Supports graduate scholars pursuing a Master's or Professional degree who are committed to finding sustainable solutions and prepares them to be global sustainability leaders.
Supports doctoral scholars developing and implementing innovative sustainability ideas and becoming leaders in academia, business, government and non-governmental organizations.
Getting around without a car isn’t easy in many U.S. cities. People who rely on public transit often contend with many challenges, including decaying infrastructure, not having easy access to a transit stop, lack of system reliability, restrictions to how late or early a system operates, and often a lack of support to fund transit improvements. These difficulties can impact people in many ways, including their ability to access essential healthcare, jobs, and grocery stores. Ride-hailing companies like Uber and Lyft can pick up the slack from inadequate public transit, but they also present challenges, like being inaccessible to people with disabilities; lacking the incentive to work along unpopular routes; creating more emissions per mile traveled; and siphoning riders (and money) from public transit. One solution to these challenges is for transit agencies to enter into public-private partnerships with ride-hailing companies to expand public transit coverage.
Licensing public buildings and water towers for cell sites is common across the United States. However, the City of Madison (WI) and Madison Water Utility provide an instructive example of how a community can effectively negotiate and renegotiate its license agreements to realize the full value they provide telecommunications companies. This case is also an example of a community generating short-term revenue from private sources to support strategic municipal projects.
In the early 1990s, the City of Philadelphia became the first municipality to appoint a temporary public advocate to represent the interests of “small users,” residential customers and small businesses, during water rate-setting proceedings. It also established the role of a hearing officer whose function was to listen to testimony and provide a recommendation on water price during rate-setting cases.
The Philadelphia Water Department has the task of maintaining an aging water system while providing affordable service in a city where 26 percent of city residents live at, or below, the poverty line. Philadelphia Water had addressed water affordability through an assistance program. Residents below 250 percent of the federal poverty level could apply for the Water Revenue Assistance Program (WRAP), which provides $200 per year for water bills and $300 for past due balances. Despite this program, between April 2012 and January 2018, unpaid bills and water debt affected over 40 percent of Philadelphia households. Twenty percent of all household accounts or 86,000 customers, experienced at least one shutoff, and 40,000 households were eligible for shut offs as of May 2017. For the Philadelphia Water Department, unpaid bills and water debt represent over $242 million in uncollected revenue.
In the early 1990s, the Lansing Board of Water and Light (LBWL) pumped approximately 23 million gallons per day (gpd) for its customers, not quite half of its 50 million gpd capacity. The loss of large industries, a small population decline (7,000 people over 10 years), and more efficient plumbing technology had lowered the community’s water use. Worried about rising rates, LBWL used funding from the Tri-county Regional Planning Commission to convene a task force to explore options for generating new customers by providing water on a regional scale.
In 2012, water softening chemical prices increased, something that hit service providers in the center of Michigan’s lower peninsula particularly hard. These mid-Michigan utilities, clustered around the capital city of Lansing, draw water from the Saginaw Aquifer. Saginaw Aquifer water is particularly hard, and requires a number of chemical inputs to soften it for use and consumption. These rising chemical costs put extra pressure on water utilities as they attempted to distribute safe and high quality water, while keeping rate increases modest.
In the 1990s, Cincinnati, OH and Boone County, KY experienced differing development trends. Boone County—and its largest city, Florence – was growing 10-12 percent annually. The expansion of a regional international airport, the Greater Cincinnati Airport, and the complementary businesses it attracted aided in its growth.