FT 19.04 The Fremont Parks and Recreation Act of 2021 (Statute)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 09:21:44 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Government
  Regional Governments (Moderators: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee, Lumine)
  FT 19.04 The Fremont Parks and Recreation Act of 2021 (Statute)
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: FT 19.04 The Fremont Parks and Recreation Act of 2021 (Statute)  (Read 500 times)
Anna Komnene
Siren
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,654


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: February 25, 2021, 08:38:33 PM »
« edited: April 24, 2021, 06:07:55 PM by Anna Komnene »

Quote
AN ACT
to fund an expansion of parks and recreational services at the local level
Quote
Section 1: Title
1. This act is titled "The Fremont Parks and Recreation Act of 2021" and may also be cited as the "Park Act 3.0".
Section 2: Parks and Recreation
1. An addition $50,000,000 will be allocated to the Corporation for Fremont Parks and Recreation (CFPR), of which no less than 90% must be allocated towards town and city governments.
2. Cities and towns may be eligible for a regional grant not exceeding $3,000,000 for the purposes of building new parks and maintaining existing recreational sites.  All maintenance and construction plans must receive approval from the CFPR prior to obtaining the grant.
3. The CFPR shall be entrusted to prioritize eligible grants for park projects from communities with high rates of poverty and crime, as well as communities with a large population of residents under the age of 35.
4. No more than 20% of the allocated funds may be used in any given year.
5. The CFPR will disband once the funds have been exhausted, unless replenished at a later time.
Sponsor: YE

The floor is open!
Logged
YE
Modadmin
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,648


Political Matrix
E: -4.90, S: -0.52

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: February 25, 2021, 08:59:15 PM »

This is a repeat of an old bill I wrote twice once as FM and once during my second tenure as speaker.

Question is the cost and the fine details here because I think the rest of self explanatory.
Logged
Unconditional Surrender Truman
Harry S Truman
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,142


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: February 25, 2021, 09:15:50 PM »

I have always been a supporter of our local parks systems, and this bill nicely follows the model of local leadership supported by regional funds. I intend to support this legislation.
Logged
Amanda Huggenkiss
amanda dermichknutscht
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 658


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: February 26, 2021, 02:46:05 AM »

This is good, in general. I am worried about substance abuse in public parks, which may happen in places where crime is already high. Children and families should be able to enjoy public parks. Is there a way this act can deal with that problem?
Logged
Battista Minola 1616
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,282
Vatican City State


Political Matrix
E: -5.55, S: -1.57

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: February 26, 2021, 07:57:46 AM »

I consider public parks a great thing for the community and I like local development, so this has my support. I think amanda raises a valid point (and actually, substance abuse can happen in areas with relatively lower crime too) however.
Logged
Anna Komnene
Siren
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,654


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: February 27, 2021, 02:23:57 AM »

I suppose information could be posted about addiction treatment and recovery centers, parks could hold pain management activities like yoga, and/or staff could be trained on how to deal with overdoses/stocked up on overdose reversal drugs like Naloxone and Narcan?
Logged
Amanda Huggenkiss
amanda dermichknutscht
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 658


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: February 27, 2021, 03:32:29 AM »

I suppose information could be posted about addiction treatment and recovery centers, parks could hold pain management activities like yoga, and/or staff could be trained on how to deal with overdoses/stocked up on overdose reversal drugs like Naloxone and Narcan?

Yes, for example. Maybe we should perhaps also keep in mind that substance abuse, and substance abuse in public places, in particular, is a more complicated issue. It should not be the aim of this bill to completely solve this issue, but some parks already have a problem with used needles and syringes, so I think it would be better if the bill addresses this in some form.
Logged
YE
Modadmin
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,648


Political Matrix
E: -4.90, S: -0.52

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: February 27, 2021, 10:15:08 PM »

Are parks particularly known for substance abuse to the point where we shouldn’t build them as is?
Logged
Amanda Huggenkiss
amanda dermichknutscht
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 658


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: March 01, 2021, 07:48:51 AM »

No, but I don't think that this was anyone's suggestion. As I stated earlier, it is not the mission of this park bill to solve the issue of substance abuse in its entirety. This bill looks good as it is, and while it would be nice to have some provision dealing with the discussion we had here, I understand the sponsor's reluctance to offer one. Also, after some consideration, I admit that it probably might anyway be better to have a bill against substance abuse in public parks on its own rather than having a half-baked solution as an of an appropriations bill (though I would refer to a more senior member of the game with a better knowledge of the drug laws of Frémont and Atlasia).

Logged
Anna Komnene
Siren
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,654


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: March 04, 2021, 01:44:19 AM »

@Amanda - Skimming through the regional statute, there's a bill on opioid rehab access and prescription restrictions, but there's definitely room for expansion. It's not unheard of for parks to have needle issues in areas with high addiction rates and to do things like needle disposal, but whether or not it makes sense to include things like that in this bill or address it in a different bill, idk.

Does anyone have any other thoughts on this bill?

I'm curious about the reasoning behind 90% to city/town governments? Not necessarily opposed to it just wondering since it's a high proportion.
Logged
Battista Minola 1616
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,282
Vatican City State


Political Matrix
E: -5.55, S: -1.57

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: March 04, 2021, 05:41:16 AM »

I'm curious about the reasoning behind 90% to city/town governments? Not necessarily opposed to it just wondering since it's a high proportion.

It's the same proportion allocated in the original Parks Act and in the Parks Act 2.0 - I assume YE felt no need to change.

Also, I have a question: does the CFPR administered regional parks (in the sense of protected natural areas) as well?
Logged
YE
Modadmin
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,648


Political Matrix
E: -4.90, S: -0.52

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: March 04, 2021, 04:30:30 PM »

Based on the wording, the CFPR isn't exactly geared towards regional protected parks so no.
Logged
Anna Komnene
Siren
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,654


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: March 15, 2021, 01:50:29 AM »

I motion for a final vote. 24 hours for objections.
Logged
Anna Komnene
Siren
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,654


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: March 16, 2021, 04:38:02 PM »

With no objections, we'll now have a final vote on this bill. Members please vote AYE, NAY, or ABSTAIN.

Quote
AN ACT
to fund an expansion of parks and recreational services at the local level
Quote
Section 1: Title
1. This act is titled "The Fremont Parks and Recreation Act of 2021" and may also be cited as the "Park Act 3.0".
Section 2: Parks and Recreation
1. An addition $50,000,000 will be allocated to the Corporation for Fremont Parks and Recreation (CFPR), of which no less than 90% must be allocated towards town and city governments.
2. Cities and towns may be eligible for a regional grant not exceeding $3,000,000 for the purposes of building new parks and maintaining existing recreational sites.  All maintenance and construction plans must receive approval from the CFPR prior to obtaining the grant.
3. The CFPR shall be entrusted to prioritize eligible grants for park projects from communities with high rates of poverty and crime, as well as communities with a large population of residents under the age of 35.
4. No more than 20% of the allocated funds may be used in any given year.
5. The CFPR will disband once the funds have been exhausted, unless replenished at a later time.
Logged
Battista Minola 1616
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,282
Vatican City State


Political Matrix
E: -5.55, S: -1.57

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: March 16, 2021, 04:51:29 PM »

Aye
Logged
YE
Modadmin
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,648


Political Matrix
E: -4.90, S: -0.52

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: March 16, 2021, 04:51:43 PM »

Aye.
Logged
Anna Komnene
Siren
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,654


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: March 16, 2021, 05:04:12 PM »

Aye
Logged
Unconditional Surrender Truman
Harry S Truman
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,142


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: March 16, 2021, 06:19:51 PM »

Aye.
Logged
Amanda Huggenkiss
amanda dermichknutscht
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 658


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: March 17, 2021, 09:38:52 AM »

Aye
Logged
AustralianSwingVoter
Atlas Politician
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,956
Australia


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: March 18, 2021, 02:09:09 AM »

Yea
Logged
Anna Komnene
Siren
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,654


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: March 19, 2021, 07:02:42 PM »
« Edited: March 19, 2021, 07:06:21 PM by Anna Komnene »

With 7 votes in favor, this bill passes the Frémont Parliament.

Quote
AN ACT
to fund an expansion of parks and recreational services at the local level
Quote
Section 1: Title
1. This act is titled "The Fremont Parks and Recreation Act of 2021" and may also be cited as the "Park Act 3.0".
Section 2: Parks and Recreation
1. An addition $50,000,000 will be allocated to the Corporation for Fremont Parks and Recreation (CFPR), of which no less than 90% must be allocated towards town and city governments.
2. Cities and towns may be eligible for a regional grant not exceeding $3,000,000 for the purposes of building new parks and maintaining existing recreational sites.  All maintenance and construction plans must receive approval from the CFPR prior to obtaining the grant.
3. The CFPR shall be entrusted to prioritize eligible grants for park projects from communities with high rates of poverty and crime, as well as communities with a large population of residents under the age of 35.
4. No more than 20% of the allocated funds may be used in any given year.
5. The CFPR will disband once the funds have been exhausted, unless replenished at a later time.

Frémont House of Commons
Passed 7-0-0 in the Frémont Parliament Assembled,

Logged
Pages: [1]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.047 seconds with 13 queries.