Policy Considerations. Is there a more equitable, predictable, easily-administered alternative to DAs? • Monitoring • Demonstrate ‘good faith compliance’ annually; recoup costs for staff time • Transparency, maintain community trust in process
Policy Considerations. 5.1 The Council has a number of statutory rehousing duties. This Contract will support the Council to ensure a sufficient supply of accommodation to meet its statutory rehousing duties as a statutory landlord.
Policy Considerations. The ethical analysis of automated cars offers a number of conclusions and recommendations for policy makers: Beside issues of safety and reliability testing, regulations and challenges concerning the human factor, it is important to look at how automated cars affect and/or interact with social norms and moral values. This is undermined so far. Ethical issues of automation go beyond “no win scenarios” presented in the literature. Which values are given priority in the design of these cars? What are the tradeoffs between, say, safety, efficiency and comfort? An analysis of values at stake is needed at this stage of technological development in order to make informed choices on preferable designs and policies. In the study of “human factors”, empirical studies should also engage in qualitative descriptions of how automated driving mediates the users’ understanding of and agency in the world. This is important for example in order to design systems in which responsibilities and roles are optimally distributed among human actors and technologies. Several critical issues have been highlighted: safety vs comfort, safety vs freedom, efficiency vs privacy and accessibility vs equality. These issues show that some values are competing within the very discourses of promoters of automated cars and should be addressed well in advance in order to avoid the polarization of the ethical debate in the future. These conclusions suggest that an attention to the values at stake needs to accompany current attempts to design appropriate policies, technologies and regulations. For each issue and context, the relevant and conflicting values will need to be elicited and acknowledged. This can be done in different contexts including the developmental process involving the technology as well as at the policy and regulatory level. This attention to values is important in order to guarantee that different social and moral concerns are explicitly addressed and choices are justified, avoiding to paint the entire situation with the same “safety” colour and only implicitly dealing with the other issues. Technology and society shape accepted morals as well as existing regulation based on this normative background. Existing laws against reckless driving that require drivers to be attentive and vigilant, for example, are grounded on the value of “safety” for road users. However, new technologies change our perspectives on what is safe. Automated cars’ proponents suggest that it is saf...
Policy Considerations. The ethical analysis of the da Vinci suggests a number of recommendations for policy makers. Even though da Vinci is already in use, surgical robotics is a new field that we should be open to. Technological progress proceeds at a rapid pace and can often be perceived as threatening. It is, however, the basis for the future welfare of society and should thus be allowed to progress, if this is done responsibly. This said, there are a number of ethical concerns, which need to be addressed. Firstly, we would like to reemphasize that stakes are high and that it is thus incumbent upon us to learn from past experience. There have been a number of surgical robotic systems (e.g. ROBODOC and CASPAR) that were applied and tested in the past. Some of the tests have come out negative and we should not repeat the mistakes that were made here. The second point to be made is that overly enthusiastic reactions to da Vinci are not advisable. If the system performs well it should be used – but not, we believe, as a replacement of current surgical practice. Instead, it should be used when appropriate and as an augmentation of the status quo. Adequate policy making will have to address and factor in various perspectives from various fields (e.g. medical professionals, developers, legal experts, ethicists, patients, etc.). For this reason, it is advisable to establish a standing committee that discusses the ethical, legal and technical issues surrounding da Vinci and to ensure that there will be an adequate platform for debate. It should be stressed, in particular, that a patients’ association will need to partake in this process of discourse at every step of the way. The possible use of the black box system will have to be investigated further in order to address issues to do with responsibility and safety as well as privacy. Our investigation furthermore yielded the finding that marketing messages are often to be taken with a pinch of salt. They do not always convey fully accurate information but are naturally biased in favour of developers of innovative surgical systems. Hence, it is advisable to analyse which types of regulation may have to be imposed on marketing, journalism as well as the media as a whole. The positive impact of da Vinci on the training of young surgical professionals should be stressed once more. It is certainly advisable to trace how the system may be used in medical training in order to harness the whole potential of medical personnel. Fi...
Policy Considerations. WIOA requirements: Governor’s guidance in consultation with CEOs, State WDB and Local WDBs Current MOU policy • Not in current MOU policy • Legal Authority also referenced at the beginning of MOU guide
Policy Considerations. Governor’s guidance must include – approaches to facilitate equitable and efficient cost allocation that results in a reasonable cost allocation methodology where infrastructure costs are charged to each partner based on its proportionate use of the one-stop centers and relative benefit received Current MOU policy • How the infrastructure of the system will be funded through an IFA. The IFA must use a cost allocation methodology that demonstrates how costs are charged to each partner in accordance to the relative benefit and proportionate use, and in accordance with the partner’s authorizing statutes and regulations. The MOU must contain the following information in regards to IFA’s: o The period of time in which the IFA is effective. This may be a different time period than the duration of the MOU; o Identification of an infrastructure and shared services budget that will be periodically reconciled against actual costs incurred and adjusted accordingly to ensure that it reflects a cost allocation methodology that demonstrates how infrastructure costs are charged to each partner in proportion to its use of the one-stop center and relative benefit received, and that complies with 2 CFR part 200 (or any corresponding similar regulation or ruling); o Identification of all one-stop partners, Chief Elected Officials (CEOs), and Local Workforce Development Board (WDB) participating in the IFA; o Steps the Local WDB, CEOs, and one-stop partners used to reach consensus or an assurance that the local area followed the guidance for the State funding process; o A description of the process to be used among partners to resolve issues during the MOU duration period when consensus cannot be reached; and o A description of the periodic modification and review process to ensure equitable benefit among one-stop partners. • How services and the operating costs of the system will be funded through other cost sharing agreements. In addition to jointly funding infrastructure costs, One-Stop partners must use a portion of funds made available under their programs' authorizing Federal law to pay the additional costs relating to the operation of the one-stop delivery system. These other costs must include applicable career services and may include other costs, including shared services. Shared costs must be allocated according to the proportion of benefit received by each of the partners, consistent with the Federal law authorizing the partner's program, and consistent with all o...
Policy Considerations. Governor’s guidance must include – the timelines regarding notification to the Governor for not reaching local agreement and triggering the State funding mechanism described in § 678.730, and timelines for a one-stop partner to submit an appeal in the State funding mechanism. • SFM appeal process must be described in state plan – policy changes will need to be updated/reflected in state plan.
Policy Considerations. None noted. LEGISLATIVE HISTORY No legislation similar to this bill has been identified.
Policy Considerations. The following policy considerations provide general guidance for the establishment, use and operation of mitigation banks. It is the agencies’ intent that this guidance be applied to mitigation bank proposals submitted for approval on or after the effective date of this guidance and to those in early stages of planning or development. It is not intended that this policy be retroactive for mitigation banks that have already received agency approval. While it is recognized that individual mitigation banking proposals may vary, it is the intent of this guidance that the fundamental precepts be applicable to future mitigation banks. For the purposes of Section 10/104, and consistent with the CEQ regulations, the Guidelines, and the Memorandum of Agreement Between the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Department of the Army Concerning the Determination of Mitigation under the Clean Water Act Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines, mitigation means sequentially avoiding impacts, minimizing impacts, and compensating for remaining unavoidable impacts. Compensatory mitigation, under Section 10/404, is the restoration, creation, enhancement, or in exceptional circumstances, preservation of wetlands and/or other aquatic resources for the purpose of compensating for unavoidable adverse impacts. A site where wetlands and/or other aquatic resources are restored, created, enhanced, or in exceptional circumstances, preserved expressly for the purpose of providing compensatory mitigation in advance of authorized impacts to similar resources is a mitigation bank.
Policy Considerations. Arguably there is a need for higher standards of fairness in relationships between the NCAA and student athletes, and NCAA rules fail to separate the interests of student athletes from the interests of their universities.124 “Comparable bargaining power does not exist at the core of the student-athlete/university relationship.”125 That observation can be extended to the athletic scholarship and how it structures the relationship between the NCAA, the university and the student athlete, limiting the term to renewable annual contracts, at the option of the university.126 “As it exists today, the athletic scholarship contract is an unconscionable contract of adhesion, inconsistent with the important NCAA principles of student-athlete welfare and amateurism.”127 Further, it is questionable whether or not the educational pursuit is indeed less important than the exploitation of the young person’s athletic ability for financial gain.128 A 1995 study of the decisional structures of the NCAA revealed seven characteristics that cast a degree of doubt upon whether or not the process accurately promotes the notion that one’s status as a student should take precedence over one’s status as an athlete.129 As a result of such concerns, reforms have been proposed to re-focus collegiate athletics on the education not the exploitation of the student athlete.130 Recent cases and commentaries have questioned another alleged form of exploitation by the NCAA and its members, that of the student-athlete’s common law right of publicity.131 For example, Hall of Fame basketball player Xxxxx Xxxxxxxxx is among three former college athletes who filed suit against the NCAA this year for the alleged illegal use of their images.132 Certainly the recruitment of high school athletes is a competitive process that does not necessarily center upon what is in the best interest of the student-athlete.133 In fact, issues concerning the recruiting of high school athletes have been a focal point of controversy over the life of the NCAA.134 The recruiting of high school athletes is crucial for the success of the institution’s athletic programs, the commensurate financial revenue stream for the institution, as well as for the success of the coaching staff, both financially and professionally.135 The amount of revenue produced by intercollegiate athletics is substantial136 and accompanied by the benefits of “money and support for the university; enthusiasm and cohesion to the university community; a...
