Local Citizens Connect to Global Rural Network

It has been over three years in the making. The Global Rural Network Project announced the establishment of a website to help rural communities from around the country and globe to establish a collaborative network with creative solutions for the future.

The goal of the Global Rural Network is to connect rural leaders from all fifty states and ten other countries by the end of 2010 to share ideas and help each other learn how to prepare ourselves and local rural areas for a different kind of future.

The Norfolk area is one of sixteen states and three other countries that have representatives involved with the initial design of the GRN. http://grnp.org/

The GRN project includes Norfolk area residents that participated in a Leadership Norfolk course sponsored by the Norfolk Area Chamber of Commerce and the City of Norfolk. These residents maintained a connection with Rick Smyre, President Communities of the Future, a consultant used by the City over a 10 year period. Through his leadership and coaching skills Leadership Norfolk participants have been making connections outside of their area, collaborated on projects, considered the impact of weak signals and future trends on the region, and investigated and implemented adaptive planning and parallel processes .

These same local leaders led and participated in the Visioning 2026 project during 2005-2006 (http://www.Visioning2026.com). The NorthFork Riverwalk Develoment Project is a an outgrowth of the visioning dialogue and focus groups (http://www.northforkne.com). Some of these same participants are involved in a local 2nd Enlightenment group that continues to dialogue on the findings and recommendations from the Visioning 2026 efforts as well as considers evolving trends impacting the area.

Contact Mark Hall (mhall@eselling4u.com, http://twitter.com/trumark), Jennifer Adams (jadams@conpoint.com), and Larry Wenzl (wenzll@asme.org) for additional information. You can follow some of the continuing dialogue at the following website, http://www.visioning2026.com/blog/.

http://grnp.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=category&layout=blog&id=34&Itemid=59 Identifies the current GRN participants from sixteen states.

For further information contact Mark Hall (402-316-9664, mhall@eselling4u.com, Twitter:trumark), Jennifer Adams, or Larry Wenzl.

The center’s workout volume "could eventually produce the same amount of electricity as a small solar photovoltaic system," says Matthew Pennington, chief of staff for the Associated Students of Oregon State University, "placing students directly in the renewable energy production chain."

Over Sixty Interviewed on the NorthFork Project

The NorthFork Riverwalk Development Project completed an important step as part of the Master Plan effort. On February 23 and 24. HDR Engineering Inc. and S.B Friedman staff interviewed over 60 individuals through a series of twelve sessions. Besides the questions listed below the HDR and S.B Friedman staff asked questions like “What do you think of when you put an image of Norfolk on a postcard?”,“What would you like to do here that you go elsewhere for?”, and “What qualities does the community have that are important for current and future residents?”

Who currently uses the river? How do they use it?

What positive qualities of Norfolk should the NorthFork Development Project capitalize upon?

How do you envision residents and visitors using the NorthFork Development?

Are there any specific uses that would not be appropriate for the NorthFork Development?

What specific features are necessary for a successful NorthFork Development Project?

In addition to collecting information from participants HDR staff also took the opportunity to take pictures of the NorthFork riverfront corridor to help prepare for the community visioning sessions scheduled for April 16th. The next phase of the master plan effort involving the community includes two visioning sessions. These sessions will incorporate the results from the interview sessions along with the case study of other communities that have completed redevelopment efforts. Individuals will gather around tables and will interact with other participants, maps, pictures, and other information to start developing a vision statement for the NorthFork Development project. Goals and priorities will be initially development that will lead into the economic feasibility phase of the project. An extended luncheon visioning session with steering committee and key community stakeholders will be followed by a general public session in the early evening. Citizens are encouraged to attend representing different organizations, e.g., youth organizations, service clubs, entertainment and recreation enthusiasts, and community and businesses leaders, as they will be helping to define the vision statement and goals for the project.

Citizens can still provide their comments concerning the interview questions by sending an email to info@NorthForkNE.com, or postings comments on the project’s website at:

http://www.northforkne.com/blog/press/northfork-river-corridor-possible-features/

The NorthFork Riverwalk Development Project Master Plan effort was kicked-off on January 27th with a lunch, Steering Committee meeting, 2-hour tour of the North Fork river corridor, logo design award, National Park Service presentation and a public forum with panel discussion with HDR and S.B. Friedman staff members. The Master Plan process includes four contractual tasks with HDR currently under contract to complete the first two tasks projected for completion in May 2009. The NorthFork Master Plan will integrate community input with case studies from development projects from other communities, a economic feasibility analysis, and a corridor design that is expected to be incorporated into the City’s Comprehensive Plan. For further information on the Master Plan contractual tasks visit the following website address: http://www.visioning2026.com/NorthFork/HDR/2008-05-23DraftScope(withoutTrackedChanges).pdf

Steering Committee members are looking for fund raising as well as community service activities (e.g., Keep the North Fork Beautiful) to bring more attention to this valuable and underutilized resource and support a NorthFork Riverfront rebirth. Contact Steering Committee through the website or Norfolk Area Chamber of Commerce Office, 402-371-4862.

****************************

Mark Hall, Steering Committee Chair

Schools now spend hundreds of millions of dollars on computers to provide an average of one computer for every three students, at a cost of $1,000 a year for each machine.

The only difference now between smartphones and laptops, they say, is that cellphones are smaller, cheaper and more coveted by students.

This latest attempt to get cellphones into schools might quell some of the old concerns while raising new ones.

“You have to be willing to put in the time and be very patient with the technology,” Suzette Kliewer, the teacher who administered the Digital Millennial program at Southwest High School in Jacksonville, N.C., said.

This year marks a new record for the introduction of renewable energy legislation. This summary has been prepared as a service to citizens trying to stay up to date on these issues. The goal of this summary is to encourage citizen input to the process. Bills can be tracked through the process at www.nebraskalegislature.gov. Bills can be referenced by number and the progress they make are noted there. Citizens have an opportunity to testify at the scheduled hearings in person or by sending an e-mail to the committee discussing the bill. If the bill makes it out of committee, senators can then be encouraged to support it on the floor. The most critical stage is the committee hearing where citizen input can make a huge difference. Get involved, government is led by those that show up and your input is needed at this critical time in our history.

Senator(district) Description/Comment Committee

LB 9 Wightman(36)...................................................Revenue Exempt biofuels and biomass used in agriculture from sales and use tax. This adds renewables to the list of old carbon energy sources already exempt. Comment: Good Bill

LB 14 White(8)...................................................Natural Resources This bill would require the Nebraska Energy Office(NEO) to set more stringent energy standards for new government buildings and requires select government agencies to reduce energy use by 10% by 2014 and 15% by 2017. Comment: I am a fan of setting goals with a date. Government should lead by example by efficient use of our energy dollars. NEO monitoring is also a good thing, good bill. It could be expanded to include ALL government buildings.

LB 246 Dubas(34)...............................................Natural Resources This bill would reauthorize the Bio-power Steering Committee to assess the bio-economy potential in Nebraska. The original committee was focused on electricity only and produced nothing to my knowledge. This bill broadens the scope and would provide for a steering committee to lead the project. The deliverable is a report that would be the basis of a real energy plan that can be used as a road map. The $200K price tag is a wise investment as a real energy plan cannot be expected out of the NEO. Annual updates being reported to the legislature is a good thing also. The plan should be available on the web for all to see anytime. Good bill.

LB 421 Nordquist(7)...............................................Revenue This bill would suspend the collection of fuel taxes until 2015 on compressed old carbon gases used for vehicles. I am not sure why natural gas and propane in vehicles should get tax exemption when biodiesel and ethanol do not. No opinion

LB 436 Haar(21).................................................Natural Resources The heritage of the net metering struggle in Nebraska is alive in this bill. Largely the same bill as LB 581, this is the basic fair net metering policy that has been stunted by lobbyist maneuvers for over a decade. This year, the discussions will be before a new committee chairman with no utility bill to compete against it(see LB663). System cap is set at 125Kw (error in introduced copy) with no additional fees(other than basic connection fee), 2% system cap for program, no required insurances, inspections, switches, etc that were intended to result in ‘net burdening’. Since ultimate success is determined by installations, utilities would be required to post this data for all to see. This is an excellent bill the state sorely needs. We need to get this done.

LB 437 Haar(21), Dubas (34), Nordquist(7).......Natural Resources This bill creates a Wind Energy Development Zone Task Force with the goal of identifying a plan to generate 7800MW of electricity from wind in Nebraska by the year 2018. To compare, Iowa and Minnesota each have about 1400MW right now. Initiating such a task force is certainly a good idea, as the voluntary capacity goals NPPD has offered wouldn’t even surpass what Iowa has now. I like the idea of numbers and dates, it helps us keep folks accountable. Findings will also support a more complete energy plan. With no funding required to execute this task force, it is a no-brainer to support LB 437. The published map as well as reports and minutes should be available to the public.

LB 455 Nordquist(7), Dubas(34), Haar(21), Lathrop(12), Mello(5), Schilz(47)..........................................................Revenue This bill provides incentives for the production of renewable electricity. It includes exclusion of sales and property taxes on any renewable energy facility and provides a production credit of almost 2cents per killowatt hour for 20 years. Eligible entities for this huge credit include only public power entities. The public is excluded from any of these incentives. This bill is an apparent attempt to make up for the fact that Public Power does not qualify for the federal production tax(PTC) credits for wind production, based on the fact they don’t have to pay all of the taxes private companies do. If installed wind capacity falls 5 years short of the LB 437 goal by growing at 500MW/year, 50% Public power ownership would result in this bill providing credits in BILLIONS of dollars to Public Power. I wonder why LB 455 provides a 20 year credit when the federal PTC is 10 while excluding Nebraska citizens producing electricity. These smaller, citizen owned systems are also double the cost with half the capacity factor of the large turbines, yet they have no seat at the table. The fiscal note should be interesting. I am not feeling very good about this one yet and perhaps I am missing something here....

LB 471 Fulton(29), Haar(21), McCoy(39)..........Natural Resources Power Review Board approval would be guaranteed for Public Power applications for renewable energy systems less than 10MW and less than 10% of the system load. C-BED projects also get this pass, but C-BED is only set up for wind power. I like the concept, but what if a Nebraska business wants to erect a 2MW turbine at their facility? What if a landowner wants to put in a 500KW tower? The Public is not granted the same privileges that are granted to the power company, why don’t we get a pass? They made Dave Tobias jump through all these hoops for a 10Kw turbine and the Attorney General had to put a stop to that. I would begrudgingly support, but I would hope the bill would be amended to allow Nebraska owned projects to be able to get the same treatment. The first time this happens it will go to the AG, again

LB 491 Haar(21).................................................Natural Resources Establishment of the Home Energy Efficiency Fund is created through this bill. This bill seems to be seeking to either decentralize the current energy efficiency program by having power providers administer it or to create a parallel program. In either case it represents an improvement over the current program. This program would provide 0% interest loans to citizens(!)and repayment is based on energy savings. This looks like an excellent program, but no funding source is noted. Only electric power suppliers are eligible to administer these programs and the terms aren’t quite as good as what public entities got in LB 624. I appreciate that both the public buildings and private residences were given consideration in these bills. Payback should be capped at 10 years to justify loans. This is a good program, funds should come from the NEO program so they can focus on more important things, like the tasks assigned in LB 567. I like this bill.

LB 492 Haar(21).......................................................Appropriations This bill would provide $3.5million dollars to UNL to establish research and teaching capacity in the wind energy field. First off, the community college system is already moving this way and is much better prepared to offer the degrees needed in this field. As far as wind research, this is much more efficiently done by the private sector and is largely well developed. The establishment of these types of resources at UNL would clearly compete with the budding renewable energy industry in the Nebraska and is counterproductive. Nebraska stands more to gain by growing businesses that create jobs that do this work. If the money has to be spent, then my recommendation would be to give half the money to MPCC and NECC to build two large turbines to train on and complete their curriculum. This is not efficient use of $ as written.

LB 561 Lathrop(12)............................................Natural Resources This bill seeks to help limit the ability of Public Power to condemn and acquire renewable energy facilities through their use of eminent domain which would make investors more comfortable about getting involved with these projects. The amended sections are not totally clear to me if the language applies to wind only. Good bill, but could be stronger in limiting these powers.

LB 565 Louden(49), Haar(21), Schilz(47), Wallman(30) ..............................................................................Natural Resources The Woody Biomass Act creates a $2.5million dollar revolving fund that makes loans with interest to fund projects that convert buildings from old carbon(existing) to new carbon(wood). The fund would be administered by the NEO. This is a great idea and is well written, but why citizens are excluded is my concern. Only public buildings can apply for these funds. So the government takes tax money and loans it to other parts of government with interest. If the technical data and rates of return were published by NEO on the projects I could see public value and support this.

LB 566 Dubas(34), Haar(21), Mello(5).............................Revenue LB 566 adds two tiers to the Nebraska Advantage Act. This bill would provide incentives to manufacturers who produce ‘windmills’. Incentives of this type are needed to attract manufacturers of wind energy equipment. $1million dollars and 10 new jobs is the minimum investment to qualify for the lowest tier, which is obviously targeting big companies. Great idea, hopefully it will grow to include all renewables, not just wind. Good Bill.

LB 567 Dubas(34), Haar(21), Mello(5), Schilz(47) ..............................................................................Natural Resources This is an excellent bill that seeks to tighten up existing and add new responsibilities to the Nebraska Energy Office, including transmission studies and RPS development. This bill adds reporting to the legislature and increased public inspection of documents and meeting minutes. This is an excellent bill that is sorely needed. Even after LB 921 last session, the NEO has performed poorly and this bill should help improve their performance and accountability to the people of Nebraska.

LB 568 Dubas(34), Haar(21), Mello(5)..............Natural Resources This bill seeks to address many grey areas that have developed in Nebraska regarding wind leases for large turbines. These easements must be filed with the registrar of deeds and terminate if not development has taken place in 5 years. The bill also requires these leases to cover specific areas like decommissioning and worksite reclamation. A good bill that would protect landowners.

LB 569 Dubas(34), Haar(21)...................................Appropriations This bill provides additional state funds ($25,000) to help fund the already federally funded Wind for Schools Program(WFS). These small wind turbines do little to offset electrical consumption, but provide learning opportunities for students. If the WFS program is going to ask for public funding, then Nebraska based renewable businesses within the geographic area of the school should have the opportunity to be involved with the project at no additional cost to the project, if they choose. UNL is being funded by NREL to provide the technical consulting on these projects, clearly competing with Nebraska business. If state money is appropriated, Nebraska based businesses should be involved. A real wind for schools program would provide transferable tax credits for 35% of the cost of the installation of a more significant wind turbine that would offset the schools power consumption and save the schools a bundle. Great intention, but this bill needs some work in committee before I could support.

LB 584 Dierks(40).......................................................Agriculture The Agricultural Commodities Protection Act is designed to require ethanol plants to make fuel available to local markets. While some plants do sell to local blenders, others do not and require huge quantities to be purchased or quote highly inflated prices. Unfortunately for the industry, their have been a number of plants that have no interest in providing ethanol to the communities which provide them the corn for their facility. Many of the ethanol plants have entered into 100% production contracts that do not allow for local consumption and pricing abuses have been found. Local markets should be able to access locally produced ethanol. While LB 584 is controversial, I believe it is needed. Amounts provided to local markets could be capped at 5-10% of production.

LB 591 Dierks(40)..............................................Natural Resources This bill would provide the Power Review Board with the opportunity to examine the ‘non-tangible’ benefits of using renewable resources. This bill seeks to address a core issue, namely that the big picture can be considered instead of price only. By examining the full spectrum of advantages and disadvantages present in a renewable application, a better decision can be made by the Board. Of course, lobbyists will howl about how these criteria can be misleading, unfair and even discriminatory. You can usually tell a good bill by how loud they howl anyway. Good bill.

LB 624 Haar(21).................................................Natural Resources Energy efficiency loans for public buildings are the goal of LB 624. The goal of improving energy efficiency of government buildings is a good one. A couple points are to be noted here, LB 624 should provide for a study and baseline of the current energy data before a loan is made to accurately assess improvements, this could be provided for in the application to the NEO. Secondly, the repayment terms are set as ¼ to ½ of the energy savings in biannual payments without interest. I believe these repayment terms need to be capped at a ten year repayment to justify public investment. Currently, this same ten year term(with 5% interest) is applied to citizens who apply for energy efficiency loans through the NEO. Good bill if we get a better handle on repayment terms.

LB 632 Mello(5), Dierks(40), Dubas(34), Giese(17), Haar(21), McGill(26), Nordquist(7), Rogert(16).................................Revenue The proposed Green Building Advantage Act would provide a refund for a portion of taxes paid on commercial buildings that are built or retrofitted to meet energy efficient LEED standards. Such refunds would defray the higher costs involved with building to these higher standards. Building efficient buildings make good sense and so does this bill, fiscal impact would be limited.

LB 641 Schilz(47)............................................................Revenue Ethanol and biodiesel have stagnated now that the first generation feedstocks of corn and soybean oil have been consumed. Second generation research is needed to move this industry forward to meet national goals. While no cellulose research incentives were offered this year, LB 641 seeks to provide limited incentives to those that would create biodiesel using 1, novel technologies and/or 2, non food feedstocks. This is a very creative incentive that focuses on rewarding small, high risk research facilities in undertaking such projects here in Nebraska. This legislation has been refined over two years and the time is now to move on this. Due to objections from the soybean board last session, the term renewable diesel was substituted for biodiesel to broaden fuel applicability. University oversight is provided for in approving projects. This is an excellent bill worthy of support. Transferable tax credits may be a better way to fund the $600,000 per year price tag for this program instead of cash payments. Good bill.

LB 663 Janssen(15).............................................Natural Resources LB 663 seeks to develop the net metering act to interconnect renewable electricity generators to the grid. This bill introduces a number of new and comparatively complex ideas. Of the 35 page bill, the first six pages are definitions! I didn’t even want to print it because it was so large. I did manage to read through it and noted some good points, but this concept is new and nobody in the renewable energy community has seen this. Most where not even aware of it’s existence until introduction. Given the fast paced environment in the running session, I would have to say this bill is far to complex to try and wade through this session. The bill basically provides true net metering for 40Kw and below and a ‘net metering lite’ program for 40-100Kw. There are several options generators have as well regarding rate programs. Present in this bill are insurance requirements, disconnect switches and utility inspections on demand typically associated with net burdening. Because the two net metering bills are so different, direct comparison is hardly possible but may need to be attempted. There are reporting requirements that are very detailed and informative. There are components within the bill that are very good, but the various rate calculations read like a calculus book. I prefer LB 436 to this new and complicated program despite its’ apparent good intent.

OVERALL there are 21 renewable energy bills in this session. Thanks to Ken Winston for helping me to ensure the list is complete.

In the above text, I have provided a brief summary of the bills intent and my personal views on the bill. My intent is to provide Nebraskans a summarized list of bills so they can look up the bill, read it for themselves and form their own conclusions. I understand not all will agree with my views and that’s fine. The key is to provide feedback to senators and committees and get involved.

With that said, of the 21 bills introduced, 14 I would outright support(some with noted tweeks), Several I am luke warm on and 4 I would not support. The important thing is to not just blindly support just any renewable bill. We must also be cognizant of where the money would come from if required.

TRENDS are apparent here. A new batch of senators are stepping up into this arena and this is a welcome sight. Sen Haar, Schilz, Nordquist and Mello are among newcomers joining the ranks of the more senior ‘renewable’ senators like Sen Dubas, Lathrop, White and Dierks. This is encouraging

Technological bias toward big wind energy is also evident, while understandable, it should be recognized that Nebraska is awash in biomass, solar and geothermal potentials. It will be important to develop a diverse balance in our renewable energy portfolio.

The NEO has not stepped up to the plate and this is clearly addressed by legislation aimed at improving the deliverables that the NEO provides to Nebraska. A true rehabilitation of this office will be a key component to a successful energy future for Nebraska.

The public component of public power is not represented in LB 455. I am very surprised that a state subsidy of the magnitude of almost 2cents per kilowatt would only be available to big wind while more expensive, citizen owned small wind gets nothing. While I understand LB 455 attempts to ‘close the gap’ for Public Power which does not get federal PTC credits, the fiscal impact of billions in subsidies and once again leaving out the little guy (as we saw in the ethanol production incentive) is troubling. LB 565 echoes this formula, public agencies can use public money, but the public need not apply. LB 624 would allow public buildings to get better energy efficiency loan terms than citizens can get, LB 471 allows Public Power to skate through power review board applications, but citizens can plan on being grilled. LB 569 leaves Nebraska businesses out of the loop. I think citizens are getting thrown into the pile with the ‘privates’(private developers), which are loosely defined as out of state interests and bad. Unfortunately, this generalization catches Nebraska businesses and citizens in its’ net. This theme of putting the average citizen at the end of the line to clean up scraps or getting nothing is getting old. The old adage that Public Power doesn’t approve of the public making power seems truer then ever, however there are signs of change.

Other than a very limited renewable biodiesel incentive in LB 641, nothing has been introduced to address the current ethanol situation or to promote second generation feedstocks for ethanol. The ‘ethanol recession’ has had a massive impact on Nebraska that nobody seems to want to talk about. Biodiesel is in a similar situation. We need to stay in the game here with biofuels.

Funding renewables in a responsible manner will continue to be a challenge, but federal grants, transferable tax credits and other creative financing can get it done. We simply need to make it a priority and find a way. Simply saying there is no money for these things is just taking the easy way out.

While C-BED offers a good strategy to allow citizen ownership of renewable projects, the model only allows for wind energy projects. This needs to be broadened to include all renewable technologies. Except for the Woody Biomass Act, all of the renewable legislation introduced include all forms of renewable energy, only C-BED remains aloof by allowing wind technology only into this citizen based model.

101st Legislature Renewable Energy Legislation Summary Sheet

LB 9 Exempt biofuels and biomass used in farming from certain taxes (Revenue)

LB 14 Create conservation standards for certain state buildings (Natural Resources)

LB 246 Reestablish the Biopower Steering Committee (Natural Resources)

LB 436 Provide for net metering of electricity (Natural Resources)

LB 437 Create the Wind Energy Development Zone Task Force (Natural Resources)

LB 455 Provides renewable energy tax credit for Public Power entities (Revenue)

LB 471 Provides approval by PRB of projects under 10MW (Natural Resources)

LB 491 Provides for residential home energy loans (Natural Resources)

LB 492 Provides funding for wind energy positions at UNL (Appropriations)

LB 561 Restricts eminent domain on wind energy projects (Natural Resources)

LB 565 Adopt the Woody Biomass Energy Act (Natural Resources)

LB 566 Provides tax incentives for wind turbine manufacturing (Revenue)

LB 567 Clarify and increase responsibilities of the State Energy Office (Natural Resources)

LB 568 Provides requirements for wind leases and easements (Natural Resources)

LB 569 Provides funding for Wind for Schools Program (Appropriations)

LB 584 Adopt the Agricultural Commodities Protection Act (ethanol access) (Agriculture)

LB 591 Increase PRB renewable project consideration criteria (Natural Resources)

LB 624 Provides for energy efficiency loans for public buildings (Natural Resources)

LB 632 Adopt the Nebraska Green Building Advantage Act (Revenue)

LB 641 Create a production incentive for renewable diesel (Revenue)

LB 663 Adopt the Net Metering Act (Natural Resources)

The big spike in wind jobs was a result of a record-setting 50% increase in installed wind capacity, with 8,358 megawatts coming online in 2008 (enough to power some 2 million homes). That’s a third of the nation’s total 25,170 megawatts of wind power generation. Wind farms generating more than 4,000 megawatts of electricity were completed in the last three months of 2008 alone.

I am sending referencing this article to you for two reasons....one to focus on the importance of the deflationary trap about which Krugman mentions in this article. Second, I am having more and more conversations with citizens at the local level who are obviously concerned, and I think almost to the point of getting involved...but they don't know what to do and are stuck with traditional knowledge and experience that relates less and less to the kind of society and economy that seems to be emerging. In my opinion, what we currently are observing at the federal level reflects problems on both sides of the isle with the way we will need to think about how to prepare for a future that is very different from the past. There is no template and if politics as usual continues to be the way we approach increasingly complex and difficult problems, we will continue to see both economic and social disruptions grow which will, in turn exacerbate the problems. It is interesting to see how the concept of "either/or" thinking is inhibiting and, at times, preventing the ability to think and act at a higher level of complexity. What is happening provides an opportunity for futures thinking and transformative dialogue at the local level in people and small groups who care about learning trends, weak signals and transformational concepts and methods. In my opinion, without developing new capacities for transformation at the local level, we will continue to see increased frustration that may boil over into anger and violence if the economy tumbles into such negative territories that citizens lose all faith in their leadership. As the Chinese say, "with crisis there is opportunity." The conversations I have had with people throughout the country this week gives me great hope that we will see more and more "access points" where the ideas and methods of community transformation will not be seen as just nice to know, but necessary to move beyond our present economic and potentially social debacle. Hope all of you have had a good week. All the best. Rick

Tim asks, "So where's the alpha-geek innovation happening today? I see it bubbling up in areas like manufacturing, open-source hardware, sensor networks and robotics."

He calls these people "alpha geeks." They are smart enough to make technology do what they want rather than what its originator expected. The alpha geeks exercise an idea or a gadget, pushing it past its current limits, reinventing it and eventually paving the way for entrepreneurs who figure out how to create mainstream versions of their novel ideas.

For example consider Greenbox, a start-up founded by Jonathan Gay, one of the creators of the ubiquitous Flash technology for online video and animation. He built an "off the grid" house (mainly because it was too expensive to bring power to his remote location). He designed some tools to visualize and manage his home power consumption--then realized that they could become the basis of a new business.

“The real opportunities for nanomaterials have become clearer,” noted Jurron Bradley, Ph.D., Senior Analyst at Lux Research and head of the firm’s Nanomaterials Intelligence service. “Because of nanotech’s broad applicability, understanding the maze of opportunities and filtering hype from reality isn’t trivial. Nanotech’s winners focus on nanointermediates in the key industries we’ve identified. ”To gauge nanotech’s commercial impact, Lux Research used its value chain framework to measure and forecast adoption across four major industry sectors – manufacturing and materials, electronics and IT, healthcare and life sciences, and energy and environment – from 2004 to 2015. The report, entitled “Nanomaterials State of the Market Q1 2009: Cleantech’s Dollar Investments, Penny Returns,” is a result of more than 1,000 primary interviews conducted with technology developers and concludes that: • Nanointermediates garnered an aggregate net profit margin of 9% in 2007 – almost twice that of nanomaterials and nano-enabled products – a figure that will expand to 15% in 2015. • Nanotech funding reached $18.2 billion in 2008, as government spending ballooned to $8.4 billion, corporate funding edged to $8.6 billion, and VCs provided $1.2 billion. • International nanotech activity is still paced by the U.S., Japan, Germany, and South Korea, but Russia and China made significant gains. • Nanotech activity in the energy and environment sector is hot on many metrics; it accounts for 29% of all nanotech government spending in 2008, 13% of corporate spending, and 41% of venture capital. However, it barely makes a dent in total emerging nanotech revenue, amounting to just 0.6% or $876 million of the total in 2007 and 2% or $57 billion of the total in 2015. “Nanotech’s impact on the energy and environment sector is real, but the disproportionate activity in the field doesn’t look justified,” Bradley added. “Still, while those applications account for only a small percentage of the revenues from nano-enabled products, energy-based nanointermediates – such as batteries, capacitors, and solar cells – can still be a smart bet.” The 102-page report “Nanomaterials State of the Market Q1 2009: Cleantech’s Dollar Investments, Penny Returns” includes projections on the value of products incorporating nanotechnology from 2004 to 2015. It offers a concise introduction highlighting nanotech’s impact on eight markets – aerospace, automotive, construction, electronics, energy and environment, manufacturing, medical & pharmaceutical, and oil & gas. The report also includes a detailed analysis of nanotechnology funding and discussions on key environmental, health, and safety (EHS) stakeholders, international nanotech activity, and the intersection of nanotech and cleantech. Lux Nanomaterials Intelligence service clients receive: 1) regular market overview reports; 2) ongoing technology scouting reports and proprietary data points in the weekly Lux Research Nanomaterials Journal; and 3) on-demand inquiry with Lux Research analysts. About Lux Research:Lux Research provides strategic advice and on-going intelligence for emerging technologies. Leaders in business, finance, and government rely on us to help them make informed strategic decisions. Through our unique research approach focused on primary research and our extensive global network, we deliver insight, connections, and competitive advantage to our clients. Visit www.luxresearchinc.com for more information.

Work Underway on North Fork Redevelopment Master Plan

On Tuesday, January 27 at 5:30 PM, at the Life Long Learning Center, NECC, the NorthFork Riverwalk Development Foundation Board of Directors will present an update on the first two of four tasks for the Master Plan effort. HDR Engineering Inc. and S.B. Friedman & Co. (SBFCo) staff will be on hand to help kick-off the Steering Committee activities earlier in the day along with a North Fork River corridor tour. The general public meeting at 5:30 PM will start with opening remarks from the board president, Jim Miller, and Norfolk Mayor Sue Fuchtman, an award presentation to the NorthFork Logo winner Andy Stappert, a slide presentation by Nancy Hansen from the National Park Service concerning trails, and a question and answer session with a panel members from HDR and SBFCo. Task 1 covers (besides the kick-off meeting and river corridor tour) data collection, data mapping, data analysis. Task 2 covers cases studies of similar riverfront redevelopment efforts, one-on-one interviews with Steering Committee members, and two visioning workshops, one involving Steering Committee members and key Stakeholders, and the second with the general public. Tasks 1 and 2 are expected to cover 14 weeks.

For additional information contact Amanda Jones, Norfolk Area Chamber of Commerce, (402) 371-4862. Additional background information can be found at the following website address: http://www.visioning2026.com/feature/northfork-riverwalk-development-project/ Mark Hall, Steering Committee Chair, (402) 316-9664

The physics department has replaced the traditional large introductory lecture with smaller classes that emphasize hands-on, interactive, collaborative learning. Last fall, after years of experimentation and debate and resistance from students, who initially petitioned against it, the department made the change permanent. Already, attendance is up and the failure rate has dropped by more than 50 percent.

This has been the situation at United State Military Academy for years.

“Just as you can’t become a marathon runner by watching marathons on TV,” Professor Mazur said, “likewise for science, you have to go through the thought processes of doing science and not just watch your instructor do it.”

Instead of blackboards, the walls are covered with white boards and huge display screens. Circulating with a team of teaching assistants, the professor makes brief presentations of general principles and engages the students as they work out related concepts in small groups.

The new approach at M.I.T. is known by its acronym, TEAL, for Technology Enhanced Active Learning.

After our discussion I wanted to jot some notes down that have been on my mind for awhile. I've tried to provide some short, mid and long term suggestions with a fair number of questions. Here's a list of the general topic areas that I'll cover.

1) 25th Street Upgrade 2) General appearance of streets 3) Reinvigorating the Entrepreneurial Spirit 4) Upgrading recreation and park infrastructure 5) NorthFork Riverwalk Project 6) Overall Vision for the Community --> Priorities (with a futures context) --> Citizen Buy-in --> Implementation Strategy

Happy New Year and good luck on your journey!

Mark Hall

1) 25th Street Upgrade. Thank you for attending the public forum concerning the 25th Street Upgrade. There was a lot of discussion on the multi-purpose trail. I believe we need a culture of change in our community to recognize the importance of endorsing such a basic and fundamental change in our city's infrastructure investment. Dennis Smith did a good job of explaining the safety reasons for an expanded path and the community's goal to connect more of our community’s resources such as the parks. The other part of the equation is the importance of the "safe route to schools" philosophy of tying our neighborhoods together with the respective school systems. We need to consider the "and/both" approach on many of these infrastructure projects. I only notice one other City Council member in attendance (Jim Lange, Dale Coy left before I arrived at 5:40).

To gain acceptance by the citizens with property along the path would the City agree to clear snow during the winter? This expense could be paid for by Keno revenues. The City plans to hire 2 new employees as part of the Keno revenue. [Should we consider outsourcing some of these "less critical" tasks to private firms?] There could be a posted sign or a place marker in or next to the path to let citizens know that this infrastructure is being supported by Keno revenues. Here again tying the revenue directly to the benefit/service that individuals will see every day.

2) General Appearance of Streets and right of ways. I'm concerned that we are not putting our best face forward when people visit our community. For example, we continue to paint over chipping paint on road side curbs, this is just like painting a house with peeling paint, it might look bright but it is still looks ugly.

Even through the summer there was still winter gravel in the turn lanes on 13th Street. For months I would still see gravel along the curbs on 13th Street in the commercial areas.

Over 30 years ago the curbs along the right-away were edged with a City machine to remove overhanging grass and weeds. This process was discontinued at some point. We have a very expensive curb grinding machine that I don't believe is getting much use. Can this equipment, with an attached edger, be used in collaboration with the Street and Parks departments? This same machine could be used to brush off the peeling paint on the curbs before painting. In addition is this one of those "less critical" tasks that can be outsourced to reduce costs?

Why can't the once used gravel from sanding the streets in the winter be used to fill the pot holes at the Memorial Park parking area? My hope is there can better collaboration between the different division, e.g., street department sweeps the streets and puts the used gravel in the Parks' associated parking areas. These pots holes have not seen much attention since 2000 and I think some of them have been in existence since 1978.

3) Reinvigorating the Entrepreneurial Spirit. From the Visioning 2026 project there was a ground swell of interest and energy in improving our live long learning opportunities in our community as well as fostering economic development initiatives focused on entrepreneurial skill development. Besides experiencing a growing chamber of commerce membership we now have a local SCORE chapter with a close tie-in to the Elkhorn Valley Economic Council. It is encouraging the chamber is sponsoring the Connecting Leaders in the Community (CLiC) and the Workforce Development Committee. The one thing we are missing is the culture of entrepreneurship in our younger population. Here again over 15 years ago there was a local Junior Achievement chapter but has since died. I believe there is a great opportunity to reintroduce JA to our community with increased young professional interest and our business leaders collaborating with our local schools system leaders. The introduction of JA is a valid service to the youth and community just as the junior high has seen the increased need for after school programs (beyond the traditional programs of sports, band, clubs). The JA program can be an excellent parallel activity with similar high school programs such as Future Business Leaders of America (FBLA), Distributive Education Clubs of America (DECA) and Future Problem Solvers. As far as I’m concerned this is a key long-term economic development priority that needs to be funded with monies and people.

What can we leverage to improve out entrepreneur spirit? One thing that is helping and can be expanded upon is our broadband capabilities. With fewer dollars for other federal and state supported infrastructure projects, e.g., roads, we need to extend our thinking on other transformational skills to help our current and future citizens. How can we create a center of excellence for entrepreneurial skills, a creative molecular economy incubator center (http://www.linkedin.com/groups?about=&gid=143752&trk=anet_ug_grppro, http://communitiesofthefuture.org, http://communitiesofthefuture.org/projects.htm)? For example, expanding our current efforts for internships and supporting these interns and firms, scholarships for participating in a CME incubator through technology introduction and giving back to the community through their exchange of knowledge.

NPPD is implementing new electrical monitoring equipment and processes in parts of the state (Two-Way Automated Communications System (TWACS)). Norfolk will be scheduled in the future. How and when is the City preparing to take advantage of newer technologies to improve service and reduce costs? How can our broadband capabilities, along with remote sensing (e.g., RFID) improve the services being offered (e.g., water meter readings)? http://www.nppd.com/Newsroom/NewsRelease.asp?NewsReleaseID=346 What City website services should be incorporated, e.g., real simple syndication (RSS) for automatic notices of postings?

Recycling is another subject that was always put on the back burner, in part due to huge commitment to the Clarkson Landfill. The community has voiced their agreement to support recycling, even if there is a small additional charge (refer to Chamber of Commerce polling last summer). GreenFiber has been an excellent recycling business leader putting out and collecting recycling without costing citizens any money out of their pocket, just time to drop it off. Another recycling business has expanded their hours since last summer. Recycling gets the whole community involved, from the great depression area grandparents to grade school children--and is better for the environment.

4) Upgrading recreation and park infrastructure. Pat Mrsny has done an admirable job given the budget he has had to work with the past 20 plus years. The facilities reflect the neglect of spending on infrastructure and the needs of a thriving and progressive community. For example, the $8k spent on disc golf courses at Skyview Lake and Ta Ha Zouka is resulting in a lot of use by multi-generation participants. I believe the community needs to conduct an in depth comprehensive plan for the next 20 years in relationship to future trends (e.g., changing school year schedules, fuel costs, technologies, aging demographics, etc.). The Visioning 2026 project 5 step process model would be excellent reference point to start from.

What are the community's priorities for the park and recreation infrastructure and programs? Have there been any customer and community surveys done in the last ten years? Who are the stakeholders in the community that would have an influence on future plans? How do we compare with other communities our size, climate, and trade area? How are we communicating Pat Mrsny's priorities that were presented to the City Council last summer (Keno revenues) to the rest of the community? Is it posted on the City's website, are there news releases going out to media outlets, what is being discussed by the park & recreation subcommittee?

With two public entities involved in recreation, schools and the city, there should be a very close collaboration on how to maximize the use of public funds, e.g., sharing of equipment, facilities, etc. When you have an overused Memorial Football Field and an underutilized (# of events held) Middle School sports complex when it comes to football there should be a lot more communication and cooperation.

What recreation services could better pay for the infrastructure investment? For example, expanded and better quality RV service investments could be paid for through daily service fees? There are North Fork River corridor areas that could be suited for expanded RV services, e.g., north of Country Club, north of Omaha Ave. (east side of river) besides Ta Ha Zouka. This is where tourism can be seriously considered as an economic development priority.

During the $60K landscape study/plan I learned that a lot of communities have an arbor/tree commission that is an advisory board to the city council. Yes this would be another committee yet it would give another group of passionate citizens the opportunity to engage the City and the community for a positive and multi-generation impact. It would be great to have a trails and tree commissions collaborating together to move our community forward.

My ideas and comments concerning the pool replacement program is worthy of a separate discussion.

5) NorthFork Riverwalk project. I suggest we use the grass roots organization and participation of the NorthFork Riverwalk project to enhance the community involvement with park and recreation infrastructure future investments. For example, the project has positive activities related to city responsibilities such as: - helping foster a vision for the community -- improved communication and dialogue from across the community (business, life experiences) -- collaborate with other tax collecting entities to improve return on invested monies -- voted by Norfolk Daily News readership as the third top story of 2008. - encourage economic development -- increase property values through investments -- establish a destination for tourism other than for retail -- enhance opportunities for non-traditional ED -- pay for infrastructure through TIF (roads, sewer & water (broadband?)) -- increased sales tax revenues -- promote the use of more hybrid/electric vehicles - develop community amenities -- expanded trails network along with connection to Cowboy Trail -- expanded recreation opportunities for multi-generational users -- increase health awareness through walking to available services -- tying neighborhoods together along with the schools -- enhance multiple housing options close to city center - increase options for city land usage and exchange/swap - storm water drainage

6) Overall Vision for the Community. I'm encouraged to hear of a Citizen Advisory Council being considered by the City Council and the implementation of the Communicator group by the Norfolk Public Schools. This increased opportunity to dialogue is important for community involvement and commitment while encompassing trust and accountability.

Our community needs to implement LB840. We are already collecting the sales tax revenue which is not being directed to this program (other than $42k to EVEDC). The plan must be one that the community endorses, builds trust, ensures accountability, and provides for a process that takes into account future trends and their impact to the community and region. I believe we should integrate or at least collaborate closely with the EVEDC, NPPD, NAR, and Norfolk Chamber committees. One of the first things I would consider is hiring a City Planner to add to the staff, possibly someone that could be groomed to become the a city administrator someday.

Typically the community can establish strategic plans because of past experience and a well understood linear process. The challenge we face is the world is changing so quickly that we need a more adaptive planning model that incorporates the near term strategic planning goals with the future impacts based on trends that are just now beginning to surface.

Our community leaders should be able to evaluate many of these emerging trends and communicate the potential impacts they will have on our culture, community, and citizens. Our community culture needs to accept change where the outcomes are not necessarily well understood--a very important leadership issue. For example, it is difficult for promoters to communicate the vision for the NorthFork Riverwalk Project when we don't necessarily have expected outcomes as we are educating the community on the possibilities. Our ability, commitment and trust to start the master planning process without having raised all the funds is a great testament of the board members' confidence. It is adaptive planning that can help us in parallel with numerous activities, connections, and stakeholders while accepting risks knowing that we don't know.

On the near term front several companies are already supporting internships, e.g., Norfolk Daily News, Nebraska Life Magazine, Faith Regional, and Nucor Steel. However we are not doing enough as a business and welcoming community to make their total experience rewarding so they begin their professional careers right here in Northeast Nebraska. Although the Chamber has instituted a work force development task committee there is a need for a living environment where these young professionals can live and socialize while providing easier access for business, commercial, and community relationships. Could we consider converting a floor of the previously known Madison Hotel (4th & Norfolk) for these interns? Also we should consider converting the ballroom to a technology, communications, and gathering center while attracting another restaurant operation to the main floor.

Another near term and long term impact example is water use. There will be many direct, indirect, and oblique impacts and connections related to the decision to not increase the number of ground water wells, irrigated crop acres, the livestock feeding operations and industrial water usage. How will we transform our area economic development when production agriculture has been throttled to a steady state and future industrial expansion is at risk?

Al Roder has a simple yet effective approach that we need to expand on. Help our current business grow by bringing their suppliers closer to them is a great first step. Over a hundred years ago our entrepreneurial spirit was transformed into reality when homesteaders changed our landscape and prosperity. Fifty years ago this was accelerated with center pivot irrigation along with expanded rural electric infrastructure along with some major manufacturing operations. Renewable energy is now on our doorstep as new economic engine. Now we need to consider our citizens creative and entrepreneurial spirit to once again increase our opportunities for the future. For example, how do we replicate a 30 ten person Nucor Steel for creative manufacturing processes (Nucor detailing center, Norfolk Specialties Inc., Arkfeld Manufacturing, Classen Turf, NIM), collaborative, interconnected, and decentralized renewable energy production, value added food manufacturing (Tielke Sandwiches, Madison Foods), recycle-reuse service business operations (Todd Dickie's Power Sports Nation, Green Fiber, MP Global), specialty manufacturing (Veyance, Tyco) expanded federal and state contract and value added services (e.g., Sterling Computers, The Day Companies)?

How can we help business leaders adopt new technologies such as Second Life 3D Virtual Reality? Here is a link to a recent BBC video entitled "Doing Business in Second Life". This just reinforces the work what Larry Wenzl (engineer at Nucor Steel) and others are working together on in-world. Consider the comment near the end of the video... "It is still relatively early days for this technology..." and consulting without all the travel arrangements and challenges. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7777485.stm, http://www.visioning2026.com/blog/post/area-resident-presents-at-world-futures-society-in-washington-dc/

If green technology is in our countries future where do we want to participate and lead in this new economy? Which of those industries listed under the Green Tech topics (right side half way down web page) can we find ourselves involved in or helping existing local companies already involved in? http://news.cnet.com/8301-11128_3-10123947-54.html?part=rss&tag=feed&subj=GreenTech

What if we changed the model of who owns landing slots at hub airports? Community(ies) owning the landing slots to a hub airport could then incentivize different commercial, shared, and private air service providers to make stops at their airport. By developing a cooperative/association/LLC with other similar communities we develop a new marketing and transportation model that better serves our community and economic development opportunities. Have we considered marketing our local airport services, e.g., services, fuel, hangers, maintenance, wireless connections, etc., using capabilities such as internet marketing? I was unable to find a direct link to the airport authority or facilities from the City’s website home page!? We should be using the internet to promote this valuable resource.

It is encouraging that the City’s financial health appears to be in good condition, witness the $6M in government backed CDs recently purchased. One of our challenges for the future can be summed up in the following statement, "A transformation of spirit without a direction and a clear plan might bring you happiness for a while, but if that happiness is not reinforced by real change in the real world, it is always short lived."

My comments below are in regard to the working group session held January 12th concerning economic develop proposed changes.

I believe we have a good economic development system operated through the Elkhorn Valley Economic Development Council (EVEDC), while it may need a revised focus and course correction given our changing times and future trends.

What has changed in 5 years to justify a significant change in direction since all of the current council members were in place 5 years ago, is the system broke or does it just need goal and action plan changes and more economic development resources from the City? The citizens approved the collection of approximately $250,000 a year for economic development from sales tax revenues, just not the plan on how to expend those monies.

Regional economic develop will be even more critical in the years ahead. We have that structure, participation, and trust already established in the EVEDC. We should not be considering backing out of this existing relationship; rather we should be discussing how we can build upon this collaborative system. This will become even more critical if the temporary moratorium on new irrigation wells and irrigated acres, industrial expansion for our region is made permanent. Putting a “throttle governor” on production agriculture and industrial growth will impact every community, school district, county for our foreseeable future.

Do the strategic planning goals need to be revised and the steps modified to reach tangible milestones, probably given changing world economies and the synergies we already have with our current businesses. Let’s use the connections EVEDC has already made in our region and the relationships that have developed over that time period to forge revised strategic planning goals.

I believe expanding the EVEDC executive team would be an excellent first step where the City of Norfolk can allocate additional personal resources to the effort. The City Council should have additional representation on the board when these additional resources are allocated. I believe there are sufficient accountability measures in place to verify we are getting value for the dollars invested. We don’t need to create more bureaucracy; we just need more vision and the understanding of trends and their impacts to our region. We need board members that have a passion for the region and also have the vision and understanding of strategic plans relative to the ever changing world around us.

We are building the case of connecting and collaborating critical resources whether they are physically collocated in the cubicle next to each other or not. Given our communications technologies we can enhance our synergy without the creation of more bureaucracy while maintaining accountability and visibility.

I believe all partners need to provide monies besides personal resources to the economic development equation. When you don’t provide a monetary stake in an investment then will you apply your best personnel to the task, sufficient time to the endeavor, and the commitment to the process? Does the same pay formula need to be followed for all partners, not necessarily which can be reflected in the board composition. Given my experience, you put your most valuable assets to work on the most tangible long term tasks and expected outcomes. For a relative simple example, we are not filling potholes in the streets rather we are defining the goals for what type of transportation and communications systems we need for the future.

I’m convinced we can establish agreements between EVEDC and the City to minimize any overlap and ensure the team members are working together toward a common goal. The members of the executive team would have their own personal performance plan that can be administered by their employer. The existing EVEDC board and City Council would decide whether to have a single team leader and what those roles and responsibilities would be. The other regional partners would continue to contribute their fair share in support of their communities and counties economic develop efforts. Does this generate more challenges, yes, however the increased collaboration should generate improved results.

Please seriously consider continuing to build on the EVEDC structure, process, and personnel that has worked and can continue to work with all partners in our area. The City has already provided approximately $250,000 over the past 5 years to EVEDC. Increase the City’s investment in a system that has even greater promise for our future. Let’s build on this solid base of trust and cooperation with increased City resources!

Mark Hall “Transforming Ideas into Reality”

Larry's 30 minute presentation (2.8 MB PDF) http://www.visioning2026.com/docs/WFS2008Presentation-LarryWenzl.pdf to the World Futures Society held in Washington DC, July 27, 2008 was part of a session chaired by Rick Smyre and David Baldwin, titled, Growing Your Community for Constant Change. Larry's presentation is titled, "Interlocking Networks in Second Life."

Read more about the agenda from the final program, http://www.wfs.org/WF2008finalprogram.pdf Washington DC, July 2008, page 26-27, Growing Your Community for Constant Change, Sunday July 27th, 2-3:30 pm

The presentation material included: (1) Emerging tools of virtual reality, virtual reality is an "Immersive" technology where you create connections with others and why this technology will be so prevalent, e.g., remote collaboration, enhanced communications, team productivity, reduced costs. (2) Collaborative creation is fun, involving virtual meetup of diverse group, futures generative dialogue, construct (3) Virtual networking to include the benefits, no geographic boundaries, merging of different networks of people

Larry shared with the audience that there are weak signal inside an emerging trend which includes: - In the UK, Second Life use is increasing faster than other online services (except for Facebook and YouTube) - Emergence of organizations existing only in the virtual world - In-world partnering - New technology will allow avatars to teleport between worlds

So how as a community can we take advantage of this trend to prepare for the future? Should we consider a 2nd Enlightenment Club in the Norfolk area that will use 3D virtual reality as a stepping stone for endorsing future changes? What about on-line social network such as LinkedIn (http://www.linkedin.com/home) and Creative Molecular Economy group (http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/143752/4871AD73E41E) and the Community Transformer Network (www.communitytransformer.com).

Stay tuned for more 3D virtual reality Second Life stories and their impact on communities and regional areas like Norfolk and Northeast Nebraska.

Related material was also highlighted in a Wallstreet Journal article. The financial marketplace, bandwidth, hardware, networked community are leading indicators for statements such as this, "Last year, Gartner Research predicted that 80% of all active Internet users will have a virtual-world presence by 2011."

A number of industry groups are working on open 3D standards. As soon as one of these gains widespread acceptance, anyone will be able to build a virtual world that is connected to any other similarly coded virtual world – just like HTML now allows anyone to create a 2D Web page that is connected to any other 2D Web page.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121625069754060057.html?mod=djkeyword

Add www.Visioning2026.com to your bookmarks and your RSS reader. Contact Larry Wenzl through email at wenzll@asme.org.

Several local Master Capacity Builders in concert with individuals involved with developing Second Life collaboration opportunities have offered a concept paper The Third Millennial Center as a vehicle to develop a new community learning platform.

The Third Millennial Center concept paper integrates multi-generational living facilities, high bandwidth communications architecture, technology laboratory, demonstration, and education center, entertainment and recreation activities, food and eating operations, along with information and knowledge kiosk center(s), and an eco-friendly natural landscape environment with renewable energy resouces.

The next stage of the Visioning 2026 process will begin next week in Norfolk.

Jennifer Adams, coordinator of the program for the Norfolk Area Chamber of Commerce, said a number of focus groups would be formed to allow Norfolk and Madison County residents to become involved in the development of practical, tangible ideas for the future that they would like to see explored.

The focus groups will meet at various times to discuss education, energy, health care, economic development, tourism/recreation, technology and workforce/demographic issues.

The information generated from the focus groups will be the impetus for the development of a list of ideas, projects and trends that will be evaluated through citizen polls, which is also a part of Visioning 2026, Adams said.

Visioning 2026 is a communitywide project envisioned by the partnership of the Daily News along with the City of Norfolk, Madison County, Northeast Community College, the Norfolk Area Chamber of Commerce, the Norfolk Public Schools and the Leadership Norfolk program.

The ultimate goal of the program is to allow citizens to help shape the future of Norfolk and Madison County by 2026.

The process began earlier this year when several dialogue groups were formed to help participants learn of national and global trends that could affect Northeast Nebraska in the future.

In September, nationally known futurist Marv Cetron was brought to Norfolk as part of Visioning 2026 to allow local and area residents to hear his take on those trends and which ones the Norfolk area might want to try to capitalize on.

The focus groups now are the next important step in the process, Adams said.

Any Norfolkans or Madison County residents who would like to participate in the focus groups can do so by contacting Pam Carlson at the chamber of commerce at 371-4862 or go online to www.visioning2026.com. More information about Visioning 2026 also is available at that Web site.

But there are people in the world who would take advantage of such an opportunity.

In fact, more than 200 people in Barcelona, Spain, plunked down $200 to have an RFID chip injected in their left shoulder so they could be quickly identified as members of the Baja Club.

So, what is an RFID tag and why might it be important to the future of Norfolk and Madison County?

RFID stands for Radio Frequency Identification. An RFID tag is part computer chip and part radio transmitter that can store information and respond to queries from an RFID transmitter.

Dr. Marv Cetron, president of Forecasters International, said he thinks Norfolk would be a logical place to manufacture RFID tags.

Cetron, a Washington, D.C.,-based futurist, is helping organizers of the Visioning 2026 project - which involves the City of Norfolk, Madison County, Northeast Community College and the Norfolk Public Schools - identify trends, challenges and strategies to better prepare Norfolk and Madison County for the future.

RFID tags have many more practical applications than identifying members of a club. And, although they sound like something from "Star Wars," the technology has been around for years.

In fact, the military used them during World War II to distinguish their airplanes from enemy planes, Cetron said.

Plus, Cetron said, they've been used for years in the livestock industry to help keep track of cattle destined to become part of the food supply.

And the applications are endless.

For instance, manufacturers can track products from assembly line to delivery, and customers can scan an incoming pallet to make sure each item that is supposed to be included, is included. Wal-Mart, for example, already requires some of its suppliers to use RFID tags on its products.

Workers who are allowed access to sensitive areas can be tagged for identification purposes.

Hotels can use RFID tags as room keys that can be reprogrammed each time the room is rented. The tags could also be used to track the guest's bill for meals, movies and other items.

Tags can be used to monitor the temperature and condition of food being shipped around the world.

Cetron said a plane could fly over a cargo ship, read what's in the boxes and transfer the information to the bridge of the ship or to another site.

And starting next month, RFID tags will placed on passports.

But Cetron said there are still bugs that need to be worked out of the technology.

For example, there currently is no global standard for the system, which means one company's tags may not work with another company's scanners.

And the data in the tag can be accessed and even changed by a knowledgeable hacker.

But the real obstacle, he said, is cost.

"Fortunately, the cost . . . is dropping rapidly," he added. "Passive tags are expected to reach 6 cents each by 2010 and just one cent per tag by 2015. At those prices, RFID becomes very attractive."

While Cetron acknowledges that not all of the bugs have been worked out of the RFID tags and systems, he believes their "future is bright."

In fact, he said one market research firm estimates that 33 billion RFID tags will be manufactured in the United States by 2010, which is up from just 1.3 billion in 2005.

Another firm estimates that the market for RFID tags and readers will grow from $2.7 billion in 2005 to $26 billion in 2016.

One of the biggest obstacles to meeting those numbers, Cetron said, is the lack of people who know how to make the products.

Which opens a window of opportunity for Norfolk and Madison County.

"Look for a specific area - such as applications for cattle - and focus on that initially. That gets you a leg up on the industry," he said.