“Servant Leadership”?by Gail Riecken, Editor Of The CCC Statehouse NewsJanuary 25, 2019Have you heard the term “Servant leadership”? I am hearing it more and more from newer politicians. At first, I thought it was because they didn’t want to call themselves politicians, as the term seems to have some negativity these days.I now think there is another reason, a legitimate reason. These politicians don’t want any confusion about why they are in politics. They want you and me to appreciate they are in their positions to serve us, their constituents, and they are serious about it.The term – “Servant leadership” – what difference does it really make? I thought about that when I read a recent article about a conversation between two legislators on the floor of the State legislatureOn January 17 Rep. Ryan Hatfield presented an amendment to HB1006 on second reading. The amendment language would mandate a certain annual report from the Department of Child Services (DCS) to the Commission on the Improvement of the Status of Children. The intent of the report would be to monitor caseworkers’ caseload so that they are able to do a good job for the children in their charge.Rep. Dave Frizzell, standing in opposition to Hatfield’s amendment, said according to the Statehouse File report, “Rep. Hatfield, I can make this promise to you, that we will update people about what’s happening with our caseworkers”.I think he was really saying, “We will let you and the public know what we want you to know when we want to tell you”.“Servant Leadership”, then, would have addressed the response a little differently. The response would have been direct, honest, respectful and trustworthy. It would have focused on the people’s interest to have information.A“Servant leader” might have presented a solution. It might have been to bring the amendment language before the legislative council for a summer study committee where participants might come up with compromise.I am convinced the concepts of “Servant leadership” have real value in politics in the legislature. At least that focus, that reminder, would go a long way toward doing more than making promises.FacebookTwitterCopy LinkEmail
FacebookTwitterLinkedInEmailPrint分享Cedar Rapids Gazette:Less than 1 percent of Central Iowa Power Cooperative’s energy comes from the sun, not all that rare in a state with less than 100 megawatts of installed solar. However, all that could change soon as CIPCO hopes next year to flip the switch on a solar project that essentially would double the state’s solar capacity.The Iowa Utilities Board in December approved plans to shut down Duane Arnold Energy Center in 2020, five years sooner than officials with CIPCO had anticipated, leaving the utility in need of a source of energy for the approximately 120 megawatts of power the utility receives from the state’s sole nuclear power facility — about one-third of the company’s 2018 energy portfolio.Wapello Solar, an 800-acre, 100-megawatt solar project in Louisa County, easily would become the state’s largest solar installation and more than double the installed solar in Iowa.Iowa’s status as a wind energy leader began with the 1983 adoption of a renewable portfolio standard, or RPS, the first of its kind in the nation. Wind made up less than 1 percent of the power generated in Iowa in 1990. By 2016, that figure jumped to 37 percent of state generation, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, a federal entity that tracks nationwide energy use. In the same time frame, coal — a fossil fuel commonly offset by renewable sources — dropped from 86 percent of the state’s electricity generation to almost half that, at 47 percent.But as wind power has flourished, Iowa’s solar portfolio has remained relatively meager — until recently. Jason Hall, founder of North Liberty-based Moxie, a 10-year-old solar company, said the declining cost of solar — the price has dropped from about $8 per watt a decade ago to around $3 per watt — is a key reason for growing interest in solar arrays. “In 2008, there was no solar in Iowa. We didn’t do any,” Hall said, noting that the company’s primary function at the time was focused on energy-efficiency audits. By the end of 2019, Moxie will have completed more solar projects than the company has built in all previous years of operations combined, Hall said.More: The game-changing spark Iowa’s solar industry needs could be in Louisa County Known for wind, new Iowa project may herald start of solar development in the state
7SHARESShareShareSharePrintMailGooglePinterestDiggRedditStumbleuponDeliciousBufferTumblr continue reading » Prominent think tank supports bipartisan Senate reg-relief bill: A key part of CUNA’s 360° advocacy includes building broad coalitions of support for our priorities. We’re proud to note that Third Way, a Washington D.C. think tank from the political center recently came out in support of the Main Street regulatory relief bill S. 2155. We welcome its backing as we continue to push for Senate passage of this vital legislation. Third Way, a strong supporter of Dodd-Frank, noted that the bill is designed to give community banks and credit unions more room to lend. I couldn’t agree more. If you agree, take action today.CFPB pledges to focus on bad actors, tailor enforcement: For a long time, CUNA has been asking for less one-size-fits-all regulation by the CFPB—target the rulebreakers, but give the good guys like credit unions more breathing room. This week the CFPB’s interim director wrote an op-ed outlining a vision for the regulatory agency that sounds like it will get us closer to what credit unions want: clearer rules, a focus on the real consumer threats, and decision-making driven by qualitative data and consumer complaints, something CUNA has forcefully argued for.We’re hoping in that new spirit, the CFPB will take another look at how it characterizes overdraft services. So far, the bureau’s reports have relied on old data from a small number of big banks, and don’t reflect the more consumer-friendly way credit unions handle overdraft protection. The bureau already agreed this week to CUNA’s request to delay the implementation of a prepaid accounts rule, beyond even what we requested.