ASPA NCAC Honors Paula Acevedo for Outstanding Service and Leadership

The ASPA National Capital Area Chapter is proud to recognize Paula Acevedo for her outstanding service, leadership, and dedication to both the chapter and the public service profession.

Paula has been a member of ASPA for 11 years and served on the NCAC Board of Directors for nine years, from 2017 to 2026. During her tenure, she played a critical role in supporting the chapter’s communications and member engagement efforts, serving as Communications Chair, Newsletter Managing Editor, and website manager.

Throughout her years of service, Paula consistently demonstrated a commitment to excellence and a willingness to step forward wherever support was needed. Her contributions helped strengthen communication with members, enhance the chapter’s visibility, and ensure important chapter information remained accessible and engaging.

Beyond her volunteer leadership, Paula exemplifies the values of public service in her professional role as a Grants Management Specialist at the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. During the unprecedented challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic, she continued to serve with dedication and professionalism while maintaining the positive, can-do attitude that colleagues and fellow board members have come to know and appreciate.

Paula’s leadership has been marked not only by her hard work and reliability, but also by her kindness, resilience, and unwavering commitment to supporting others. She has been a valued colleague, a trusted board member, and a role model for both public servants and ASPA members.

On behalf of the ASPA National Capital Area Chapter, we extend our sincere gratitude to Paula for her years of service and congratulate her on this well-deserved recognition.

Marcos Fabian Wins Third Place in the 2026 Student Essay Contest

NCAC congratulates Marcos Fabian for winning Third Place of the National Capital Area Chapter’s (NCAC) 2026 Public Administration Student Essay Contest for the essay Language and Robots: Children Words, Adult Prompts, and the New Human Capital

Marcos Fabian is a PhD candidate at the University of Maryland’s School of Public Policy and, along with the distinction of winning the Chapter’s Essay Contest, will receive a cash award of $750 that we hope will go toward furthering your education and a three-year membership to the American Society for Public Administration.

Marcos joined us at our Chapter’s Annual Meeting on June 4.

A link to view the recording of the meeting will be posted when we have it.

Congratulations, Marcos, on winning Third Place for your essay in our Chapter’s 2026 Student Essay Contest!

Lydia Woodley Wins Second Place in the 2026 Student Essay Contest

NCAC congratulates Lydia Woodley for winning First Place of the National Capital Area Chapter’s (NCAC) 2026 Public Administration Student Essay Contest for the essay The Storm Ends, Bureaucracy Begins: Rebuilding Recovery Around Social Equity

Lydia Woodley is a master’s student at the Trachtenberg School of Public Policy and Public Administration at The George Washington University and, along with the distinction of winning the Chapter’s Essay Contest, will receive a cash award of $1,500 that we hope will go toward furthering your education and a three-year membership to the American Society for Public Administration.

Lydia joined us at our Chapter’s Annual Meeting on June 4.

A link to view the recording of the meeting will be posted when we have it.

Congratulations, Lydia, on winning Second Place for your essay in our Chapter’s 2026 Student Essay Contest!

Zara Qaiser Wins First Place in the 2026 Student Essay Contest

NCAC congratulates Zara Qaiser for winning First Place of the National Capital Area Chapter’s (NCAC) 2026 Public Administration Student Essay Contest for the essay Rethinking the Role of Bureaucrats in Democratic Governance: The Case of Social Welfare Policy in the United States.

Zara Qaiser is a Ph.D. Candidate at the Trachtenberg School of Public Policy and Public Administration at The George Washington University and, along with the distinction of winning the Chapter’s Essay Contest, will receive a cash award of $2,000 that we hope will go toward furthering your education and a three-year membership to the American Society for Public Administration.

Zara joined us at our Chapter’s Annual Meeting on June 4 to discuss the essay and express gratitude for being selected.

A link to view the recording of the meeting will be posted when we have it.

Congratulations, Zara, on winning First Place for your essay in our Chapter’s 2026 Student Essay Contest!

Emerging Technologies and America’s Future: Why Public Servants Need a New Playbook for the AI Age

Written by NCAC Board Member, Ryan Heimer

Nine seconds.

That is reportedly how long it took an artificial intelligence agent to delete production databases and associated backups after encountering a routine credential problem. When investigators later examined the incident, the AI’s explanation was as startling as the damage itself:

“I guessed instead of verifying.”

For many readers, the story may sound like another Silicon Valley mishap—a cautionary tale for software engineers and technology startups. Yet the implications stretch far beyond a single company or a single AI system. The incident offers a glimpse into a future where artificial intelligence increasingly moves from providing recommendations to taking actions, often at speeds that outpace traditional forms of human oversight.

For public servants, this should command attention.

The real lesson is not that an AI system made a mistake. Humans make mistakes every day. The lesson is that the system possessed the authority to act before governance mechanisms had an opportunity to intervene. In many ways, this was not an artificial intelligence failure at all. It was a governance failure.

Throughout American history, technological revolutions have forced institutions to adapt. Railroads transformed commerce but required new safety regulations. Automobiles expanded mobility but demanded traffic laws and licensing systems. The internet reshaped communication while creating entirely new concerns around cybersecurity, privacy, and information integrity.

Artificial intelligence presents a similar challenge, but at a much faster pace.

The Stanford Emerging Technology Review describes AI as a foundational technology with the potential to reshape economies, public services, national security, and society itself. Yet researchers also caution that today’s AI systems continue to exhibit unpredictable behavior, hallucinations, reliability failures, and hidden biases. The technology is advancing rapidly, but the institutions responsible for governing it are often struggling to keep pace.

The PocketOS incident highlights this growing gap.

While headlines focused on the AI agent, the deeper issue was data governance. A recent report titled AI Redefines the Governance of Data Based on Use argues that organizations are entering a new era in which traditional approaches to governance are no longer sufficient. Historically, data governance focused on protecting information from breaches, unauthorized access, and theft. Security was the primary concern.

Artificial intelligence changes that equation.

Today, the challenge is not simply protecting data. It is governing how data is used.

Modern AI systems are extraordinarily data hungry. They draw information from structured databases, documents, emails, reports, images, and other sources. Increasingly, they combine information from across organizations without regard for traditional organizational boundaries. The result is a new governance challenge: ensuring that information is used responsibly, ethically, and for its intended purpose.

This shift, from data security governance to data use governance, may be one of the most important developments in the AI era.

For decades, organizations asked whether data was secure.

Now they must also ask whether data is being used appropriately.

Just because a system can access information does not mean it should.

The OneTrust report argues that responsible governance requires understanding four forms of context surrounding data: technical context, consent context, regulatory context, and business purpose. Together, these elements determine not only whether data can be accessed, but whether its use aligns with legal requirements, ethical standards, and organizational objectives.

Public administrators may recognize this concept immediately.

Government agencies rarely make decisions simply because information exists. Public servants operate within legal authorities, policy frameworks, ethical obligations, and public expectations. Data alone is not enough. Context matters.

An MSHA inspector may possess extensive operational information about a mine. However, that information must be used within the framework established by the Mine Act, agency policy, and principles of due process. Similarly, agencies handling citizen information cannot simply feed data into an AI model because it is available. They must consider why the information was collected, whether consent exists, and whether the proposed use aligns with law and public trust.

These concerns become even more significant as AI systems increasingly act on information rather than merely analyze it.

The Stanford review notes that emerging AI agents are capable of carrying out multistep tasks with limited human supervision. Yet researchers continue identifying reliability concerns, including goal drift, overconfidence, memory limitations, and unpredictable behavior. When combined with broad access to data, these weaknesses create new forms of organizational risk.

The PocketOS incident demonstrates exactly why.

The problem was not merely that an AI guessed incorrectly.

The problem was that governance mechanisms allowed it to guess at all.

This is where public administration has something important to contribute.

The Government has spent generations developing systems designed to manage risk. Internal controls, financial audits, workplace examinations, accident investigations, separation of duties, ethics rules, and regulatory oversight all emerged from the same underlying principle:

Trust matters.

Verification matters more.

In mining, ventilation standards exist because experience taught painful lessons about what happens when hazards go undetected.

Workplace examinations exist because assumptions can be deadly. Lockout/tagout procedures exist because relying on good intentions alone is insufficient when safety is at stake.

AI governance increasingly requires a similar mindset.

Organizations cannot rely solely on prompts, guidelines, or user instructions. Governance must be embedded into systems themselves through permissions, audit logs, approval requirements, policy enforcement mechanisms, and continuous oversight.

The OneTrust report describes this transition as a movement toward programmatic governance. Traditional compliance models rely heavily on manual reviews, audits, and after-the-fact assessments. AI systems operate too quickly for those approaches to remain effective. Governance increasingly must occur at machine speed.

This may represent one of the defining governance challenges of the next decade.

Human-speed oversight cannot effectively govern machine-speed decision making.

Institutions must adapt.

The implications extend beyond technology departments. Public trust is increasingly at stake. Surveys consistently show that citizens remain concerned about how organizations collect, store, and use personal information. Many are uncertain whether their data is being handled responsibly. For government agencies, these concerns carry special weight because trust is central to democratic legitimacy.

Citizens deserve answers when automated systems influence decisions affecting their lives.

Why was this decision made?

What information was used?

Who approved the system?

How can errors be corrected?

Can outcomes be appealed?

These are not merely technical questions. They are democratic questions.

Ultimately, the PocketOS incident offers a warning, but it also provides an opportunity.

America has navigated technological revolutions before. Success has never depended solely on innovation. It has depended on building institutions capable of channeling innovation toward public benefit while managing its risks.

Artificial intelligence is no different.

The future will not be determined solely by how powerful AI becomes.

It will be determined by whether governments, organizations, and communities develop the governance frameworks necessary to guide that power responsibly.

The lesson hidden within those nine seconds is therefore much larger than a deleted database.

It is a reminder that the central challenge of artificial intelligence is not intelligence.

It is governance.

And as public servants look toward the future, that may be the most important lesson of all.

Progress, Democracy, and the American Experiment: Reflections on Samuel Miller McDonald’s Progress and Jon Meacham’s The Soul of America

Written by NCAC Board Member, Ryan Heimer

As the United States approaches its 250th anniversary, Americans are increasingly asking questions that extend beyond politics, economics, and technology. The semiquincentennial offers an opportunity not only to celebrate the nation’s achievements but also to reflect on the ideas that have shaped the American experiment from its founding to the present day. Among those ideas, few have been as influential—or as taken for granted—as the concept of progress. 

From the construction of canals and railroads to the development of public education, public health systems, interstate highways, space exploration, and the digital revolution, Americans have long believed that each generation can build a better future than the one it inherited. Progress has served as both a national aspiration and a governing philosophy. It is woven into the language of public administration, public policy, and democratic governance. 

Yet what happens when we pause to ask a deceptively simple question: What do we actually mean by progress? 

This question sits at the center of Samuel Miller McDonald’s Progress: How One Idea Built Civilization and Now Threatens to Destroy It. McDonald argues that the modern world has embraced a powerful narrative that equates progress with growth, expansion, technological advancement, and increasing control over nature. While this narrative has generated extraordinary achievements, he contends that it has also contributed to environmental degradation, social fragmentation, and unsustainable systems built upon perpetual expansion. McDonald challenges readers to reconsider whether humanity has confused growth with genuine improvement and whether a new definition of progress is needed for the future.

For public servants, this argument is both provocative and timely. Public administration has traditionally been tasked with advancing progress through more effective services, improved infrastructure, stronger institutions, and better outcomes for citizens. However, as governments confront challenges such as climate change, artificial intelligence, declining public trust, workforce shortages, and growing social complexity, the meaning of progress itself is increasingly open to debate. 

What makes McDonald’s work particularly interesting when viewed through the lens of America at 250 is how it contrasts with another influential book that has resonated with many public servants and civic leaders: The Soul of America by Jon Meacham. 

While McDonald questions the assumptions underlying modern progress, Meacham offers a more hopeful interpretation of American history. In The Soul of America, Meacham examines periods of division, fear, nativism, racism, political polarization, and democratic crisis throughout the nation’s history. His central argument is that these moments are not exceptions to the American story; they are part of it. Yet again and again, Americans have demonstrated the capacity to confront those challenges and move toward a more inclusive and democratic society. According to Meacham, the enduring struggle in American history is a contest between fear and hope, division and unity, exclusion and inclusion. America’s progress has never been inevitable, but it has been possible because citizens, leaders, and institutions repeatedly chose to pursue what Abraham Lincoln called the nation’s “better angels.” 

Taken together, these two books offer a fascinating dialogue about the future of governance and public service. McDonald asks us to question whether our traditional measures of progress—economic growth, consumption, technological advancement, and institutional expansion—are sufficient. Meacham reminds us that progress is not solely material. It is also moral, civic, and democratic. A nation can become wealthier without becoming more just. Technology can advance while trust declines. Economies can expand while communities become more fragmented.

This distinction is particularly relevant to the field of public administration. For much of the twentieth century, governments increasingly relied upon measurable indicators to assess performance. Agencies tracked outputs, budgets, projects completed, permits issued, inspections conducted, and  services delivered. These metrics remain important. Evidence-based policymaking and performance management have strengthened accountability and improved decision-making across all levels of government. 

However, many public administrators have come to recognize that outputs do not always tell the entire story. Completing a project on time and within budget does not automatically build public trust. Increasing efficiency does not necessarily improve equity. Expanding services does not guarantee that citizens feel heard, respected, or connected to the institutions that serve them. 

As a result, governments are increasingly exploring broader measures of success. Public value, social equity, resilience, environmental sustainability, citizen satisfaction, and community well-being have become important complements to traditional performance metrics. These emerging frameworks reflect an evolving understanding that progress involves more than growth alone. This is where McDonald and Meacham intersect in meaningful ways. 

McDonald challenges us to reconsider whether perpetual growth can remain the organizing principle of modern civilization. He argues that societies built around extraction, expansion, and consumption may eventually encounter ecological and social limits. The narratives of dominion, growth, and expansion that helped build modern civilization now risk undermining the very systems upon which human flourishing depends. 

Meacham, meanwhile, reminds readers that American history demonstrates another kind of progress—one measured not by economic output but by the gradual expansion of democratic participation, civil rights, and civic responsibility. The abolition of slavery, the advancement of women’s rights, the civil rights movement, and other democratic reforms illustrate forms of progress that cannot be measured through GDP or productivity statistics. They represent moral and institutional progress achieved through collective action and democratic engagement. 

For public servants, both perspectives offer valuable lessons. The first lesson is humility. History rarely moves in a straight line. Progress is often uneven, contested, and accompanied by unintended consequences. Technologies that promise liberation may introduce new challenges. Policies designed to solve one problem can create another. Public administrators must continually evaluate not only whether programs are effective but whether they are advancing the outcomes communities truly value. 

The second lesson is stewardship. Public administration exists not simply to manage systems but to preserve and strengthen the institutions that support democratic governance. Meacham’s work emphasizes that democracy survives because individuals and institutions choose responsibility over complacency. Public servants occupy a unique position within this framework. They are custodians of public trust, responsible for maintaining continuity, professionalism, and accountability regardless of political circumstances. 

The third lesson is adaptability. As emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence reshape government operations, public servants will face new questions about efficiency, transparency, privacy, and ethics. AI promises extraordinary opportunities for improving service delivery, forecasting risks, and enhancing decision-making. Yet McDonald’s critique reminds us that innovation alone does not constitute progress. The relevant questions remain: Who benefits? Who may be excluded? What values are embedded in these systems? How do we ensure technology strengthens rather than weakens democratic governance? 

These questions become even more significant as America heads towards its third century. The Founders themselves wrestled with competing visions of progress. Figures such as James Madison, Thomas Jefferson, Alexander Hamilton, and George Washington debated the proper balance between liberty and authority, federal and state power, stability and change. They understood that democratic institutions must evolve while remaining anchored to enduring principles. The Constitution itself was designed not as a static document but as a framework capable of adaptation over time. 

As public administrators, we inherit that responsibility. The challenges facing the nation today differ dramatically from those faced in 1776 or even 1976. Artificial intelligence, cybersecurity, climate resilience, demographic shifts, infrastructure modernization, and declining trust in institutions all present complex governance challenges. Yet the underlying question remains remarkably familiar: How can democratic institutions help create a better future? 

McDonald’s answer suggests we must rethink what “better” means. Meacham’s answer suggests that the pursuit of a more perfect union remains possible when citizens and institutions act with courage, integrity, and civic purpose. 

Perhaps the most valuable insight comes from combining the two perspectives. Progress should not be understood solely as economic growth or technological advancement. Nor should it be viewed merely as an abstract historical force moving society forward. Instead, progress may be best understood as the ongoing effort to expand opportunity, strengthen democratic institutions, improve quality of life, preserve the environment, and promote human flourishing for future generations. 

For ASPA members and public servants, this broader understanding aligns closely with the values of public service itself. Public administration is ultimately about helping communities solve problems, build trust, and create conditions where individuals and families can thrive. It is about balancing innovation with accountability, efficiency with equity, and growth with sustainability. 

As America prepares to celebrate 250 years of independence, perhaps the most important question is not whether the nation has progressed, but how it chooses to define progress in the years ahead.

If McDonald encourages us to question our assumptions and Meacham encourages us to believe in our better angels, both authors ultimately point toward the same challenge: the future is not predetermined. It will be shaped by the choices citizens, leaders, and public servants make together. That may be the most enduring lesson of the American experiment and the most important reflection for America at 250.

Recap of “Horrible Bosses: How to Navigate a Toxic Workplace”

Recap submitted by NCAC Board Members, Kitty Wooley and Whitney Meyerhoeffer

On Tuesday, September 10th, the National Capital Area Chapter of the American Society of Public Administrators held a virtual Drinks and Conversations networking event.

Our Drinks and Conversations events arose out of the pandemic when the Board felt it was a good idea to have an open event where our colleagues in public administration could get together and talk about the issues we were facing in a relaxed environment. These events became a wonderful staple of our programming during the pandemic and have kept going with lively discussions. In the past year, the chapter has begun introducing themed Drinks and Conversations events that propose a topic for the discussion. The spirit of the networking event, where we share our experiences with candor and discuss strategies to handle issues, is still ever-present. If you’ve been to one of our Drinks & Conversations events you know this is a time for us to tip our drinkware and have open discussions about a topic.

This week’s event topic was Horrible Bosses: How to Navigate a Toxic Work Environment.

We’ve all heard stories—or perhaps lived them—of challenging work environments, difficult supervisors, or navigating office politics. 

Throughout the 1-hour event, attendees did not just listen; but engaged in an open, honest conversation about their own experiences. The group shared stories, asked questions, and offered each other support and a few strategies to navigate and overcome the obstacles that can make workplaces feel toxic.

We had meaningful and lively discussions and learned from one another’s journeys. 

This event is as much about connecting as it is about learning new strategies. 

This event was not recorded to be mindful of folks sharing experiences and to create a safe open space for sharing.

A member recounted how productivity in his situation ground to a halt under toxic leadership. Several other members shared strategies they used to try and effect change, some still trying to make changes even as they were exiting the job.

Questions arose about why these people do these things.

  1. They have personal agendas.
  2. Something is going on in their lives.
  3. They have some sort of lack of self-esteem, lack of confidence, or they are intimidated by something.
  4. Other reasons

There were also a few books mentioned relative to discussions about leadership, and how to a) be a successful leader and b) how to give and receive feedback to help improve yourself and others in the workplace.

Out of these discussions, as is often the case, other topics for future Drinks and Conversations events were proposed. One that we all agreed would be good to have soon is how to create a safe space for feedback (Thank you, Belva Martin!)

The main takeaways from the event and the most important bullet points the group wanted to make sure everyone knew:

  1. You are not suffering alone. It can feel very lonely and helpless in a toxic workplace. But always know, you are not alone in your struggle. There are others out there on similar journeys and it is essential that you know you aren’t alone and you don’t have to do this alone.
  2. It is important to find allies inside or outside of work. Find a trusted colleague at work or attend a networking event outside of work to find allies. Having a person to lean on, to talk to, or to vent and take a walk with is important to helping you get through this challenging time. The mental work it takes to manage difficult situations is taxing and giving ourselves the grace and space to process is important.
  3. Sometimes leaving has its own impact. While not always the case, choosing to leave your job can be a signal to higher-ups that there is an issue. Strategies such as mentioning to a higher-up leader that the reason you are leaving is because of a toxic situation can have an impact. Other times you can make HR aware that there is a reason why you are leaving. But even if you just leave and say nothing, there is an impact.
  4. Sometimes you learn more from the horrible manager. You learn who you are as a leader or what you are looking for in a company culture. You know the signs of a toxic workplace and can look for them in the future. You also are learning how you do not want to be treated, which in turn helps you be a better leader in the future.
  5. Organizations and businesses with bad leadership are not sustainable. Over time, poor leadership affects productivity, creativity, and teamwork. 

It was a great discussion and a helpful event with support and compassion.

Look for our next Drinks and Conversations event with the topic of creating safe spaces for feedback in the workplace.

Community Engagement as a Useful Tool for Seeking Solutions and Actions

What Is Community Engagement and How Can it be a Useful Tool for Seeking Solutions and Actions to Climate Change?

The program will focus on key aspects and practices of community engagement and then delve into how they can be applied for seeking solutions and actions to climate change.

The event’s speakers will provide an overview of the National Academy of Public Administration’s study, “Engaging Americans & Increasing Public Trust: An Agenda for 2021 and Beyond” and the City of Alexandria, Virginia’s community engagement program, What’s Next Alexandria. They will then discuss how community engagement practices and lessons learned can be used to engage people in seeking solutions and actions to climate change. The discussion will include how these practices and lessons learned can especially engage people whose thoughts and needs are often marginalized on topics that have a direct effect on them.

 

Presenters:

Dr. Carolyn Lukensmeyer, Founding Executive Director, The National Institute for Civil Discourse and Founder and Former President, America Speaks

Carrie Beach, Division Chief, Neighborhood Planning and Community Development, Office of Planning and Zoning, City of Alexandria, VA

Ellen Eggerton, Sustainability Coordinator, City of Alexandria, VA

 

Register to attend by 5:30 p.m. Wednesday, December 15th to receive the Zoom link at: https://www.eventbrite.com/e/community-engagement-as-a-useful-tool-for-seeking-solutions-and-actions-tickets-211473863017

20200227-2020 The Story of Unmanned Aerial Systems (aka Drones)

[vc_row][vc_column width=”1/4″][vc_column_text]

The Partnership for Public Service · 1100 New York Ave. NW ·

Suite 200 East · Washington, DC 20005[/vc_column_text][vc_column_text]

6:30pm – 8:00pm Presentation & Discussion by Frank Principi [/vc_column_text][vc_column_text]Eventbrite - The Story of Unmanned Aerial Systems (aka Drones)[/vc_column_text][vc_gmaps link=”#E-8_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” size=””][vc_wp_tagcloud taxonomy=”post_tag”][/vc_column][vc_column width=”3/4″][vc_custom_heading text=”The Story of Unmanned Aerial Systems (aka Drones)” font_container=”tag:h2|text_align:center|color:%230069a2″ google_fonts=”font_family:Montserrat%3Aregular%2C700|font_style:400%20regular%3A400%3Anormal” link=”|||”][vc_text_separator title=”Thursday, February 27, 2020 • 6:30pm-8:00pm” color=”custom” accent_color=”#be2026″][vc_row_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/2″][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][vc_column_text]

The advent of unmanned aircraft systems (“drones”) presents very significant commercial, safety and recreational challenges and opportunities in the US and around the world! There are an estimated 1.7 million drones in operation today – growing to an estimated 2.6 million by 2026. The exponential growth of this technology has provided new jobs, an expanded tax base, and a wide-range of quality-of-life benefits. It has also created complex new issues for federal, state, and local officials and governments. Some of the issues involve:

(1) public safety

(2) privacy

(3) law enforcement surveillance 

(4) preventing terrorism

(5) workforce development and training

At the federal level, how are drones included in agencies (such as FAA, DOD, DOL, DHS, and DOJ) strategic plans? Also, what collaboration is taking place among these agencies regarding this emerging technology and this issue listed above? How are agencies focusing on  ethical issues around drones?

Small, unmanned aircraft are required to be registered with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). But there are many challenges to this, and as a result many drones that should be registered are not. As directed in the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018, DOT has contracted with the National Academy of Public Administration to assess the compliance and effectiveness of the FAA’s registration program for small unmanned aircraft, focusing on FAA’s Interim Final Rule published in December 2015. The study will examine the information collected by FAA, the regulatory environment, organizational capacity, and how non-compliance is determined, including the role and responsibility of local law enforcement.

Frank Principi, a senior advisor on the study, will discuss aspects of drone technology, FAA’s registration program, and conduct a “show and tell” with his own personal drone. Participants will be asked to share their perspective of the challenges and opportunities of drones and to offer recommendations on how to ensure drones continue to be registered, flown safely, and provide new and innovative quality-of-life solutions.             

Presentation by:

Frank Principi is a seasoned management consultant and trusted advisor to c-suite clients in public, private, and non-profit corporations around the world, and is a crisis management expert. He is serving his third term on the Prince William Board of County Supervisors, where he is leading efforts to build public and private sector infrastructure – roads, schools, water/sewer, natural gas, electric, and telecommunications – in this rapidly growing jurisdiction. He has served on several regional and state bodies, including the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments (Chairman 2012), National Capital Region Emergency Preparedness Council (Chairman 2013, 2015), Potomac and Rappahannock Transportation Commission (Chairman 2016-2017), Northern Virginia Regional Commission, Virginia Association of Counties and Potomac Hospital. He also chaired Prince William’s Future Commission 2030. 

In the past, Frank served on the House Energy and Commerce Committee and its Subcommittees on Transportation, Telecommunications, and Finance. His state government experience includes work with the National Governors Association, including the Governors’ response to 9/11. Among his many honors, Frank is the recipient of three Businessman of the Year awards from the Prince William Chamber of Commerce, Arlington Diocese, and Prince William Living Magazine.

 [/vc_column_text][vc_column_text][/vc_column_text][vc_column_text]

The event is free but registration is required.

Light snacks and refreshments will be served.

[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

20191120-2019 Affordable Housing and Regionalism

[vc_row][vc_column width=”1/4″][vc_column_text]The Partnership for Public Service · 1100 New York Ave. NW · Suite 200 East · Washington, DC 20005[/vc_column_text][vc_column_text]6:00pm – 6:30pm Social

6:30pm – 7:30pm Program[/vc_column_text][vc_column_text]Eventbrite - NCAC 2017 Annual Meeting with Keynote Speaker Paul Light, PhD.[/vc_column_text][vc_gmaps link=”#E-8_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” size=””][vc_wp_tagcloud taxonomy=”post_tag”][/vc_column][vc_column width=”3/4″][vc_custom_heading text=”Affordable Housing and Regionalism” font_container=”tag:h2|text_align:center|color:%230069a2″ google_fonts=”font_family:Montserrat%3Aregular%2C700|font_style:400%20regular%3A400%3Anormal” link=”|||”][vc_text_separator title=”Wednesday, November 20, 2019 • 6:00pm-7:30pm” color=”custom” accent_color=”#be2026″][vc_row_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/2″][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][vc_column_text]

A major “wicked problem” at the national state and local levels of governments and many nonprofits is affordable housing. There is not enough needed affordable housing available.

However, building and maintaining needed affordable housing challenges the financial and intellectual capabilities of governments and communities. Recently, the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments’ adopted three housing targets for the Metropolitan Washington DC area between 2020 and 2030. One of the targets was “At least 75% of new housing should be affordable to low- and middle-income households.” Achieving this target as well as the other two targets will require a lot of commitment, dedication and innovation by the District of Columbia and the local governments in Maryland and Virginia.

 The National Capital Area Chapter of ASPA will sponsor a discussion on affordable housing focusing on such questions as:

 (1) What is, or should be, the accountability mechanism for achieving this target?

(2) What tools will be needed to achieve this target?

(3) What are the equity issues around this target and how should they be addressed?

(4) What type of non-financial incentive might serve to encourage increasing needed housing supply?

 Bring your thoughts, ideas and knowledge to this exciting discussion on one of the nation’s and local and state governments’ wicked problems.

 [/vc_column_text][vc_column_text][/vc_column_text][vc_column_text]

The event is free but registration is required.

Light snacks and refreshments will be served.

[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]