MIS_180_Spring_2016__Instructor_George_Bonilla1xHTMLHTML_5_

MIS 180 Spring 2016 Instructor George Bonilla

xHTML/HTML 5 Assignment 7

Due: MUST be uploaded to Bb by Saturday, April 30, 2016. Points: 15 This is an introductory assignment designed to allow you to learn the basics about creating web documents using elements from xHTML and HTML 5. You will build a short & simple web page to provide basic information about you. Specifically, you must have at least two paragraphs of text. (For this assignment, a paragraph should have at least 5 separate sentences.) You must consult the Assignment 7 Grading Criteria to help guide you through this assignment.

1. Paragraph 1 must provide: § background information about you § why you are attending SDSU § something interesting about yourself.

Be sure to include information about all 3 pieces that is easily able to be discerned from reading your web page.

2. Paragraph 2 must discuss: § what your major is and why you chose it § how companies in your major/career path use information systems to provide a

competitive advantage. Provide the name of at least two companies you researched to find out about their MIS systems

§ Both paragraphs should have a minimum total of 250 words NOT including your code.

Be certain that you have done a thorough job of analyzing and writing this material. I expect that you will provide specific and thorough content. What you write – the content – will affect your grade!

Assemble the different information components you need to include on the page – write the text, get the images, decide what the contents of your list will be, etc. Develop a prototype layout – do a rough sketch that includes all required elements. Your page should not look exactly like the sample provided! After you are satisfied with your prototype, enter the code into your editor. “TEST” your webpage to ensure that all pieces work together (e.g. Does the email link work? Is your picture no larger than 350X350 pixels (or ‘about’ 4 X 4 inches)? Does your picture open in the web browser?

Notes: 1) See last page to learn how to resize your picture. 2) DO NOT use pictures found in a URL which forces the user to have internet access.

Remember…

• You MUST create your web page using Notepad or TextEdit (Mac). Note: If you use TextEdit you MUST ensure

o You may not use an HTML or XHTML editor for your assignment – this means FrontPage, DreamWeaver, or any other XHTML/HTML editor available online (such as HTML Tidy) or via download.

o This also means that you may not use any editing programs that convert your text into html – for example, you may not use the Save As Web Page option in Word.

MIS 180 Spring 2016 Instructor George Bonilla

• You must write your web page code using the XHTML strict standard • You must work independently and all work must be original

Your web page must have the following required components:

NOTE: Not following directions and paying attention to details will result in points being lost. 1. The first three pieces in your document must be written exactly as follows Do Not include the

letters a, b, c: a. <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> b. <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">

c. <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> This stuff at the top of a web page is required and all you need to know is these lines makes it valid XHTML and makes it possible for your web page to be read by different web browsers and devices well into the future. Consider creating a template of the above three lines or pieces for you to add to your future web pages.

2. Use the following XHTML elements (and appropriate text that you will supply): HEAD TITLE BODY Heading - use at least two different sizes Paragraph Horizontal Rule Break (used at least once to “force” a line break

Hypertext links – Include an E-mail link for yourself.

Lists – Create either an Ordered or Unordered list with >= 4 items in the list. Incorporate the list into one of your paragraphs to provide the required information.

Text Formatting (use at least 2 of the following: Strong, bold, emphasis, typewriter.) Use this around regular text in a paragraph, not in a heading tag.

At least one picture of you or selfie saved in .jpg format will be acceptable. The picture must not be over 350x350 pixels in size.

Meta Elements (include 1 for author and 1 for description, which will contain a description of your page)

3. Enter an HTML comment to create internal documentation inside of the “Head” area. The

comment (not visible to the user) should state “Web Page last updated on XX/XX/XX.” Update this date every time you work on the page.

4. If all of the required components are not included in your web page, or if they are not working correctly, you will lose points. Additionally, your page must be visually pleasing (e.g. don’t have all the text cluttered together) and free from spelling and grammar errors.

5. Name your HTML file with your Last Name + Initial of First Name + A7Webpage and the

correct extension (e.g. for student John Doe the file would be: DoeJ_A7Webpage.html)

6. Check your file using an HTML validator (such as: http://validator.w3.org) to ensure that you have followed all of the programming rules correctly. Select the Validate by Direct Input tab,

MIS 180 Spring 2016 Instructor George Bonilla

copy and paste your code into the window and select the check button. When you are done validating, be sure to select the “Show Source” option and revalidate. For full credit, you must validate successfully using the HTML Strict Doctype tag.

Remember that a successful validation when using Validate by Direct Input (as opposed to Validate by File Upload) will end up with the following message:

Notes and Potential Issues

The following notes and warnings highlight missing or conflicting information which caused the validator to perform some guesswork prior to validation, or other things affecting the output below. If the guess or fallback is incorrect, it could make validation results entirely incoherent. It is highly recommended to check these potential issues, and, if necessary, fix them and re-validate the document.

Using Direct Input mode: UTF-8 character encoding assumed

Unlike the “by URI” and “by File Upload” modes, the “Direct Input” mode of the validator provides validated content in the form of characters pasted or typed in the validator's form field. This will automatically make the data UTF-8, and therefore the validator does not need to determine the character encoding of your document, and will ignore any charset information specified.

If you notice a discrepancy in detected character encoding between the “Direct Input” mode and other validator modes, this is likely to be the reason. It is neither a bug in the validator, nor in your document.

Congratulations

The uploaded document was successfully checked as XHTML 1.0 Strict. This means that the resource in question identified itself as "XHTML 1.0 Strict" and that we successfully performed a formal validation of it. The parser implementations we used for this check are based on OpenSP (SGML/XML) and libxml2 (XML). Turn in by Uploading to Blackboard 1) A zipped folder containing three items: a. your html page, b. your picture, and c. a Word document of your validated page, all three items in the same folder. 2) An electronic copy (word document) of the validated page. In the options in the Validator, select “Show Source” and Revalidate. This will include results about whether your page passed the validation, along with the source code. This printout may be several pages long. 3) Be sure to save and keep an electronic copy of your file. You MAY be asked to submit an electronic copy of your file. Additionally, you will need this file for a future assignment.

MIS 180 Spring 2016 Instructor George Bonilla

Note: The sample figure shown below does not meet all of the assignment requirements, it is only

an example. Do not make your page look identical to this sample – you should determine the organization and layout of your own page.

How to Resize a Picture.

The following are two software programs native to the PC and/or Mac to resize your picture to meet the No Bigger Than 350x350 pixels picture size for your web page. Download the document HOW TO RESIZE YOUR PICTURES to learn how to use the software appropriate for your computer.

• For the PC use Windows Live Photo Gallery. • For the Mac OS X use Preview.

Have fun with this assignment!

'es ilr Ftmlinp hington. DC-: 0.

alvsis a.[ he. Govercrnent

3AO). 2005 s Neecled h rington. DC; i. B).2(fr2.The rington, DC:

'arilwrk.t and

I kcal Deci- undfltl0ll. lism: Slouch- rtham Honse.

'eralisnt: llis tnharn. Il{D:

leatures and ieviev 25(5):

md Polrtical :ience 38(3):

Susan Rcsegrant / Wichita Confronts Contamination 137

"do sonrething about the p:'oblem,' the report also tritgerecl an irnmediate reaction from the banl<ing community which stopned making loans to downtown resiclential and commercial own- ers in tl-e Cilbert-Mosley area, thereby causing serious economic repercussions. What shor.rld the city clo to protect its environment and econorny-indeed the very health of its citizens?

ln the ioilowing case, tlre city rnanager, Cl'ris Cherches, who is'aced with the respcnsi- bility of drafting a plan of actjorl to deal with this crisis, must work with various itrtergov- ernrnentat bodies such as lhe KDHE and EPA to frame options ancl devise a strategy to clean up the a.ffected site. ln tlre process, Cherclres achieves a workable plan, but one that very much ctevelops within-and depends on-an ICR framework.

As you read thls case, consicler the following:

Whai :eatirres of opporl-rnistic federalism as described by Proiessor Conlan does this case possess?

What are the potential benefits public adrninistrations might derive from opportunistic fede:alism? How can it vrork for, rather than against, effective public management?

Ho',v rnight opportunisric federalism benefit communlties/ society, and the general public? How can it advance the public interest? Or, serve to negate it?

ln this case, how clid ICR entities help to icle",tify the problern(s), frame the options fcr the city nanager, ancl ultirnately help him creare a workable plan of aciion for the affectecl sitei

Why were the environrnental and ICR proclems in this case so complex?

lclentify the negotialions among the various IGR actors in th;s story.'Why were tltese negotiations so critical in dealing with Wichita's contarrinatior?

ln general, what does tfris case tell us abolrt the importance of IGR to tlre work of punlic acjnritristrators in the twenty-first century?

Wichita Confronts Contamination

SUSAN ROSEGRANT

n- d- ye

:r- il, Llr

ln the summer oi 1990, the centrai business district of Wichita, Kansas, faced familiar problems of urbatt decline, along witn the prospect of revitalization. Jhe downturn i;: tre regional oil and gas industry had exacerbated thc nationwide real estaie sli-rmp, leaving

'[his case wns wrinen i:r.' .iusaa Rosegxnt fcr Professor Alon Altshulet: dlrector o! the Taubrnn Centet ior State tntl Locei Government at tlw John F. Kcnnedy School oJ Govenunent,for use at the Progrant an lanotcttion in Slatc atd Local Govenuvn! " CEO Sytry:rsiuttt," September24-26, tgS2- Funclhg provided by thc Fotd t'oundatlott. (1292)

Copyright O 1992 by rhe President nnd Fcliows of I'larvard College. Reprintec ry permission of the Kennedy School of Cov gnrment Casc Plogranr. Han'artl [Jnivers iiy.

Sourcel Cose Progranr, John F. Kennedy School of Govemment, Harvard Universiry, Prrts A & B CL6-92-I',57 .A & C t 6-92-l 158.0

downtown Wichita stagnant, At thc, same time, local business leaders were pursuing a ccnrmon formula for renewall a project relying ot't subsiantial public improvements to leverage new private investment, a $325 million unclertaking in all,

ln downtown Wichita, however, a special probtem was brewing. Haza,dous chemicals l<nown to cause cancer and other health problems hacl ireen detected ln some private and industrial welis in Wichita's core area. Banks were growing more careful abcut requiring site inspections, ancl evcn soil and water sampling, before they woulcl grant loans. And in lune, local rnanufacturer Coleman Co., lnc., the venerable tnakerof camp stoves and other outcioor equiptnent, approached the city's iegal department tor advice about a contamination proble-m it had first discovered during routine tesls in the fall of '1988.

l's

in nt at rd

.lr

rl t' .o

138 Clr.rp:er 5 / I rlter8ove rnn:er i.al Relations ( ICR)

ln late August, the: caltn was shalteted as the pieces of bad news suclclenly iit rogether io rornr a frightenirrg whole. The Karrsas Departmenl oi Healtlr and Envirorr- nrent (KDHE), .tcting orr behalf oi the Environmental Protection Agc:rcy (EPA), reported tlrat Wichita was sit- ting, on arr undergrolrnd lake po ltrtecl by a variety of comrnercial ancl industrial chearicais. The area ol contamirr.rtion*clrlbbed ilre Cilbe i ancl Mosley site after a street irrtersection rrear its cenler-was extensive, covering a plo:.rcout iour miles iorg.r,rcl one-and-one- hali rnlles wicre. rVloreover, the pcllr"rtecl aqtrifer l.ry scluatelybene.r.tlr the city's central l>usiness clistlict. The 8,000 parceis afiected had an assesse(l valLre of abouit $86 million. ,l4ajor banks, hotels, irrciustrial lreaclquar- ters, and hornes a,i iay in the six-square-mile area. Tlre worst polllrtic;n, consisting of high concentrations of trichlcrroethene, a clrenrical clegre.rser used to clear rrretal 1:afts befo,e p.rirrting, w('rs fourrd at Colernan's heaclqr-rarters at trre north end of the sr:e.

Although KDHE hacl completed "r

prelirninary study on Cilbert-Mosiey the previous November, the August 1990 Listirrg Site !rvestigatir;n was ihe first conrprehen- sive conLrmination report that Ci:y Nl.rnager Clrris Cherclres hacl seerr. Accorcling to lris o[t'ice's quick esti- rnates, to clean tlre aquiter could cost as nurch as $20 mil- llon and lake as !o;.9 as 20 years. KDIIE ott'ered just two options in its repcrt recornnrendatioris: either the com- panies responsibie for tlre contanrin.rtion could lrancl together to cle.1n -p the area, or the state would rarrk the site for Natior.ial Prioiity Listing, lhe first step towarcl activatirrg Supertr.lrrcl. I

Contamination Fallout

The Wichita coi*nrnurrity did not vie'-r, Cilbert-Mosley as a serious he.r't1,. risk. Although the contamination was nrovirrg south at the rate oI about a toot a day, the pollLrtecl aqr-rifer lay '1 5 toet [:elow ihe surface and was not usecl for crin <ing water. "Kans"]s is not that corr- cerned al:out vvater quality," r:xcl.rined Williarn Cather, chair ol the Sierra Club's srnall Kansas cl'rap- ter, "We are colrcernecl about water clLrantity."

But the pctential economic irrpact o[ thc contam- ination had tlre ccmmunity up in .r::ns. KDFIE's report irlerrtificcl 508 ;.rrea businesses as Potentially Respon- silrle Parties (?RPsi under SuperiLrnd law lf Cilbert- Mosley l;ecarle a Superiuncl site, all o[ these businesses wor-rlci be potentially I able for cleanr,p

costs regarcllc.ss of vrhether tlrey hacl contributecl to the contamination, ln the clays follolving release of the Listing Site lnvesligation, KDHE received a barrage of phone calls fronr husirress owners .r,'rx ous to uncler- stand tlre implir:"it:oris of t[Teir PRP statr"rs.

Even mote threalening, however, lvas the response cf the financial corrnunity, lust a few months earlier', in US vs. Fleet F,tctors Corp., the US i I th Circuit Court in Allanta hacl .u led that a lencler rnay i ncur Su perf urrci liability "by participating in fir-rancial rnanagenrent to a degree inclicatirg a capacity to i,liiuence the corpo- ration's treatrne r",: of lraz.rrclou s wastes. " j

Sirnply pr,rt, tre rr"rling openecl le^ciers to Superirrrrd liability. Not only t;rat, because oI th,eir relatively "cleep pockets," financial lnstitutions rnacle iCeal targets ior Superlu rrcl c leanr.rp cost recovery.

ln tire wake of ihe dramatic reporl, Wichita bankers took abrupt actiorr, iralting virtually ali lerrding "rctivity irr Cilbert-Mosley. the heart of the citv. " (lon't think you cor-rld have h it a b.rnker over the lreaci vvith a trvo-by-foLrr ancl gotterr hinl :c make a loan tlren," cleclarerl J.V. Lentell, chairrrarr of the Kar.rsas St.rte Bank ancl Trust Co. "We already knew property vairres vsere plumnreting in the downtown area. f)owntown w'as cirying up. lt was the last thing we neeciecl."

The banlcs' reClining had an irnmecll.'rte impact on bot.h comrnerci.il arrcl residential oroperty owners. David C. Burk, ior example, an arc;ritect turned devel- oper; had fornrecl an investment company to develop restaurant, retarl, a.parlment, ancl ofiice space irr a few blocks of al:anclcned brick wareholrses ncrcrr Coleman's headquarlers. ;\ though he had drillecl 20 test holes without finding contamination before aunching his ill- tirred venture, a,l tirree bullclings he iracl contracts on, as well as tl'rose lre had options to D.,y, l'ell within thc contaminatecl zotrc. "As soon as C;lbert-Mosley carne in. we lost oul invcstors," he reportecl grimly. Residents were similarly af:ected, as they iouncr it sudclenly im- possible to sell their honres. "Therc ,,vere hundrecls of tragcdies wrappecl up here," dcclarecl Mayor tlob Knight. "l startecl getiing calls frorn scns and daughters, trying to mal<e provisions tor a parent vrho was lett alone arrd aged, whc were unable to liqriidate property."

As city gove!'1ment strugglecl il. thc days follorving the report's release to understancl arrcl rcsr:oncl to the cti-

sis, lt hecame c ear that the twirr tnrcal.s of uncertain li-

abiliry arrcl the bank-imposed real est.rie ireeze posecl a sul:starrtial hiizard to the city's tax [rase. Properties in the area had generated more than $ l2 rnlllion of the $203 rnillion in 'ocal property taxc5 lnc previous year,

:on:ributed to the tg release of the ivecl a barrage of rxi<.rus to uncler- atu.s.

ryas tl're response v t"nontns earlier, 'l th C rcuit Coun irrcui"Superfund managernent to

rerrce t[re corpo- ]s. "r ers to SJperfund 'reiatively "cleep icle.rl iargets for

Wichita bankers :nding.rctivity in : don't ihink you 'ith a tv.zc-by-four r," declared J.V, rnk ancl Trust Co. e plunrmeting in ing Lrp. lt wasthe

diate ,n"pact on ol)erty owners, .ct turnecl clevel- )any to clevelop ) spaco in a few near Colenran's cl 20 iest hole.s aunciiing his ill- rcl coriracts on, ,, feli w.ithin the rt-Mosley came rimJy. Residents it sudclc.nly im- rre l'rurrc/reds of -.d Mayor Boit . ancl daughtcrs, ro was lett alone e property." days following

;Pono to lhe cri- of uncenain li-

t freeze po.sed a a. Properties in I nrillicrr of the : prcv'ous ycar,

but already, tlte county apptaiser's office was receiving

requests ior tecluced valuations. li all Cilbert-Mosley properties losi substantial vaiue, or were frozen ior months, or even years, not only woulcl the reclevelopmen: plan clie, bL,i the entire core area woulcl be threatened.

"When the gror-rndwater problem c.rrne along," recaliecl

city attorney Tliornas R. Powel , "i: looked like it was going to be the cieatl-r knell."

The City Weighs lts Options

City Manager Cl.erches, who faceo tire imnrediate r"e- sponsibility for clratiing a plan, enlisted a cadre of staifers to stucJy KDHE's two recommendecl options. ln evaluating the possibllities, Cherches stressed that two priorities rerrarned uppermost: to begin cleaning up the acluifer as soon as possible, a.ncl tc preserve prcp- erty values, The orrly way to do tltatl convince the barrks [o resurre lencl ng in tl're area.

1) tet Companies Responsible for Contamination Clean Up the Site

The first impulse on the part of son'ie of Cherches's star was to encoLrrage Coleman ancl other polluters to take charge of the Cilbert-Mosley site. "ln the very early stages, it was viewed as a business pr.oblem," recallec Mark Claser, special assistant to the rrranager for man- ag,ement tcsea:cir. "Tlre businesses contributed to the contamirration.'l'he businesses are i:asically resporrsi- ble for clearr,ng up the contarninatiorr." Added city at- [orney Powell, "Our hope was that sornehow Coleman woulcl soLve the problem."

But hist<.:ry argired strongly against this choice. Cillrcr't-Mosley was not the city's iirst experience u/itn contaminaLecl sites. Three years earlier, groundwater contamirlatlon hacl been discovered at a srnailer s;te abor;t two miles north of Cilberf-tuiosley, known as 29th and Mead. There, also, the banks haC sropped lending, arrcl the county appraiser hacl lowe,ccl property values 40 percent. A group of about 'l 00 potentially responsi- ble parties at the site, including boti-. the city and Cole- man, had fcrrried a PRP group to strike an agreelnent on how to pay for the initial EPA-required Renredial in- vc'stigation and Feasibility Study (Ri/FS), which wor"ricl identiiy sources ancl types of contarnination along with remediartiorr rnetlrocls, But group negotiations had be- come clivisivc, llren stalled, and the state had alreacly

Susan Rosegrant / W,clrita Confronts Contanrination 'l 39

placed the site on the Nation.rl Prlo:ities List {NPL). ii the group fared no better in cleterrnining ultimate cleanup liability, it would face fr"rlt im;:lementation oi Superfund and rr.rny years of reai esta!e paralysis.

Civen th s experience. it seenrecl lrighly unIikely tlra: the more than 500 PRPs at Ciibert-Mosley would be able to reach a:inlely agreement on liability, ln adclition, it was questicnable whether Ccleman would cooperale. Although tlre ccmpany had been a ,eacl party at 29th and Mead, it h.rcl not pushecl lor a speedy resolution. Moreover, while Coleman acknowledged that it lrad found some pol!ution at its Cilbert-,\'losley site, it wtrs already discor-inting its responsibllity ior the overail contarninaticn. Rernarked city attorney Powell, "When they said they wei'e going to pay for what they were responsible [or; i dicln't know if we would ever agree on what they w.ere responsible tbr." li a PRP gr<.rup at Cilbert-Mosley tared no befter than :he one at 29th ancr Mead, there woulcl be no quicl< cleanLip in sight, anct tro lncerrtive fo. l:anks to resun']e ienriing until the thre;rt of contamination had been remor,,eci.

2) Rank the Site for Possible Superfund Status

As unprocluctive as forming a PRP group might ap- pear, Cherches ancl his staff socrr concludec.i that KDHE's second option-to allow tne site to be rankec for Superfuncl*.was far less appealing.

lf EPA l:ecarre directly involved, Cherches le'arned, the cost of c,eaning up Cilbert-Moslcy would increase dramatically. The agency typicallv hirecl an oversiglrt contractor, fo, exanrple, to watch over the work of tire regular contractor-a step that autornatically adclecl r.rr> to 40 perccnt lo the cleanup bill. ln addition, possil:le polluters facei tne prospect of paying for the adminrs- tratjve oversight of EPA itself; thc Su1:erfund law called on EPA staffers to charge their time. to the private firrns. Moreover, EPA was allowed to overcharge as a nleans of rcplenishins its cleanup tirr.rcl ard punishing nor,- complying Dusinesses.

The threat of prolongecl multi-party litigation was an even bigger cleterrent to reiiance on Superiurrci. Because any business in a conl,anlinatecl area could ne helcl resporrsible for cleanup costs, regardless oi its con- tribution, lawyers played a major r:ari in any SuperfurrC resoLrtion, as',to:iiltcrs sought to spread the blanre, anci laultless propefiy owncrs strugglco Lc.r avoid iiability. ln fact, Superflrrrd law spread potentiai liability to such a

140 Chapter 5 /lntergovernrnenLal Relations (lCR)

broad number of parties, rnany of whorr were wholly innocent, that any hope of quick resclution became mired in stalling tactlcs and litigation. Tlris legal wran- gling, along with third party lawsuits against polluters seeking damages i Lie to contami nation- related decl ines in property values, had given rise to Superfund's nickname as "Tlre Lawyers' Full Employment Act of 1980." One city tLa: Cherches talked to reportecl that its $30 rnillion cleanup had sparked an estirnatecl .$700 rnillion in civil la,"v suits, A study cornlrrissioned by the American lnsurance Association estimated that clean- ing up 1,800 Supe,furrcl sites would generate $8 billion irr legal lees.3

Finally, both litigation, and the oversiglrt arrd ad- ministrative steps i.at EPA requires, a.dci years to a typ- ical Superfuncl cleanup. Of the average 10 years taken to clean up a site, seven are spent orl str-rdy and assess- rnent, legal proceedings, and crafti"g a iemedy before the actual cleanr",p begins.a Jrrdging from thls tracl< record, if Cilbert-Mosley became a S.:perfund site, it would be years before cleanup coulcl even start.

According to lviayor Knight, who co,rsulted a num- ber of other mayors about Cilben-N4osley, cities witlr major contaminaiion problems iaced a bleak progno- sis, "l couldn't fird any successful nrooels." he recalled. "The only thing we found was faih.rre: clivision, frustra- tion, assignirrg bla:,-re, financial ruirr, ano, ultimately, the very worst thing ii:at can happen to oeople who love cities, decline."

Special Assistant Claser also placLld successive phonc calls in a desperate bid to ilnd a new a ternative:

What we kept hearing was, "l can't tell you what to do, but do so'.'reihing. Don't iet it go Superfuncl. Once it goes Suoerfund, you're in ro;ble." We knew we hacl to do something, br-rt nobccly knew what that sonrething yrould bc.

A Third Option

Cherches rejectec ooth of KDHE's options, and made up his mind fast. Vlithin a week of the t.isting Site lrrvestigation's rclcase. he decidccl to r sk a major leap fr-om existing prece.Jents. Although no one had accuscd Wichita of being a polluter. and aithough tlre city had not even been lisieci as a PRB Che:'clres proposed that the city take iu,ll ,csponsiblliry for thc Cilbert-Mosley cleanup. ln doing so, \Mclrita woulci at:empt to sidostep the time and reso;r'ces normally si)ent on Superfund-

related litigation. ard to create some lrechanism to get banks to start leniling in tlre contarniraieci area again.

The most obvious ancl immediate barrier to a city- led cleanup was firrding an acceptal:,e way to f)nance it. Cherches was cletermined that Coleman and other contribr.rtors woula pay as much as oossible for the ccntamination they had car-rsed. But tne city coulcl rot count ou reco.rping all cleani,c costs from re- sponsible pollLiters. Some likely €ontrioutors were no longer in business, for example, ancl otl'er's iacl<ecl the resources to sLrpport their share oi the cleanup. More- over, in order to sell the idea Io the s:ate arrd EPA, the city woulcl have :o prove it had the {uirds available to sLrpport wlrat could be a 20-year project without relying on uncer-,ain corporate contr:Dulions,

Cherches's stafi prepared a list of iiuancing alterna- tives, ancl tlre most powerful argurnerrt agairrst each, as follows:

. Establislt a sTrecial assessment distt'ict: All property owners in the area woulcl be charged an assess- ment to cover the cost of cleant'o. Likely to cre- ate an uproar over the inequity of rnaking a large group, conrprised mostly oi innocerrt property owners, pay for the pollLrtion oi a few,

. lssue bonds: Taxes would be raisecl throughout the city to help cay ofi the bonds. CoLrld cause a property iax revolt, and would require a change in state statute io allow boncls l'c be used for on- going maiirtenance of the clear-rup crograrn.

. Create a tax increment finance dlsrricti Would decl icate a rr i r crement of C i I bert-Mosley prope rty taxeE---bolstereti by the cleanup-to pay for the prograrn. An .,ntricd use of this concept, ancl, like the boncl oolicn, woulcl requiie a change in state legislation,

. County pav entire cost, witlt slale assistancer Based on ra:ionale that the econonic health oi Wichita is ;zrportant to the ent,re ctrunty. WoulrJ face certain oppositiorr frorn t['re county, which believed polluters should pay t,he tah. Tlre county might seek stare reimbursenrent.

. lrnpose a siatewide fax; Wouici spreacl the burden to lhe broaCesi nunrber of constituents. Certain to provoke strorg opposition frorn a r.rral state unln- terested in solving Wichita's incl.:stnal problenrs,

ln addition to rhe backing of tlre Wicrita City CoLin- cil, most of these plans would require tle approval of the Sedgwick Cournty Council, as well as the Wjchita

echanism to get tled area again. )arrier to a city- ,way to finance -'man ancl other :ossible for the the city could costs from re-

ibutors were lto thers

'acked the

cleanup. More- rte and EPA, the fr,rncls available project without :r-ttions, rancing alterna- agarnst each, aS

dct;Allproperty lrged an assess- p. Li<ely to cre- f rrraking a large locent ProPerty r [ew. C tlrrcLighoutthe Coulcl cause a

:qr-rire a change be usecl for on-

rp proSram. clislrict: Would

Mosley property

-to pay for the )ncepi, and, like r change in state

;tatc .rssistancel rornic ;.lealth of -, coLrnty. Would l county', which tab. Ti'e county

rread the burden uents. Certain to rural state unin-

rstrial problerns,

chita City Cor-in- the approval of I as :he Wiclrita

Sclrool Boarci, slr.rce their tax bcises would be ;iffectecl. Even with a financing mecn.lnism in place, tholrgh, a

ciV-lecl plan woirld face a number of additional obs:a-

cles. Politic.r ly, the concept probaoly wouldn't fly unless

Coleman and other contributors coulcl be helcl at least

partially acccuntable, "Some r:f the very early public

response was, 'Why woulcl the city Bet involvecl ancl cornmit our tax dollars?'" recallecl Claser, "We were thinking of signing on the dottec line to say we would be responsible for $20 million. Po,itically anel fiscally, that

doesn't wast'. li's not even reasonable." Unfortunately, if the city war-rted to take charge, it woulcl have to make a

cotnmitrnent tong beiore it knew llre lil<elihood of getiing

major coniribrrtors other than Colernan to pay. Cherches v,rould also have to convince EPA, wr-.icr

lrad a repLriation for being burea'.rcratic and inflexib e, that lhe ciiy nacl the resources and ihe commitment to take on such an unusual arr"tng,ement. There was ro record of any city ever lraving stepped in to accept lia- bility for a ccntaminatiorr problent it had not causecl.

ln addition, unless Wichita could come up with a way to revive lending in the ccntaminated clistrict, it wouldn't ma(e any dilference lrino was responsible for the cleanr"rp. Tne central business oistrict could uot atforci to wait 20 years {or life to relLlrn ic normal.

Finally, a survey of ihe obstacles macle it clear that the ultirnate success of the plan wouJd depend on a complex col aboration between rnultiple, ancl some- times opposeci, constituencies, including the city marr- ager's oifice, ihe city courrci[, ilre county commission, thc schooi board, lenders, Coienran, KDHE, tlre state legislature, the governor, ancl EPA.

KDHE na.cl already warned the city that it woulcl have to repoi: to EPA in Januar-v abor.rt progress at tire Cilbert-Mosley site. Unless a cleanup plan hacl taken shape, the state would recommend that EPA take over. l{Wichita uvas unableto solve any one of the obstac,es it faced, it wc.ruld have to coniront the inevitability of Superfund, wiih all that coulcl in:piy fcr the devaslation of the city's ccre.

Developing the Flan

Wichita City Manager Chris Cherches moved fas: to begin conscliclating support icr a city-lecl slsanLrp of the Cllben-Mosley site. ln order to present tlre plan to the vatious constituencies that would have to approve it, the city first hacl to decide how to oay {or it. After weigh- ing alternatives, Chcrches conclucled that creating a tax

5r" san Rosegrant I Ulichita Confronts Contamination 141

incrernent (iuance (TlF) district woLrlcl be the most equi- table and politically palatable way to raise funds. The city's approach, lrowever, was a novel tw,st on the traditional TIF concept. Typically, a TIF clistrict !s set up in an area slated for redevelopnrent. After ciiy-cacked improvements are in place, tire clifference between the olcl, depressed property assessments and the new, !rrghervalues that have resultecl from the improvements creates an increment tha! is then usecl to pay for the revitalization effort,

Wichita, by contrast, proposed what coulcl be callecl a tax "decrernent" plan: as a resu,l of the contamina- tion, the city would devalue al the property in rhe Cilbert-Mosiey area-for exampie. by the 40 percent that property lrad dropped at the 29th and Meaci con- tantinatiorr s,re-and then woulo irnmediately raise val- ues back to :heir pre-contarnination level, undei' the argurnent thai the city plan wor,rlci restore lost valr-re, The differencc' woulcl create the increment to lre set aside each year ic finarrce the cleanup, Although the ci:;, could find no exarnples of TIF being used to sLrpport en- vironmentai rernediation, Claser felt it was an ideal use of the concept. "This seemed like it reaiiy fit what the fLrll interrt cf TIF was clesigned to dc," he declarecl.

The city's ir:iial talks with tlie Kansas Department of Health ancl Environment (KDHE) about assuming re- sporrsibility fcr Cglbert-Mosley had been encouraging. With the TlF prcposal in place, KDHE became openl,v enthusiastic. Cherches began negotiating a plan for the state to oversee Wichita's cleanup in EPA's steacl, tlrereby avoiciing the agency's usual high oversight costs. After presentlng the proposed plan to the public, and winning tlre unanimous ap1:rovai of the city cour- cil, he next approached the locai financial community.

Lenders. Cherches soon discovered, made eage: allies. After al , thcy risked not only losing the value of their Cilbert-tulosley investments. but of being he,cl liable for the actual cleanup. Tl;.ey also irnderst:oocJ ti,e irnportance to Wichita's econonry-and to their own businesscs-of returning real estate activity in t^e contaminatcd area to normal. But oankers woulci not resLrme lerrdirg until they had some sort of legal protection frorn cleanup liability in place.

The concepi that the city ancl tne ienders deviscd :o satisfy this neecl was cleceptively sirnple. lnnocent prcp- erty owners, including residents, businesses, and banks. could applv to the city for a docr.rmont called the Cer- tificate ancl Release for Environncntal Conclitions. lf granted, the tlccument would release the holder from any cleanirp l;anility. With sr,rch a release in hand, prop-

erties cotlld a6ain be bought anrl sold without the

142 Cir.rpter 5 /lntergoverrtntental Relaticns ( CR)

specter r:i pctential SupeIfLr'1ri iability. But wlrlle tne banking con'tnunity overall erlbraced the plan, li v;oulcl not implenent it until the ci';y ia(l receivecl EPA's as- surance lhat it would not take over the site, negotie:ed firrn agreen'ents with KDHE ancl Coleman, ancl pushed through tlie ch.rnges in state law trecessaty to allo'* Lax incrernc,'i i narrcing to be usecl ior a long-terrn proiect.

Final Negotiations

Cettirrg EPA's backing w€is easier tharr the c:ty rad expeciec. Cherches proposed thatWichita woulcl follow all thc, us.rai EPA steps arrcl recLr tements in cleanirrg r.rp Cilbert-Mosley, bLrt r.vith KDHE acting .rs the prima.ty oversight aee:rcy. TlrroughoLri the process, tlte city wculd repolt regr,larly to EPA on its p"ogress. Altlrough tlre cir.y hacl ex1:ectecl some op1:osition, EPA actually hacl ;: gre.rt deal to gain ancl very little to iose: lf the city succeerlecl, the agency could cleclarea victoryrvith minimalex.Dense or eltbrt or.i ,ts part. Conversety,, if the plan failecl, tlrere was nol!-' ng to keep EPA fron: stepping in and imple- rnentirrg S.,nerfund. After jus: one rneeting in late November. illorris Kay, director of EPA's for.rr-state Region Vll, agreeci i,1 principle to support both the city-led p an and the state's otter to ov€Isee the process, AlthcLrgh therc was .ro written agreenent guaranteeing that lpA woulcl not intervene, Kay assr.r:ecl the city that as lor.:g as it was operating, according to agency requirernents, lt wolilcl no: irrtercecle.

With EPA's sLrpport secure. tie city still faced a rnajor legislative challenge. A Kansas stale law designecl to ensure iiscal responsibility, the Cash Basis and 3r-rclget IaW wor.rlcl rrot let local governr'i'tent comn'rit ope,ating revenues beyond one year, Wiclrita neeciexl an exceDlicn to that l.irv, ancl an amenrlrnent to'llF larv, in order to ire able to r--orrmit funds raised ironr a TIF district to a long- term env rorrmental cleanup, \tithout the charrg,es, the city wor:icl ire Lrnable to co|ltracl with KDHE to take on and finarice rvlral coulcl be a 2O-year effort.

Cetiing legislative approral of thc TIF bill prcn::secl to be a struggie. The Cash Basis lirw was, in Chercires's words, a "sacred cow" that |he legislature was ioathe to toucl.r. ln aCdition, thc traditiona! antagonism that existecl betwec,n .i b.in Wir:hita ancl ihe t.rrgely rur.rl legisle.:i-rrc ,,vas cert...in io complicate the bill's chances for passage.

The city hacl to clispel the inrpressiorr that its plari m.ght be gearecl in Coleman's favor, .r difficult task witlr the company's l'ability agreeme:rt s(,ll in negotiation. More- over, hecause Kansas's pari-tinre icgislature mel only

irom Janirar,v through April, tlre city had a lirnited win- dow oi opporiiinity to prove the merits of its plan.

Wichira's credibility wasn't heipetl in March v,lrer. both the co.irrty assessor and tne s(ate property valiiaticn director declared unworkable the city's original proyrosar to estabtis^ a rax incrementby first owering and therr rais- ing assessecl property values, ln i:s place, three Sedgw ck County leg:s ators responsible icr reviewing dre T,F bi:l worked witlr the city to ctaft a ltew amendrnent that a.l- lowecl rnrlnicipalities in the state that met narrolvly de- iined requirements to eanrark 2C percent oi a specia ly createcl Tl: cl,strict's base year property taxes, olt a:t ar- nual basis, rorenvironmer tal cleanirps. lf thebill passecl, Wichita woirld be able to reserve up to 20 percent of tl'e first year's Cilcert-Mosley prollerty tax revenltes tc r.rse for grouncuiater cleanup each -vear, for the next 20 yeai's.

On Ma:cr: 26. Wichjta sigrec a consenl decree rvith KDHE, spelling out the city's responsibilities, what KDHE's oversight obligations rvould be, and how t,re Certificate alrd Release progra.nl would work. Br"rt tne major obsL:cle to legislative approval, the Colernan agreemen:, was not resolved until Apr'l 23, slrghlry more than a week before the legis,ature adjourneo. The agreement Cividecl the contarnir-ratecl site into tlree zorres: Co ernan agreed to p.ry al: cle.rtrup costs ior tl're area where r was tlre main po luteu it would split costs with the city in a secotrcl area where it was a ccn- tributor tc ccntanrinationi arrcl tne city wpr-rlcl be re- sponsible for cleanup and cost recovely in tlre fin.rl area, wlrere most of the pol u:ion came frotn otre: sourcos. n acidition, the camping equipment nranuiac- turel agreed ;o pay $1 million :or the initial Rer.'reclia lnvestigati oniFeasi bil ity Str,rcly recui red by EPA.

AlthoLrgh Special Assistant Claser hacl expectecl the

Colenran negotiations to be nerhaps tlre biggest i,.arrier to settlemert, the manufacturer aciually had good r.ause to setlle. The. agreement allowecl Coleinan to convey a rcsponsible civic and environmental image, an intpoi'- tant consicleration for a maker of outdoor eclr.ripnrerrt. In aclclit,or, if Gilbcrt-Mosley iracl become a Superiurrci site, Cc;leman woulci have iaced substantially h g',e, costs, and would have been 'e[t vulnerable to ;t lrost endless thirci-party lawsuits. in faci, Coleman lracl alreacly been slred by ploperty owrrers seeking d.rrlages due to ccntarnination-relatecl declines in propertv values. "l fcel we got a prelty gooc Ceal frorn Colemar," saicl city ntto:ney Tlromas Povrcli. "They neeciec it as badly as v;e did."

One v;eek after thc Colernan ngreetnent was sigrtcd, the Karrsas legislatute approved tlre TIF hill, and

acl a liq.ited win. s of its plan. I in March when )roperty valuation ; origi'.al proposai 'ring ancl then rais e, three Sedgwick

=wing tre TIF bill renciment that al- met narrowly de- :ent of a specially I taxes, on an an- . lf the bill passed, 2C percentofthe

( revenues to use the neK 20 yean. rsent decree with nsibiiities, what ce, ancl how the ld yrorl<. But the al, tlre Coleman rpril 23, slightly a acljor,rrned, The I site into three nup costs for the woulcl split costs 'e it was a con- ty rvo,,rlcl be re- rery ir': the final ame fronr other prnent nranufac- irritial ,lemedial lby EPA. ad expected the e biggest banier hacl good cause

nan lo convey a nage, an impor- Ioor equipment, ,me a Superfund ;tantiaily higher rrable to almost

Colenran hacl eeki,.E dartrages

'es in propcrty from Cr)lel.nan," ey neeciecl it as

rent v!,as signeci, r TIF rriil, and

Cherches beqan meeting again urith the fittancial ccrn-

munity the next clay. On May 14, several major )oca [3nks signecl an agreement not tc refuse to lend on the

security of rea properties within Gilbert-Mosley if the owner hacl obtained a Certificate and Release for Envi-

ronmental Ccnclitiorrs. With the start of the Certificate and Release progratx on August 2, there was no longei'

a reason fol contamination, alone, to block real estate trans'actions :n the Cilbert-Moslev slte"

Epilogue

ln August 1992, one year after the Certificate ano Release progrann began, Iife had begun to return to normal itr the Giibert-Mosley area;

r The city of Wichita had granrecl more than 800 Certificate and Release forn:s. Some property owneis just outside of the contaminatecj area had petitioned for inclusion, hoping to receive cer- tificates :hat would remove all stigma of poten- tial llability from their prcperties,

. Bank l\f one of Wichita's rriajor lenders, had closeci 11 loans in Cilbert-,\4osley for a total of $6.4 nrillion.

. Developer David Burk, who recelved the firstCer- tificaie anci Releasefrom the city. hacl wooed back inveslors to his redevelol)'nent project, and hacl openecl for.rr restaurants anci two retailstores in the contan-linated area.

. The thre.e plaintiffs in the iirst court case against Coleman received only $86,000, about one-fif:h of what Lhey had reqr-rested, after the jury ruicd that as a result of the ciiy-led cleanup plar, po I I utiorr -cau sed da mage tct clowntown propeny 'values was temporary, not permanent. Thornas Powell, wno had left his po-.ition as city attorne-v to enter private practice, appeared as an expcri witness on Colemant behali to describe how the city plan rad restored property yalues,

Chapter 5 Review Questions 143

r Camp, D:esser & McKee, lnc,, the environmenta consultant hired by the city, was about to release the results of the Remeclial lnvestigatiory'Feasibi:- ity Stucly, a site analysis that tvoically takes as long as five years to complete under Superfund.

. The business community hac begun pushing ward on rnore modest plans roriedeveiopn-

"The contamination is not even something t widely discussed anymore," declared Mayr Knight, "yet it could have oeen a total ca for the city."

Cilbert-i\losley was still a depressed area, been b-efore the contamination was discov, with the city's plan in place, Kn:ght once i hope that the core downtown area might , nated. 'lf peop!e are sufficiently committer ing complicaiec clrallenges, they can do e> things," he declared, "l believe th s is a this commr.lni:y's history wher we dir extraordinary."

Notes

i, Congress created Superfirnd, the Comprelrensive Environrnental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA), to give EPA rhe re$ources io clean up hazardous waste sites na- tionwide. Six years late; Congres passed the Su- pefi.rncj Amendments and Reauthorization Act. o: .l 986 in an attetnpt to improve what critics had

character:zecl as a sluggish ancl ineffective program. 2. Davicl R, Tripp, "Wichita S:rikes Back at the

Blob," To.:<ics Law Reporter, June 25, 1991 . 3. Marc K. Landy and Mary llague, "Private lnter'-

ests ancl Superfuncl," The Public lntercst, No. 108, Sumrner 1992.

4, E. Donald Elliott, "Superfunci: EPA Success, Na- tional f,ebacle?" Nafura/ Resources & Environ- ment, Vol. 6, No, 3, Winter I992.

Chapter 5 Review Questions

What is federalisrn? What was the Founding Fathers' rationalc for establishing U.S.

-qovernment in this iederal rnanner? What is the difference between I'ederalisni and IGR? Why are both so critical to effec- iive program perfor:nance in the public sector today?

144 Clrapter 5 / lrrtergr>vernrnental Relations (lCR)

Accorcling to Conian. what is "opoortunistic t'ederalism"'l How does it cliiTer fl'oil "co- operative federali-.nr"'l How ck:es Colan explain tlte sigr:ificance of each iutd th'eir roles in IGR? In what ways did tl:e Wichita case stLicly illustrate some ol the characteristics and dilem- rnas of lnodern :ntergover"nmental relations'l Who were the lCR actols in thi.s crse. and how did they "calculate" their opportunitie.s to secure their own interests? Do you think they successfully handled ani :'esolvecl the complex is.sue? In particular, rvhy were public administrators' roles so clitical? What does the ci-ise stutly say about the role and importance of expert.s irrvolvec in IGR? Who were the experts from both the public and private sectors in this case? Horv did they cleri v e theil profe.ssional stanciarcls? What doe.s the case study say aboLit the positive aspects of opportuni.stic feiieralisrn and its role in influene:ing outcornes? Can you pinpoint whele the.re opporturi.stic dimensions of tGR are pl'e.sent in Case Study 5'l

)1.

OMB ACIR project grants peribrmance management c ros.scuttin g r eq uirerren ts instrumental acivocacy cooperative state policymaking

Key Terms cooperati ve federali sm

opportunistic federalism intergoveirirnental rel ations dual federalisr:r categorical grants

block gLants Kestnbiuun Report

Suggestions for Further Reading Some of tl:e best up-to-clate soul'ces of information on the chairglng world of intclgovernmental relairons can be iot:ne in The Natiotiti! ,lournal. Goveming, and Prrblirr.s. Timothy Conlan. Nev Federqli.sm: In- tersovernrnatttal, Rejonn frtsm Nixon to Reu;qatt (Washingir:r:. D,C.: Brookings. 1998) offbrs one of the be.st accoril:is oi ICR clurin-u tne past lbur decadcs, and for a fine aualysis of the development of Ameiica:r i'ederalisnr. read Samuel H. Reer, 7b Make a Nqtiott: Tlw Reclistt;rerv o! Americqit Federalisn (Car:r- bridge. Mtrss.: [Iarvarci University Press, 1993) as well as Mariira Derthick. Keeping the Compoutd Re- publicctn: /Isslrus on Atneriutti Fecleralism (Was:r- ington. D.C.: Brookirrgs Institution. 2005).

-I'here are also a ntrmber of excellent "overviel.s"

available, :nciucling Thomas Gais and James Fossett "Fedcralisrn uld the Executive Branch." The E.uecu- tive lJrcutc'lt, editecl by Joel D. A:erbach ancl Mark A.

fiscai disregard nnfunded rnaniates intergovemmental analysis program waivers third-party governance network management

Peterson (New York: Oxford, 2005). pp. 486-.524: Deil S. Wright. Unelerstcnclittg lntergovernnrcnto! Relcilions, 4:h ed. (Monterey. Caiif.: Brooks/Ccle Publi.shing, 1995); Paul E. Peterson, What Price Fed- eralisrn? (\Yashington, D.C.: The Brookings Institu- tion, 1995): ltobert Stokcr', Re!uctunt Parrners (Pittsburgh, Pa: Pittsburgh University Press. 199.): and David 11. Berman, und Michael McGuirc, "Re- lating to Other Organizations." in Charldean Newel[. ed.,'tlrc Efibctive Local Go,",e rnnrcnt Muwger, 3rd ed. (Washington, DC: ICMA. 20C4). pp. l8l-20,S: and Davicl B. Walker, The Rebirth o.f Fecleraiisnr (Chatham. N,J.; Chatham Llouse, 1995). For more current "overYiews." see Ilussell I-. Hanson, ed,. Governing Partner.s (Bou1der. Colo.: Westview, 1998)l RobeLt Ir. Nagel. The Iniplosion of Anrerittitt ITederalisn (Oxford: Oxford Univer.sity Pres.s. 2002): Paul Posner', The Politic.r oJ the Fetlercri

and ior:s

ttco-

roles

lern-

rities

J the

GR? ,dicl

rp. 486-524; 'ot,enititeillal Brooks/Cole at Price I'ed- lings In.stitu- ttt Partner.s )ress.

I 991): :Cnli'e. "Re- lean Newell. lanage4 3rd p. l8--208; Fecleralisnt

i), For n'rore :lanson, ed., : Westview, ofAtiierican rsity Press, the I ecleral

M o ncla t a s : W I t i t he r F e de rcilis n r ? ( \&hshington, D.C. : Georgetown University Press, 1998); John T. Noo- nan, Ncrr'olpr)'tg the Nc.ti()n's Pow'er (Berkeley: Uni- versily of Calitolnia Press. 2003): Beryl Radin "Management and lntergovenr me n'ral Relations, " in Inrcryove nutrctfial Relations .for the 2lst Century, edited by Paul Posner andTirn Conlan (Washingron, D,C.l Brookings. 2008): and Robert Agranoff and Michael McGuire. "American Federalism and the Search tbr Models of Managemenl." Public Adtnin- istrulktt Reilet, 61, (Novernber/December 200i), pp, 671-81, Also two Web pages offer cunent IGR resources: The U,S. House of Representatives Committee on Governmeni Reform (reform. house.gov/TlPRC/) and the Institute of Intergoveln- mental Relal"ions (rvww. iigr.co/publication_detail.php. publication= 193).

Serious students of IGR also should begin by reed- ing the U.S. Con.stitution and The Feclerali,tt Papers. The Kestnbaum Commission Report (June l9-55), whicli contains information stili helpful tbr under'- standing moden: lGR. Other basic documents on IGR are conttiined ir: Richard J. Stillnan, Bctsic Doa,tntents of Anerictrtr Public Admini.stration Since 1950 (New York: Holmes and Meier, 1982). Laurence J. O'Toote, Jr.. ed.. Anrcicur lutergovernmental Refu- tioru. 3rd ed, (Washington, D.C.: Congres.sional Quar- terly. 2000); Lervis G. Beuder ani James A. Stevel, Administering the New P'ederalism (Boulder, Colo.: Westyiew Press, 1986);as wcll as DeilS. Wright arld Harvey t,, White. eds,, Ft:deralism arul Intergovent-

Sugg,estions ior Further Re"rcling 145

nvntal Relqtiorrs {Washington. D.C.: Atnerican Society tbr Public Administration. 1984) oft'ei outstanding col- lectious of ciassic IGR essays. For survey BSSays on federalism by drsringuished scholals in this field. see the

entire issue oiT!ru Arutals r$tlrc Americun Acuden* oJ Politic al and S oc ict I S c ie nce (May t 990), eclited by John Kincaid, and ellii tlecl "American Federalism: The Thi Ld Century," and U.S. Govemment Accounting Olfice. Highlights oj'l GAO Svnryositun Atlclrcssing Key Chul- lenges h ut lntergovertunentnl Settittg (Washington. D.C.: Government Plinting Ofi'ice, 2003), GAO- 03-365. Where we are with the research in this tield today is sumnrarizecl by Vincent L. Matando and Patri- cia S. Florestano, "lntergovemn:ental lvlanagement: The

State of the Discipline," in Naomi B, Lynn and Aalon Wildavsky, ecis., Public Administratiort: The Stote r$ tlrc Discipline (Chatharn, N.J,: Chatharr House, 1990).

For an outstnrxling model of acadentic rcsearch on federalism and IGR, see Mmtha Dertnick. The Influertce

of Fedcrcl Grilts (Cambridge, Marss.: Harv-ard Uni- versity Press, 1970). Recently some olthe best insights into cunent is.sues facing IGR cirn be lbrrnd in discLts- sions of Krtrina as well es Homeiand Security prob- lem.s. such as Martha Derthick. "Where Federalism Didn' t Fail, " P ub I i c A dnt i ni st rs ti<t rt Re v i ew', 67. spec i al issue (Noveinber/December 2007), pp. 535-46 or in Kiki Caruson and Susan MacManus. "Managemenl Challengas in the Tt'enches:An Intergovernmental Per- spective on Flomeland Security, "Public A&ninistrer t ion R e v i ew', 66 (July/August 2006), pp. 522-36.

W3 Discussion "Ethics in the Workplace"

· Identify and discuss the importance of ethics in the workplace.

· What do you think the business world would be like without them? Why?

Please respond to the initial question by day 5 and be sure to post two additional times to peers and/or instructor by day 7. The initial post by day 5 should be a minimum of 150 words. If you use any source outside of your own thoughts, you should reference that source. Include solid grammar, punctuation, sentence structure, and spelling.

Study 5: Wichita Confronts Contaminations

Read Case Study 5 in your textbook and answer the following questions:

· Identify the various actors of intergovernmental relations involved in the case

· In general, what does this case tell you about the complexity of IGR in this country and the work of public administrators in the 21st century?

W3 Discussion "Ethics in the Workplace"

Identify and discuss the importance of ethics in the workplace.

What do you

think the business world would be like without them? Why?

Please respond to the initial question by day 5 and be sure to post two additional times to peers

and/or instructor by day 7. The initial post by day 5 should be a minimum of 150 words. If you use

any

source outside of your own thoughts, you should reference that source. Include solid grammar,

punctuation, sentence structure, and spelling.

Study 5:

Wichita Confronts Contaminations

Read Case Study 5 in your textbook and answer the following questio

ns:

Identify the various actors of intergovernmental relations involved in the case

In general, what does this case tell you about the complexity of IGR in this country and the

work of public administrators in the 21st century?

Please respond to the initi

al question by day 5 and be sure to post two additional times to peers

and/or instructor by day 7. The initial post by day 5 should be a minimum of 150 words. If you use any

source outside of your own thoughts, you should reference that source. Include sol

id grammar,

punctuation, sentence structure, and spelling.

W3 Discussion "Ethics in the Workplace"

 Identify and discuss the importance of ethics in the workplace.

 What do you think the business world would be like without them? Why?

Please respond to the initial question by day 5 and be sure to post two additional times to peers

and/or instructor by day 7. The initial post by day 5 should be a minimum of 150 words. If you use any

source outside of your own thoughts, you should reference that source. Include solid grammar,

punctuation, sentence structure, and spelling.

Study 5: Wichita Confronts Contaminations

Read Case Study 5 in your textbook and answer the following questions:

 Identify the various actors of intergovernmental relations involved in the case

 In general, what does this case tell you about the complexity of IGR in this country and the

work of public administrators in the 21st century?

Please respond to the initial question by day 5 and be sure to post two additional times to peers

and/or instructor by day 7. The initial post by day 5 should be a minimum of 150 words. If you use any

source outside of your own thoughts, you should reference that source. Include solid grammar,

punctuation, sentence structure, and spelling.

blog1

Get help from top-rated tutors in any subject.