2. Legislative Oversight The House Bay Trust Study Commission Presented by Sandra T. Whitehouse, Ph.D

3. R.I. Constitution Article 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.

5. 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

6. 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

7. Process for successful planning and implementation efforts: Chesapeake Bay, Puget Sound 1) Assessment of problems 2) Make recommendations, set goals and priorities 3) Develop a plan with strategies to achieve goals 4) Implementation of plan: annual work plans, annual and long-term budgets 5) Evaluation of progress toward goals:monitoring 6) Oversight: accountability Fiscal Performance : performance assessment reports

8. 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

9. 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

10. 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

11. What happened with the CCMP? Successes: nutrient reduction No discharge zone/marina pump out facilities Greenwich Bay Initiative Providence combined sewer overflow project

12. What happened with the CCMP? Failures: Plan deficiencies Management of living resources Public participation Dredged material management plan Bay governance Implementation of plan 500 recommendations Monitoring program Guide for agency decision making

13. 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

14. Why did this happen? Problems with the plan Inadequate oversight

15. Bay Planning process CCMP Assess  Set goals  Plan  Implement  1/2 Monitor Oversight

16. 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

17. 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

18. The Partnership for Narragansett Bay: The HUD/Chafee Project 2001-2003 Review planning history Review economic assessments Develop vision/set goals Monitoring plan

19. Goals Economic development that conserves our soul Restoring fish and shellfish Public Access Protecting the landscape (forests, waterfronts and villages) Stewardship and community engagement

20. Monitoring Shoreline buffers Water temperature, salinity, pH, nitrogen, phosphorous, oxygen, flow and circulation Fish, shellfish, benthos

21. Bay Planning process Bay Summit/ PNB Assess  Set goals  Plan Implement Monitor Oversight

22. 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

23. 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)

24. Same issues defined as problems Nutrient reduction Habitat restoration Economic development Dredged material management Monitoring program

25. 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

26. 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

27. Bay Planning Process Ches. Bay Puget Sound CCMPBay Summit /PNB Gov Comm. Assess√√√√√ Set goals√√√√√ Plan√√√? Implement√√√ 1/2? Monitor√√? Oversight√√?

28. 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

29. 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?

30. Summary of Responsibilities Executive Branch –Plan development –Implementation Legislature –Goal setting –Oversight