Blog

Highlights From the EPA America Recycles Summit and Innovation Fair 2019

Last week the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) held its second annual America Recycles Summit and inaugural Innovation Fair to highlight national efforts being taken to address major challenges facing the U.S. recycling system. The two-day event brought together industry heads, nonprofit organizations, local and regional leadership, and the federal government to network; show off their latest recycling projects, programs, and technology; and collectively commit to work towards the implementation of the EPA’s 2019 National Framework for Advancing the U.S. Recycling System.

This framework, officially released on America Recycles Day (November 15), details the work of four working groups created to address critical areas for action: promoting education and outreach, enhancing materials management infrastructure, strengthening secondary materials markets, and enhancing measurement. The framework document summarizes the activities and accomplishments of the workgroups in 2019 and lays out a path forward for the new year. Recommended 2020 workgroup actions under consideration include:

  • Develop and make available a set of common recycling messages and national public relations campaign to lay the foundation for this common messaging.
  • Conduct and compile research on successful infrastructure investments and continue to support programs like the “Materials Recovery for the Future” pilot project.
  • Explore economic models to create robust and sustainable domestic secondary markets and articulate a better business case for using recycled materials.
  • Develop a central compilation of data and metrics used to measure recycling or components of the recycling system.

These critical considerations were echoed in the America Recycles Summit, where speakers discussed how we can chart a path forwards towards a more resilient U.S. recycling system. Below are themes and takeaways from the event:

Education: A large portion of the event was devoted to the importance of using education as a strategy to address the nation’s recycling challenges. Helen Lowman, CEO and President of Keep America Beautiful, stressed the importance that consistent, ongoing messaging has on the public. Recycling dialogue needs to provide a positive image about the current state of recycling and explain why it is important to continue recycling.

Partnerships: The broad range of participants in the room demonstrated that no one entity is to blame for U.S. recycling shortfalls, nor can anyone solve this problem alone. No one solution exists to fix the American recycling system. It will require a collaborative effort, relying on partnerships built between the private sector, non-profit organizations, governing bodies at all levels, and the general public to carry the momentum forward.

Innovation: There was a general consensus that Americans want to recycle, yet so many communities do not have access to recycling centers or have systems in place to handle the management of recycled materials. This is especially the case for rural, remote, and hard-to-reach communities. Innovation needs to happen to improve the recycling infrastructure in all communities, whether that community is a coastal city or a rural, heartland town.

How can your organization can get involved with EPA’s recycling efforts? An action you can take today is to sign the America Recycles Pledge, an initiative resulting from the EPA’s first recycling summit. All U.S. based organizations can join NARC in signing the pledge, signifying that you are willing to commit to work towards a more resilient materials economy and build on existing efforts addressing the challenges facing the nation’s current recycling system.

What Regions Can Do to Protect Themselves from Cyber-Attacks

The National League of Cities (NLC) in partnership with the Public Technology Institute (PTI) has recently released a new guide: Protecting Our Cities: What Cities Should Know About Cybersecurity during cybersecurity month in October. This document was designed to help communities, regions, and local officials better prepare for cyber-attacks before they happen.

Despite popular belief, ransomware is not a new concept. The first ransomware attack happened 30 years ago involving floppy disks and mailed checks. Although technology has drastically changed, the intent to steal data and instill fear while costing taxpayers millions is the same. During a ransomware attack, a hacker will block access to a computer system or data and hold access hostage until the victim pays a fee or ransom. If the victim does not pay the fee, the hacker could destroy important data forever. The US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) both recommend that no entity should comply with ransomware demands in order to stop the cycle of attacks as many victims who pay a ransom are vulnerable to repeat attacks.

Recent increases in cyber-attacks and ransomware campaigns can be linked to the rise of hard-to-track payment methods like bitcoin. Many consider the 2013 CryptoLocker malware incident with the Swansea Police Department in Massachusetts as the first modern day ransomware attack. Since then, there have been thousands of reported cyber and ransomware attacks. According to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), there were more than 31,000 cyberwarfare incidents against federal agencies in 2018.

Cities and regions not only risk losing sensitive data in the event of an attack but also may face costs associated with returning their software to normal and loss of public trust. The cost for Atlanta to recover from its ransomware attack was estimated at $17 million. Similarly, the recent Baltimore ransomware attack was predicted to cost over $18 million. And it is not just big cities that are at risk. Lake City, Florida and Riviera Beach, Florida paid ransoms of $485,000 and $600,000 in bitcoin respectively to unfreeze their systems. Twenty-three Texas municipalities were affected by a ransomware attack this past summer caused by failure to take proper cybersecurity precautions. 

So what can you do to help prevent cybersecurity attacks before they happen, or to mitigate the risk in the case that they do occur?

General Recommendations for Local and Regional Leaders

The combined NLC and PTI guidebook, along with other national tools can help cities, regions, and local officials protect themselves against cybercrime.

Below are ten strategies and recommendations from the NLC guidebook for local leaders to strengthen their cybersecurity efforts:

  1. Identify one individual to be responsible for cybersecurity programs in that jurisdiction
  2. Make digital hygiene an institutional priority
  3. Educate the local workforce, elected leaders, and residents about cybersecurity
  4. Conduct an analysis of local government vulnerabilities
  5. Ensure your data is properly backed up
  6. Implement multi-factor authentication
  7. Create policies or plans to manage potential attacks
  8. Ensure public communication is part of your attack response plan
  9. Consider converting to a dot gov (.gov) domain
  10. Work with education partners to create a cybersecurity talent pool

Cybersecurity Strategic Planning

According to a survey of local government IT executives conducted by the Public Technology Institute, 75 percent of governments surveyed have a cybersecurity plan. However, only 43 percent of respondents felt their communities elected officials make cyber security an adequate budgetary priority. After the recent 23-municipality Texas attack, the state Chief Information Officer attributed their cyber incident response plan to the state’s ability to swiftly contain the damage of the attack.

The Department of Homeland Security’s new Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) has also developed a National Cyber Incident Response Plan (NCIRP) to help localities develop their own plans. CISA also hosts webinars sessions to continue outreach efforts to stress the importance of local governments remaining proactive to prevent a cybersecurity breach.

Cybersecurity Insurance

Many government agencies and private companies recommend against paying ransomware, which leaves localities footing the bill. After the event of a cyber-attack, system restorations can become very expensive. Insurance can help mitigate some of these costs. Cybersecurity Insurance has been available for 15 years and is now becoming more widely available as the number of attacks has increased. Coverage is designed to mitigate losses from a variety of cyber incidents including data breaches, business interruption, and network damage.

Cybersecurity Avoidance

In the fight against cybercrime, it is also important for regions and localities to focus on ransomware avoidance. PTI identifies four key ways ransomware can cause damage to a system:

  • Exploitation of a software vulnerability
  • Employees opening malicious email attachments
  • Employees visiting hyperlinks (phishing exploits) sent in spam emails
  • Employees simply landing on contaminated websites

Making sure your employees are aware of the red flags associated phishing emails or fake websites can go a long way in keeping your data secure. Whether you are an intern, executive director, elected official serving on a board of directors, or anywhere in between, people on all levels of a regional council are responsible for the safety and security of critical data. As the digitalization of services and local management of sensitive material increases, cybersecurity efforts will only become more important.

Take Action Now: Support House Funding Levels for Health and Human Services Programs

Over the next several weeks, the House and Senate will be working on drafting a final fiscal year (FY) 2020 omnibus appropriations bill in hopes of meeting the November 21 continuing resolution deadline. As is so often the case, the House and Senate Labor-Health and Human Services-Education (Labor/H) appropriations bills differ. 

Overall, the House FY 2020 Labor/H appropriations bill – passed through the chamber as a part of the H.R. 2740 legislative minibus package – offers more favorable funding levels for the Older Americans Act (OAA) and other key health and human services programs. It would increase funding for a wide range of human services programs important to regions, especially those regions that are also designated as the Area Agency on Aging (AAA). In contrast, the draft fiscal year 2020 Senate Labor/H bill would maintain funding at current levels. 

The proposed Senate Labor/H appropriations bill would level fund Title III of the Older Americans Act (OAA). The House, in contrast, would increase overall funding by $151 million – a 10 percent increase over fiscal year 2019. The same is true for Title V programs. The Senior Community Service Employment Program (SCSEP), a program operated by the Department of Labor, would be level funded. By contract, SCSEP funding would increase by approximately 15 percent if the House funding proposal is adopted. 

Other HHS programs such as the Community Services Block Grant and the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program would also see a funding increase if the House Labor/H appropriations bill becomes law. While none of the proposed increases are large, all represent movement away from last year’s appropriations amounts that either level funded or reduced funding to these important programs.

A current appropriations chart developed by the National Association of Area Agencies on Aging (n4a) is available here.

Here are some ways you can take action now:

  1. Send a letter to your Members of Congress. Use this template to send your own messages to you members of Congress about the importance of a long-term funding bill and funding increases for OAA and health and human services programs.
  2. Does Your representative or senator serve on an Appropriations Committee? Advocacy with Members on the House and Senate Appropriations Committees is especially important. If your representative or senator serves on one of these key committees, your letter should request that they share your messages with their committee leaders. At this point, many funding decisions are being made at a leadership level, and the more they hear from their committee colleagues, the more seriously they will consider these requests. You may wish to add: As a member of the {SENATE/HOUSE] Appropriations Committee, I urge you to work with your fellow committee members to ensure that the House language is adopted.
  3. Engage your grassroots. Using n4a’s toolkit or your own approach, get the word out in your networks that action is needed now! Here are some approaches you could take:
    • Ask your grantees to email or post a short note to lawmakers on social media. Members monitor their email/website/social media traffic for constituent correspondence, and personal messages resonate most. Ask your advocates to share why the OAA is important to them. 
    • Ask local advocates to call Congress. Included in the n4a toolkit’s grassroots template alert are instructions on calling lawmakers and a short sample script that constituents can use.
    • Share stories in person. Encourage your advocacy stakeholders to attend the next town hall your federal representatives have in the region to share the importance of funding for OAA. Invite your senators and member(s) of Congress to come see your agency in action and meet some of their constituents receiving OAA and other senior services.

NARC would like to thank n4a and Sandy Markwood, n4a’s Chief Executive Officer, and Autumn Campbell, n4a’s Senior Director, Public Policy and Advocacy, for their assistance and support addressing OAA, AAA, and other programs for seniors, as well as permission to use their funding documents and draft templates. 

How Regions are Supporting Recycling in an Increasingly Challenging Market

As the cost of recycling is escalating for many local governments, regional councils are working toward solutions. Regional Councils and Metropolitan Planning Agencies (MPOs) are looking at solutions that reduce waste, improve recycling efficiency, and/or educate public and private entities on better recycling practices. Some of these programs, like the Upper Arkansas Recycling Program, highlight the cost savings that collaboration provides. Others, like the Iowa Waste Exchange offer a service that connects businesses with would-be discarded materials.

Recycling pledges are another effort to increase engagement and raise awareness about the nation’s recycling challenges. The National Association of Regional Councils recently signed on to the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) America Recycles Pledge in order to work toward a more resilient materials economy. Signatories promote education and outreach, pledge to enhance materials management infrastructure, strengthen secondary materials markets, and attempt to enhance the measurement of recycled materials.

Regional Recycling Programs

Region XII Council of Governments: Iowa Waste Exchange

Region XII Council of Governments runs a no-cost materials exchange program called the Iowa Waste Exchange (IWE) where the Region XII COG maintains a database of available and wanted materials and is funded by the Iowa Department of Natural Resources. The idea behind the IWE is for companies and other groups to use the confidential resources provided by Region XII to find a market for materials they would otherwise discard or warehouse. The program also offers free consultations to locate needed materials or potential buyers. The Iowa Waste Exchange offers services including online materials listings, waste management technical assistance, materials innovation service, economic development and general business assistance, and area resource specialists.

Upper Arkansas Area Council of Governments (UAACOG): Upper Arkansas Recycling Program

The Upper Arkansas Area Council of Governments (UAACOG) operates a collaborative low-cost recycling agreement. The Upper Arkansas Recycling Program (UAR) is a collaborative effort between the UAACOG and other regional entities. In an effort to bring additional resources to the region all partners of the UAR have signed an intergovernmental agreement. The program, which has been in operation since 1998, is funded by an annual $1.30 per capita charge and consists of drop-off recycling sites in all of the partner areas accepting newspaper, aluminum, tin, and glass. UAACOG maintains collection totals, provides community support, coordinates special collection events, and runs a specialty Materials Recovery Facility (MRF) for glass.

Mid-America Regional Council (MARC): Solid Waste Management District

The Mid-America Regional Council (MARC) is a Solid Waste Management District which administers a solid waste grant program for waste reduction, reuse, and recycling projects. Cities and counties, non-profit organizations, businesses, and schools throughout the region can apply for the grant. MARC also supports the collection and disposal of household hazardous waste through contracts with two permanent collection facilities and several mobile collection events. In addition to this, MARC has created public education initiatives to reduce the amount of waste the region sends to area landfills. MARC also manages the RecycleSpot.org website and a recycling hotline (816/474-TEAM), that provides residents information on recycling opportunities in the region.

Texas Council of Governments 

Texas handles solid waste and recycling a little differently than other states. This is due to the fact that Texas designates all of its COGS as planning agencies for solid waste and all Texas COGs receive state funding to distribute local and regional implementation grants for programs related to recycling and waste management.

As solid waste planning agencies, Texas COGs must also develop regional solid waste management plans outlining activities and priorities that will be initiated in the region throughout the planning period including items such as population and growth patterns, economic activity, waste generation and characteristics, waste management systems, summary of needs and problems, goals, and an action plan for the region. Capital Area Council of Governments (CAPCOG), in the metro Austin area, lists 15 intended goals under their regional solid waste plan, ranging from reduction strategies to administrative goals.

All Texas COGs receive state funding from landfill fees that allow them to support projects that further the regional solid waste management plan. In an effort to extend the life of landfills, the North Central Council of Governments (NCTCOG) is using such funding for programs such as Time to Recycle and Report DFW Dumping. Across the state, there is a serious effort to reduce landfill disposals and waste. This is especially true after the 2017 release of a report from the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ), which reported that annual landfill disposal reached approximately 33.3 million tons of waste across the state, equivalent to 6.84 pounds of waste per Texan per day.

Whether it’s a collaborative reuse material buying market, special collection events, public recycling education outreach, solid waste management plans, or efforts to extend the lifecycle of current landfills, regions are finding innovative and collaborative solutions to the nation’s recycling challenges.

The California Emissions Standards Situation and Regions

In July of this year, California and four major automakers, BMW, Ford, Honda, and Volkswagon, reached an agreement over a framework for setting Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards and vehicle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions standards through the year 2026.

The framework was announced in anticipation of a Trump administration rollback of federal emissions standards set during the Obama administration.

The Obama-era standards require an average mileage of 54.5 miles per gallon for passenger vehicles by 2025, along with a year-over-year 4.7 percent reduction of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions through 2025.

The rollback proposed by the Trump administration freezes model year 2020 CAFE and carbon dioxide emissions standards for passenger cars and light trucks through the year 2026.

The framework developed by California and the four automakers eases the Obama-era standards slightly, but rejects the freeze of the proposed rollback. The framework would drop average mileage standards from 54.5 by 2025 to 51 by 2026, and loosen GHG reduction standards from 4.7 percent over four years to 3.7 percent over five years

How California Sets Its Own Standards

The Clean Air Act provides the State of California with the right to waive federal preemption regarding air pollution standards for vehicle emissions. This waiver allows California to set stricter air emissions standards than the federal government. The waiver, however, must be approved by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

Under Clean Air Act Section 209, the EPA is required to grant California a waiver unless they find that:

  • California was arbitrary and capricious in its finding that its standards are, in the aggregate, at least as protective of public health and welfare as applicable federal standards;
  • California does not need such standards to meet compelling and extraordinary conditions; or
  • such standards and accompanying enforcement procedures are not consistent with Section202(a) of the Clean Air Act.

The Administration’s Reaction

Following the announcement of the framework, the Trump administration began pushing back against California and the four automakers through several actions:

September 6, 2019: DOT and EPA Write Letter to CARB Stating that the Framework May be Illegal

On September 6, the Department of Transportation (DOT) and the EPA wrote a letter to the California Air Resources Board (CARB), the state agency responsible for filing the waiver request with EPA. The letter states that the framework agreement between California and the automakers “appears to be inconsistent with Federal law.”

September 6, 2019: DOJ Opens Anti-Trust Probe Against Automakers

Also on September 6, it was reported that the Department of Justice would be opening an anti-trust probe to determine if the four automakers involved in the framework had acted lawfully.

September 19, 2019: EPA and NHTSA Announce One National Program Rule on Federal Preemption of State Fuel Economy Standards

On September 19, the DOT’s National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and the EPA issued a final action establishing the One National Program rule that would ensure that the federal government sets one single fuel efficiency standard for the country. Along with this rule, EPA withdrew California’s Clean Air Act waiver that authorized the state to determine its own emissions standards.

September 24, 2019: EPA Threatens to Block California Highway Funding

On September 24, EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler issued a letter to CARB Chair Mary Nichols warning that the state’s violation of Clean Air Act regulations could affect it’s highway funding. The letter notes that California has “failed to carry out its most basic tasks under the Clean Air Act” and has a backlog of 130 State Implementation Plans (SIPs), the plans which have to be developed to increase air quality for areas failing to attain National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). The letter further states that if California does not work with the EPA to develop approvable SIPs, the EPA will begin a disapproval process which could result in a stoppage of DOT approvals for highway projects.[1]

California’s Response

September 20, 2019: California Files Lawsuit Along With 22 Other States

On September 20, California, along with 22 other states and the District of Columbia, filed a lawsuit against the NHTSA, the DOT division which withdrew California’s Clean Air Act waiver. According to the filing, the action “exceeds NHTSA’s authority, contravenes Congressional intent, and is arbitrary and capricious.”

Significance for Regions

Preemption

The repeal of California’s emissions standards waiver is federal preemption of the state’s authority to regulate vehicle emissions. Recent increases in federal preemption of state and local authority are a serious concern for local governments which need the authority to make decisions based on their region’s needs. The precedent that this exercise of preemption could set is notable and worrying.[2]

Air-Quality – Non-attainment Consequences

Many regional councils function as air-quality planners. In this role, they work to maintain NAAQS in their regions. Repealing California’s waiver and setting lower national emissions standards will result in increased emissions. This could make NAAQS more challenging for regions to attain and sustain.

NAAQS non-attainment can result in sanctions from the EPA, which affect approval of highway projects. (for an example of this, see the section titled “EPA Threatens to Block California Highway Funding” above).

Air-Quality – Public Health

Additionally, and critically, poor air quality presents a variety of direct threats to the health of a region’s residents, including serious heart and breathing problems.[3]

Climate Change

“Greenhouse gases trap heat and make the planet warmer,” according to the EPA’s Sources of Greenhouse Gas Emissions webpage. Furthermore, the EPA identifies the transportation sector as the primary source of greenhouse gas emissions.[4] In 2017, transportation accounted for 28.9% of overall U.S. greenhouse gas emissions. Within the transportation sector, passenger cars and light-duty trucks comprise the largest portion of emissions.

Increased global temperatures present many threats to the health and well-being of residents of regions across the United States. Consequently, the drivers of warming, like GHG emissions, should be mitigated. The EPA identifies several methods for accomplishing this. Among the primary methods, the EPA includes “improving fuel efficiency with advanced design, materials, and technologies,” a strategy that is supported by increasingly stringent standards, such as those included in California’s framework.

[1] As ENO Transportation reports, the letter cites a section of the Clean Air Amendments of 1990 which allows for the cutoff of highway project approval, but not the cutoff of actual funding. The state or region would still be able use funds for highway safety projects of mass transit projects.

[2] In this case, it should be noted that California’s proposed standards would be more stringent than those set by the federal government.

[3] CDC Public Health Issues

[4] Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990–2017 (published 2019)

Broadband Resources for a 21st Century Nation

In 2019, having access to the internet is no longer an option. Job applications, student homework, ecommerce, small business billing, and even conversations with friends and family require access to basic internet. Unfortunately, millions of Americans still lack sufficient internet access.

Census data from 2017 indicate that 19 million households do not have a mobile or in-home internet subscription, with 16 million of those simply not having any internet access. Broadband connectivity is an issue in both urban and rural centers; however, the challenge is greatest in rural areas. According to the FCC, over 31 percent of rural Americans do not have access to broadband at home compared to four percent of urban Americans.

Despite concerningly limited national broadband coverage, municipalities, counties, and regions are making progress and overcoming barriers to implementation. Some of the many challenges of broadband deployment facing local officials include ensuring stakeholder buy-in, locating funding, and choosing the correct technology to deploy.

Regional councils have an important role to play in the strategy, development, and deployment of broadband infrastructure. No single connectivity model works for every community, but with the aid of some of the tools below, local and regional leaders continue to connect communities through broadband:

Pew Research: State Broadband Policy Explorer

The Pew Research Center has a state broadband policy explorer which provides states, localities, and regions with an easy tool to look up state laws regarding broadband access expansion. Included in the document are important chapters outlining policies and procedures to support investment and information on how to prioritize digital inclusion. Categories for searching within the tool include broadband programs, competition and regulation, definitions, funding and financing, and infrastructure access. The tool also allows searches by state, category, topic, or year. A 50-state map illustrates which states have adopted such laws. Each state code is broken down into relevant broadband criteria. The state broadband policy explorer includes state statutes related to broadband as of Jan. 1, 2019.

Next Century Cities: Becoming Broadband Ready

Next Century Cities has established a toolkit for communities and acts as a one-stop shop for strategies and solutions to connect residents. This resource is ideal for those in the first stages of seeking internet strategies and solutions to connect their residents. Throughout each chapter, several resources are linked, successful examples are provided, and Next Century Cities provides relevant suggested reading. The toolkit acts as a checklist for planning and developing a broadband deployment strategy, helping readers consider topics such as identifying goals, exploring financing options, collaborating, and measuring success.

National League of Cities (NLC): Small Cell Wireless Technology in Cities

The National League of Cities (NLC) has produced a municipal action guide, Small Cell Wireless Technology in Cities, which provides guidance on how local and regional leaders can plan for and develop small cell wireless internet deployment. In addition to the municipal action guide, NLC has also developed a model ordinance for local leaders. As the carrying capacity of cities grows, local officials are finding new and innovative ways to provide better service, more data, and connectivity for all residents.

National Telecommunications and Information Administration: BroadbandUSA

The National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) managed two broadband grant programs funded by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA). However, these programs are no longer funded and NTIA is no longer accepting applications for these programs. But the Broadband Technology Opportunities Program (BTOP) and State Broadband Initiative (National Broadband Map) NTIA still offers many resources for local and regional officials, including Sustaining Broadband Networks: A toolkit for Local and Tribal Governments.

USDA Toolkit: e-Connectivity @ USDA: Broadband Resources for Rural America

This USDA toolkit presents resources that support e-Connectivity with the aim of helping customers navigate the agencies within USDA to find the opportunities that best fulfill their needs. USDA hopes to use grants and loans, partnerships, and in-person consultations to support a wide variety of projects and customers.

Back to School: Preparing the Next Generation of Regional Leaders

With new backpacks and school supplies in tow, students across the country are heading back to school. They probably are not thinking about the regional planning that went into creating the transportation system that brought them to school. Nor the interjurisdictional trails that connect the parks that they will use for soccer practice. No, they are probably more focused on where their classes are at than knowing where their community’s natural disaster emergency evacuation routes are located.

Some regional councils are trying to teach the next generation that even being as young as they are, they can significantly impact their communities. Just as Mara Mintzer highlighted in her TedxMileHigh talk, children should be included in local planning efforts. After all, they may help regional planners find a blind spot in how we construct our built environment that we adults have not considered. The decisions being made today will impact their tomorrow, so it is imperative that they know how to be a part of the long-range planning process that may influence their way of life 20, 30, or even 50 years from now.

Below are some examples of how members are educating young leaders about regional planning and are involving them in ongoing efforts across their communities.

Broward Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) – Think Like a Planner Program

Broward MPO has held several “Think Like a Planner” workshops in high schools across the region. During these workshops, teens get an introduction to transportation planning and potential careers in the industry. After a walk around the neighborhood surrounding Broward MPO offices, the students are tasked with coming up with ways to make the area safer for all modes of transportation. They then turn these ideas into a proposal, presenting to a three-judge panel of transportation professionals and Broward MPO Board Members. The organization has seen great success with the program and is looking forward to hosting more workshops this school year.

Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning (CMAP) – Future Leaders in Planning Program

For ten years, CMAP has organized Future Leaders in Planning (FLIP), a leadership development opportunity for high school students in Northeastern Illinois. Over the course of a week during the summer, the students learn about the issues that are shaping the Chicago region and come up with solutions for some of the challenges facing urban planners. Activities throughout the 5-day bootcamp include:

  • A scavenger hunt to find bus stops, LEED-certified buildings, and public art;
  • Negotiating a mock community development project;
  • Designing their own sample plan for the new Obama Foundation central plaza; and
  • Completing a final group project where they visualized the goals of CMAP’s ON TO 2050 plan across the different scales of urban planning.

Atlanta Regional Commission (ARC) – Model Atlanta Regional Commission

Bringing together 10th and 11th graders from the Atlanta metro area, ARC’s Model Atlanta Regional Commission (MARC) provides experimental learning opportunities in critical issue areas such as transportation, sustainability, and community development. Participants take part in a six-month program to learn from subject-matter experts and community leaders, engaging in thoughtful conversations about challenges the region is facing. Students are taken on field trips and visits to various community partners to receive hands-on learning about the efforts of different stakeholders throughout their region. They also develop leadership, communication, and collaboration skills by creating actionable solutions to current regional issues. After participating in MARC, students have expressed a better understanding of the considerations that go into the different issue areas that ARC regional planners have to think about, as well as how their entire 10-county region is interconnected.       

Three Takeaways From Last Week’s Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Webinar

Tracking Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions and mitigation efforts is no easy task. Accurate data collection may require decades worth of data points and many seemingly noncontributing factors may skew results.

The International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI) is working with local and regional organizations all over the globe to achieve sustainable urban development. ICLEI works with regional organizations by incorporating sustainability into regional planning and policy. ICLEI has also developed several tools and projects to assist policy makers. Through the GHG Contribution Analysis Toolkit, regions and local officials can compare and contrast the relative effect different factors have on overall GHG emissions in the region.

Last week the National Association of Regional Councils (NARC) hosted a webinar featuring a presentation from ICLEI on some of the tools and programs they offer to regional leaders to track progress in GHG mitigation. The Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments (MWCOG) and the Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission (DVRPC) joined the webinar to discuss how their regions are tracking GHG mitigation efforts and how the GHG Contribution Analysis Toolkit has helped them in their work.

Three takeaways from the webinar:

  • Inventories are Important for Tracking GHG Emissions Reduction

You can’t effectively reduce greenhouse gas emissions if you’re not measuring them. Measuring emissions helps regional leaders identify what the largest emission sources are in the region. Tracking GHG emissions over time can lead to effective reduction actions and cost saving across multiple sectors.

  • Multiple Inventories Provide Significantly More Information Than Single Inventories

Single GHG inventories can provide a breakdown of emissions levels by sector -at a single point in time, but they do not capture changes in emissions levels by sector over time. This can be achieved through multiple inventories, which show change over time (often five-year periods), giving local officials a better picture of overall mitigation efforts.

  • Contribution Analysis Tools Can Help Fill the Gaps Left by More Limited Inventories

Basic inventories can provide good information regarding emission levels by sector, but they typically lack information about the specific driving factors of change. Factors like population growth, a cleaner electricity grid, and changing mean temperatures all affect emission level changes, but traditional inventories typically don’t capture all of this information. Contribution analysis tools provide analysis at this level, which results in more actionable information that can be passed on to lawmakers, community leaders, and residents

You can find a recording of the webinar here.

A copy of the webinar’s PowerPoint presentation can be found here.


Is Your Region Harnessing Clean Water and Drinking Water State Revolving Funds?

August is National Water Quality Month, a perfect time to take a look at some of the ways that regions can use the Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF) and Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (DWSRF) to support local water infrastructure improvements.

What are the State Revolving Fund (SRF) Programs?

The CWSRF and DWSRF are programs which function through a federal-state partnership that uses federal funds matched with state funds to capitalize water infrastructure banks in all 50 states and Puerto Rico.

Money from these state banks is distributed for loans, refinancing, purchasing, guaranteeing local debt, and purchasing bond insurance. Recipients who receive money at low interest rates return payments to the fund, allowing it to “revolve.”

SRF Funding Provides a Good Value for Communities 

SRF loans are typically provided at lower interest rates and with more flexibility than other financing options can provide.

According to the EPA’s DWSRF fact sheet:

  • In 2018, the average DWSRF loan had an interest rate of 1.8%.
  • Loan terms can be extended up to 30 years.
  • Repayment begins up to 18 months after project completion.

CWSRF funds can be used for:

  • Municipal wastewater facility construction,
  • Control of nonpoint sources of pollution,
  • Construction of decentralized wastewater treatment systems,
  • Green infrastructure projects,
  • Estuary protection, and
  • Other water quality projects.

DWSRF Funds can be used for:

  • Drinking Water Treatment,
  • Pipe Installation/Replacement,
  • Source Water Protection,
  • Well Construction/Rehabilitation,
  • Storage, and
  • Other water quality projects.

How Can Regions Councils Get More Involved With SRFs?

Regional councils, as “intermunicipal agencies,” are eligible to directly borrow from SRFs. Regional councils can also coordinate borrowing for their members and for groups of members and other entities with projects that extend beyond state borders.

Regional Councils as “Intermunicipal Agency” Borrowers

As “intermunicipal agencies,” regional councils can receive SRF funding for individual members or for the council itself.

The EPA’s “Financing Options for Nontraditional Eligibilities in the Clean Water State Revolving Fund Programs” highlights several loans provided directly to regional councils:

  • $1.0 million to the Missouri Association Councils of Government (MACOG) for capitalization of the Missouri On-Site Wastewater Improvement Grant-Loan Program. MACOG directed this funding in a pass-through arrangement to homeowners for the repair or replacement of on-site wastewater treatment systems. 
  • $3.5 million to the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) divided among four assistance agreements for projects which included trash capture devices for catchment basins.
  • $2 million to the Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission (DVRPC) for green infrastructure projects focused on addressing non-point source pollutant loads.

Regional Councils as Coordinators for Smaller SRF Borrowers

Project management and reporting requirements can be a challenge for smaller entities that are interested in borrowing SRF funds. Regional Councils can help these smaller borrowers by supporting some of this work. 

Idaho is an example of a state that encourages this type of coordination. According to the Idaho State Department of Environmental Quality, “to help many of the smaller DWSRF borrowers comply with this requirement, Idaho has encouraged them to coordinate with Councils of Government. This arrangement seems to be paying dividends in terms of oversight and compliance.”

Interstate projects present another opportunity for regional councils to operate as SRF coordinators. In these cases, regional councils can apply for loans on behalf of multiple municipalities in different states who are working together on a project whose geographic scope extends past state lines.

SRF Program Details Vary by State

Each state administers their revolving fund individually and project and borrower eligibility varies significantly. For details regarding your state’s SRFs, contact your state SRF contacts. 

What’s Next for the Senate EPW Committee’s Highway Title?

The push for transportation reauthorization has begun, with approximately 15 months before the current authorizing legislation – the FAST Act – expires. This early start to the process can be ascribed to two systemic challenges Congress faces in getting a final bill across the finish line. First, the transportation reauthorization is a complex piece of legislation, under the jurisdiction of four committees in the Senate and two in the House. It is also a large program with a fading source of revenue, which requires Congress to find a funding patch every time it enacts a new, long-term authorization. This time around, the gap between anticipated Highway Trust Fund revenues and desired spending levels is expected to be $100 billion or more, which needs to be transferred from general Treasury funds and somehow offset with new revenues or spending cuts.

The second systemic challenge Congress faces is a simple one of timing: voting for the 2020 Presidential election will take place just over a month after the current authorization expires. The politicking, of course, will begin much sooner. Neither side will want to hand the other a substantial victory too close to an election, and both sides could be wary of spending hundreds of billions of dollars (to say nothing of raising the federal fuels tax), unsure of how it will swing voters.

That brings us to the Senate Environment and Public Works (EPW) Committee’s proposed highway title (transit, rail, and other items will be added later by other committees), which is a five-year, $287 billion bill. As is often the case with transportation bills, there is much for both sides to point to as advancing their policy agendas. This is part of the reason it passed out of committee on a unanimous 21-0 vote. On one side is project permit streamlining, increases to the National Highway Performance Program, and rural-focused provisions regarding safety and bridge repair. On the other side is a new climate title, safety and funding provisions for bicycle and pedestrian projects, and a new program to combat congestion in the nation’s largest urban areas.

The EPW bill maintains the existing structure of the federal transportation program. This is, overall, a positive. There are only minor changes made to the law as it applies to planning and the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) program. One change we had advocated for was an increase in the portion of the Surface Transportation Block Grant Program (STBGP) that is provided directly to local areas through their metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs). Though this share will remain at 55%, we were pleased at changes to the Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP), including an increased share for local projects (57.5%, up from 50% presently) and broader eligibility to include MPOs in urbanized areas under 200,000 population. In addition, two new programs created in the EPW bill for resilience and safety require suballocation of funds and create incentives that would allow a portion of those funds to be used as STBGP funds if certain criteria are met.

A notable aspect of the EPW bill is the sheer number of new programs that it would create, covering a broad range of topics including wildlife crossings, bridge investments, safety, charging and alternatives fuel infrastructure, carbon reduction, congestion relief, resilience, and more. This is an interesting shift in approach, with the current FAST Act bill sticking mainly to the approach initiated in the MAP-21 authorization which consolidated the program from more than 100 programs to just a handful.

If you want to learn more about what the bill contains, NARC has prepared a number of resources that will be helpful, including a section-by-section analysis and a broader overview of some of the most relevant portions. In addition, NARC will be hosting a webinar on Tuesday, August 13 at 3:00 PM ET and you can register here.

As one Senator said during the committee discussion, the committee passage of this bill is the “end of the beginning” of the process. We’ll still need to see what the Senate Commerce and Banking committees develop for their portions of the bill, and that combined package will need to make it through the full Senate. The House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee is also likely to develop its own proposal, though it is unclear when it might release something. And the Senate Finance and House Ways and Means committees have perhaps the toughest job of all, which is coming up with a way to pay for the whole package.