Chesapeake Bay Program Management Board April 11, 2013.
-
Upload
kevin-briggs -
Category
Documents
-
view
212 -
download
0
Transcript of Chesapeake Bay Program Management Board April 11, 2013.
![Page 1: Chesapeake Bay Program Management Board April 11, 2013.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022072015/56649ece5503460f94bdb66a/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Chesapeake Bay Program Management BoardApril 11, 2013
![Page 2: Chesapeake Bay Program Management Board April 11, 2013.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022072015/56649ece5503460f94bdb66a/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Background• On January 10, 2013, the Management Board approved
development of a set of options for a finance advisory committee for consideration.
• Efforts to protect and restore the Chesapeake Bay and its watershed demand significant investments to achieve success. Such investments require financial strategies, tools, coordination, and partnership.
• The Chesapeake Bay Program sponsored environmental finance workshops and webinars in 2012 and 2013, but greater effort is needed to support Bay Program partners.
![Page 3: Chesapeake Bay Program Management Board April 11, 2013.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022072015/56649ece5503460f94bdb66a/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Option 1: Status• Constitute workgroup as part of existing organization such as
EPA EFAB or GIT 6.• Establish advisory committee with standing equal to CAC,
LGAC, or STAC.
Option 2: Scope• Focus of new group should be on water quality.• Focus of new group should be all goals of the Chesapeake Bay
Partnership.
![Page 4: Chesapeake Bay Program Management Board April 11, 2013.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022072015/56649ece5503460f94bdb66a/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Option 3: Scope• Focus of new group should be on either public financing or private
financing.• Focus of new group should be on both public and private financing.• Focus of new group should be on both but place greater emphasis
on one or the other.
Option 4: Size• New group should be open to all potential members willing to
serve.• New group should be limited in size.
![Page 5: Chesapeake Bay Program Management Board April 11, 2013.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022072015/56649ece5503460f94bdb66a/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Option 5: Credentials• Membership in new group should not be predicated on
professional credentials and expertise.• Membership in new group should require demonstration of
appropriate credentials and expertise. Half the membership should be from entities headquartered outside the Chesapeake Bay watershed.
Option 6: Term• Duration of membership in new group should not be limited.• Duration of membership in new group should be limited to
five years.• Terms should be staggered with a portion rotating off on a
specific frequency.
![Page 6: Chesapeake Bay Program Management Board April 11, 2013.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022072015/56649ece5503460f94bdb66a/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Option 7: Operations• Work plan of new group should be based on issued raised by
Chesapeake Bay Program partners.• Work plan of new group should be based on issued raised by
members of the new group.• Work plan of new group should be based on issued raised by
Chesapeake Bay Program partners and by members of the new group.
![Page 7: Chesapeake Bay Program Management Board April 11, 2013.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022072015/56649ece5503460f94bdb66a/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Budget Implications• Since FY 2009, CAC and LGAC have each received between
$150,000 and $169,000 per year in Chesapeake Bay Program funds. During the same period, STAC has received between $303,000 and $401,000 per year.
• We expect the new group to conduct much of its business via teleconference and video conference.
• Due to the broad mandate of the new group, we expect its budget to be between $150,000 and $300,000.