Parts three and four examine in more detail the main programs and agencies at the federal level as well as Iowa’s state and local levels and the roles they play in national and state water policy.

Water Planning Law and Government, November 2008

Water planning efforts typically identify problems and needs. But simply calling attention to issues is usually not enough to spur action; the end result of many well-intentioned planning efforts is a report that ends up gathering dust on a shelf. Vague recommendations like “Water conservation measures should be implemented” usually accomplish little by themselves as they don’t assign responsibility to anyone. Success is more likely when an implementation strategy — who can and should do what — is developed as part of the planning process. The more detailed and specific the implementation strategy, the greater the chance that something will actually be done.

Cultural Heritage and Records Retention Task Force Report, August 2008

The Rebuild Iowa Cultural Heritage and Records Retention Task Force respectfully submits its report to the Rebuild Iowa Advisory Commission (RIAC) for its consideration of the impacts of the tornadoes, storms, and flooding on Iowans and their cultural, historical, and arts institutions and organizations and records collections and archives. As the RIAC fulfills its obligations to guide the recovery and reconstruction of Iowa, the cknowledgement that culture and records as Iowa’s identity is important, and that if these items of cultural heritage vanish from Iowa’s landscape, the items that Iowans associate with their history, traditions, and sense of place also disappears. Iowa is certainly not the only state that has experienced this type of disaster; however, many states have not recognized culture and records as critical concerns as part of the recovery and rebuilding process. When rebuilding Iowa stronger, smarter, and safer, quality of life is an important consideration for attracting new residents, making it a necessity to keep culture alive and thriving in Iowa. Additionally, the cultural arts constitute a vital economic industry, providing employment to thousands of Iowa’s citizens and generating millions of dollars in local and government revenue across the state. In the case of records, these items are irreplaceable and provide important information for the daily workings of government and life in our state, and maintain vital records of Iowa’s heritage and traditions. This report provides background information on the damages incurred in Iowa from the disasters and additional context for policy and rebuilding discussions. It also offers recommendations to the RIAC for steps that might be taken to address the significant and important challenges faced by Iowa’s cultural, historical, and arts institutions and organizations; individual artists and other cultural workers; and records retention entities and officials.

Supplemental Information to the August 2008 Cultural Heritage and Records Retention Task Force Report, August 2008

The Rebuild Iowa Cultural Heritage and Records Retention Task Force respectfully submits its report to the Rebuild Iowa Advisory Commission (RIAC) for its consideration of the impacts of the tornadoes, storms, and flooding on Iowans and their cultural, historical, and arts institutions and organizations and records collections and archives. As the RIAC fulfills its obligations to guide the recovery and reconstruction of Iowa, the cknowledgement that culture and records as Iowa’s identity is important, and that if these items of cultural heritage vanish from Iowa’s landscape, the items that Iowans associate with their history, traditions, and sense of place also disappears. Iowa is certainly not the only state that has experienced this type of disaster; however, many states have not recognized culture and records as critical concerns as part of the recovery and rebuilding process. When rebuilding Iowa stronger, smarter, and safer, quality of life is an important consideration for attracting new residents, making it a necessity to keep culture alive and thriving in Iowa. Additionally, the cultural arts constitute a vital economic industry, providing employment to thousands of Iowa’s citizens and generating millions of dollars in local and government revenue across the state. In the case of records, these items are irreplaceable and provide important information for the daily workings of government and life in our state, and maintain vital records of Iowa’s heritage and traditions. This report provides background information on the damages incurred in Iowa from the disasters and additional context for policy and rebuilding discussions. It also offers recommendations to the RIAC for steps that might be taken to address the significant and important challenges faced by Iowa’s cultural, historical, and arts institutions and organizations; individual artists and other cultural workers; and records retention entities and officials. Supplement to main report.