Are you a Preservationist: a tool guide for your next project

Placemaking is a multifaceted approach to planning, designing, and managing public spaces that puts people at the center. It's about capitalizing on a local community's assets, inspiration, and potential to create public spaces that promote health, happiness, well-being, and a sense of belonging.

The concept originated in the 1960s with thinkers such as Jane Jacobs and William H. Whyte, who emphasized the importance of lively neighborhoods and inviting public spaces designed for people rather than just cars or commerce. The term itself gained more common usage in the mid-1990s.

In essence, placemaking is about creating public spaces that are not just functional but also meaningful, engaging, and reflective of the communities they serve. It's a dynamic and evolving field that emphasizes a bottom-up, human-centered approach to shaping the built environment. Read more: https://savingplaces.org/stories/sojourner-truth-legacy-plaza-placemaking-toolkit?utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&utm_campaign=weekly

In Riverside County, Potential Medi-Cal Cuts Cause Distress - California Health Care Foundation

As a member of the Riverside County IHSS Advisory Committee, I read articles like this one and am reminded daily of the critical importance of the IHSS program right here in our community.

Kristine's story from Desert Hot Springs is a powerful example of how IHSS allows our neighbors with disabilities and seniors to live with dignity and independence in their own homes.

Evanne from Rancho Mirage rightly points out the need for continued support and respect for our elders and those with disabilities.

We on the Advisory Committee are committed to advocating for substantial IHSS funding and policies that support both recipients and caregivers in Riverside County.

#IHSS #RiversideCounty #HomeCare #DisabilityRights #SeniorCare

 

U.S. Food Loss and Waste 2030 Champions | Analysis

As an MPA graduate student, I always look at policy in action. "The National Goal for Reducing Food Loss and Waste" is an excellent example of how government can partner with the private sector to address complex problems. This initiative, led by the USDA and EPA, relies on voluntary commitments from "2030 Champions" to reduce food waste by 50% by 2030. It showcases multi-stakeholder collaboration, goal setting, and public-private partnerships – all crucial concepts in public administration.

What are your thoughts on this approach?

#MPA #PublicPolicy #FoodWaste #Sustainability #PublicPrivatePartnership Read more

 

Supreme Court sides with San Francisco, requiring EPA to set specific targets in water pollution permits

The Supreme Court's recent decision on the Clean Water Act requires further analysis as it impacts how the EPA enforces its permit requirements.

The Supreme Court decision regarding the EPA's regulatory power under the Clean Water Act prompted extensive debate. The decision effectively restricted the application of expansive narrative permit requirements that broadly instruct facilities to "do not violate water quality standards."

The Court analyzed the San Francisco Oceanside plant case and determined that the EPA's requirements were unclear.  Despite the Court's ruling, the decision preserved the EPA's authority to regulate water pollution. Regulatory authorities have the ability to establish exact numeric effluent limitations as well as non-numeric requirements, including time- or weather-based restrictions.

The judgment requires that regulatory bodies write permits with greater precision.  The effect of the ruling will hinge on how regulatory bodies apply their existing powers.  Regulatory bodies maintain the authority to enforce strict effluent restrictions based on water quality and additional regulatory actions.

My research focuses on understanding the effects of this ruling on upcoming permit renewals and how water quality standards will be enforced moving forward. The Court's decision represents a recalibration rather than a full dismantling of the Clean Water Act, despite its reputation for opposing regulation. 

Let’s Support Healthy Options for Kids!

Hey everyone! This legislative session, we're thrilled to support Senator Weber Pierson's SB 764 policy. SB 764 requires restaurant chains to offer healthy meal choices for children. Studying for my MPA degree has sparked my deep interest in understanding the potential real-world effects of public health policies.

Think about it: Numerous restaurant kids' meal options contain excessive calories, sodium, and sugar, which we know is harmful to children.  My experience as a research assistant has shown me research demonstrating that these eating habits can result in serious health complications later in life.


But here's the thing: Our goal is to assist families in choosing better options. Through my family experiences, I understand how difficult it is to locate healthy food choices during restaurant meals.  My little cousin enjoys fresh veggies and fruit, but kids' menus often lack these healthy options.

So, here's where you come in! Parents and community members throughout California should provide their feedback. Can you tell me which healthy items you expect to find on children's menus? Is your family faced with children who prefer fresh produce and nutritious options over traditional fried foods when dining out?

 We must demonstrate to government officials the significance of nutritional balance in children's meals for our family and community.  Seriously, let us know! We must show lawmakers why nutritionally balanced kids' meals are vital to us and our families. For example, I’d love to see more whole grain options, grilled protein, and fresh fruit and veggie sides as the default, not the exception. And I’d like water or milk as the default drink options. Together, we can take action to create meaningful improvements for our children's well-being. What do you think? Which healthy choices would you prefer to become available? 

Honoring and Celebrating Black History

From my perspective as a Black gay man, I understand that assaults on Black history impact me personally, extending beyond mere political issues. The distortion of Dr. King's legacy, along with the diminishing of the struggles faced by Black Americans, serves to undermine my personal identity and experiences. The forces attempting to eliminate Black history are the same forces that seek to erase LGBTQ+ history, as my identity exists at the intersection of racial discrimination and anti-LGBTQ+ prejudice. The Black and LGBTQ+ communities must unite to protect our shared heritage and promote justice and equality for all.

What College Leaders Are Saying About Trump’s Directive on Race and DEI

College leaders remain challenged by the consequences of this letter. Two weeks is insufficient time to fully evaluate and make necessary changes to sophisticated policies and programs. Potential funding reductions create substantial pressure. I want to understand how colleges will handle these changes and their eventual impact on campus diversity.

According to this letter, the Department of Education has significantly changed its stance on race-conscious policies. The expedited timeline reveals that they plan to implement their interpretation forcefully. Legal challenges against this letter remain uncertain as debates surround race-conscious approaches in higher education. Achieving institutional diversity without referencing race is a substantial policy difficulty.