Featured Stories
USPOULTRY Seeks BRI Preproposals to Evaluate On-Farm Poultry Depopulation Using Nitrogen
TUCKER, Georgia, Sept. 17 -- The U.S. Poultry Foundation issued the following news release:
* * *
Tucker, GA - September 16, 2026
USPOULTRY Seeks BRI Preproposals to Evaluate On-Farm Poultry Depopulation Using Nitrogen
The U.S. Poultry & Egg Association (USPOULTRY) and the USPOULTRY Foundation are seeking research preproposals to evaluate the use of nitrogen-based methods for emergency depopulation of commercial poultry flocks. Whole-house nitrogen gas and nitrogen-infused foam have emerged as potential options during outbreaks of highly pathogenic avian influenza, foreign animal diseases and
... Show Full Article
TUCKER, Georgia, Sept. 17 -- The U.S. Poultry Foundation issued the following news release:
* * *
Tucker, GA - September 16, 2026
USPOULTRY Seeks BRI Preproposals to Evaluate On-Farm Poultry Depopulation Using Nitrogen
The U.S. Poultry & Egg Association (USPOULTRY) and the USPOULTRY Foundation are seeking research preproposals to evaluate the use of nitrogen-based methods for emergency depopulation of commercial poultry flocks. Whole-house nitrogen gas and nitrogen-infused foam have emerged as potential options during outbreaks of highly pathogenic avian influenza, foreign animal diseases andother emergency situations.
These methods may offer opportunities to reduce labor requirements and live bird handling, enhance safety for farm personnel and emergency responders and improve the efficiency of large-scale emergency response. Additional research is needed to validate their effectiveness and practicality under commercial production conditions.
Through its Board Research Initiative (BRI), USPOULTRY aims to evaluate the efficacy, bird welfare outcomes, operational feasibility and biosecurity implications of whole-house nitrogen gas and nitrogen-infused foam depopulation systems. Research may examine performance across poultry species, ages, flock densities and housing systems; bird welfare indicators; environmental and engineering factors; occupational safety; biosecurity considerations; equipment and labor requirements; and costs and logistics associated with commercial-scale implementation.
The goal is to establish science-based best management practices and standardized protocols that can support effective emergency depopulation and disease response.
Researchers from colleges, universities and research institutions are invited to submit preproposals by Nov. 2. To view more information about this topic and how to submit preproposals, visit the USPOULTRY BRI webpage.
* * *
About USPOULTRY
U.S. Poultry & Egg Association (USPOULTRY) is the All Feather Association progressively serving its poultry and egg members through research, education, communications and technical services.Founded in 1947, USPOULTRY is based in Tucker, Georgia.
* * *
About USPOULTRY Foundation
The USPOULTRY Foundation's mission is to support the recruitment and training of the brightest students, seek and fund scientific research, foster student scientists and promote careers in the poultry and egg industry.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.poultryfoundation.org/news/pressRelease.cfm?pid=0C770E7EB88F8AF37228FF474267BF93
USPOULTRY and Foundation Invest $465,000 for Five New Research Projects
TUCKER, Georgia, Sept. 16 -- The U.S. Poultry Foundation issued the following news release:
* * *
USPOULTRY and Foundation Invest $465,000 for Five New Research Projects
September 14, 2026
USPOULTRY and the USPOULTRY Foundation are continuing their longstanding investment in advancing poultry and egg industry research, approving $465,000 in funding for five new research projects at five institutions through the organizations' Comprehensive Research Program. The boards of directors of USPOULTRY and the USPOULTRY Foundation approved the grants based on recommendations from the Foundation Research
... Show Full Article
TUCKER, Georgia, Sept. 16 -- The U.S. Poultry Foundation issued the following news release:
* * *
USPOULTRY and Foundation Invest $465,000 for Five New Research Projects
September 14, 2026
USPOULTRY and the USPOULTRY Foundation are continuing their longstanding investment in advancing poultry and egg industry research, approving $465,000 in funding for five new research projects at five institutions through the organizations' Comprehensive Research Program. The boards of directors of USPOULTRY and the USPOULTRY Foundation approved the grants based on recommendations from the Foundation ResearchAdvisory Committee (FRAC). Comprised of professionals representing diverse segments of the poultry and egg industry, the FRAC evaluates research proposals for scientific merit, industry relevance and potential to deliver meaningful, real-world value.
For more than six decades, research has been a cornerstone of USPOULTRY's service to the industry. What began in the early 1960s with funding dedicated to poultry disease research has evolved into a comprehensive program supporting research across all aspects of poultry and egg production and processing. Since the program's inception, USPOULTRY and the USPOULTRY Foundation have reinvested more than $40 million in research, supporting work at more than 50 universities and federal and state research facilities. The newly funded projects will address priority issues facing the poultry and egg industry, supporting research designed to generate practical knowledge, strengthen industry practices and help prepare the industry for emerging challenges.
"Investing in research is an investment in the future of our industry," said Bill Griffith, Peco Foods, USPOULTRY chair and FRAC member. "The challenges facing poultry and egg production continue to evolve, and it is important that our industry has the science and information needed to respond effectively. By supporting research driven by real industry needs, we can help advance practical solutions that strengthen our industry today while positioning it for continued success in the years ahead."
The research grants for each institution include:
Reducing Layout Times and Improve Heat Treatment During Windrowing Using a Low-Cost Covered Static Aerated Pile (CSAP) Approach
Auburn University
* * *
Repurposing FDA-Approved Animal Drugs to Control Histomonas meleagridis (Blackhead Disease) in Turkeys
Clemson University
* * *
Novel Vaccine-Based Approach for the Control of Avian Pathogenic E. coli (APEC) in Poultry Production
University of Georgia
* * *
New Generation Clostridium perfringens Vaccine Development
University of Florida
* * *
Characterization of Turkey Coronavirus Transmission Routes in the U.S. Turkey Industry
The Ohio State University
* * *
About USPOULTRY
U.S. Poultry & Egg Association (USPOULTRY) is the All Feather Association progressively serving its poultry and egg members through research, education, communications and technical services.Founded in 1947, USPOULTRY is based in Tucker, Georgia.
* * *
About USPOULTRY Foundation
The USPOULTRY Foundation's mission is to support the recruitment and training of the brightest students, seek and fund scientific research, foster student scientists and promote careers in the poultry and egg industry.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.poultryfoundation.org/news/pressRelease.cfm?pid=0AB3D16B23A92D01BF2B246572C82F57
SEC Proposals to Silence Shareholders Would Undermine Property Rights and Trust in Public Markets
OAKLAND, California, Sept. 16 -- As You Sow Foundation posted the following news release:
* * *
SEC Proposals to Silence Shareholders Would Undermine Property Rights and Trust in Public Markets
*
MEDIA CONTACT: Ryon Harms, ryon@asyousow.org, (310) 730-9407
EL CERRITO, CALIFORNIA -September 16, 2026 -The Securities and Exchange Commission today proposed to rescind Rule 14a-8, the rule that has governed the inclusion of shareholder proposals in company proxy materials since 1942, along with amendments to Rule 14a-4 and the elimination of Rule 14a-6's Notice of Exempt Solicitation. As You Sow,
... Show Full Article
OAKLAND, California, Sept. 16 -- As You Sow Foundation posted the following news release:
* * *
SEC Proposals to Silence Shareholders Would Undermine Property Rights and Trust in Public Markets
*
MEDIA CONTACT: Ryon Harms, ryon@asyousow.org, (310) 730-9407
EL CERRITO, CALIFORNIA -September 16, 2026 -The Securities and Exchange Commission today proposed to rescind Rule 14a-8, the rule that has governed the inclusion of shareholder proposals in company proxy materials since 1942, along with amendments to Rule 14a-4 and the elimination of Rule 14a-6's Notice of Exempt Solicitation. As You Sow,the nation's leading shareholder representative, underscores that the proposals would remove one of the most effective and least expensive risk-detection mechanisms in American capital markets, at a cost borne not by advocacy organizations but by every investor who owns a share of a public company.
"This is not a loss for any one organization; it is a loss for the free market," said Andrew Behar, CEO of As You Sow. "Shareholder proposals are the most efficient and inexpensive form of risk intelligence a board will ever receive. They arrive early, in writing, from the people whose capital is at stake, and they cost a company almost nothing to read and engage. Killing the canary does not make the mine any safer."
Rule 14a-8 is not a niche instrument. Independent board directors, annual elections for boards, and advisory votes on executive compensation were all advanced through shareholder proposals before becoming mainstream governance practice across the U.S. market. Each strengthened accountability and improved alignment between executives and long-term owners without new legislation or regulatory mandate. A recent academic study of nearly 10,000 shareholder proposals at S&P Composite 1500 firms found that board responsiveness to proposals can enhance firm value.
The mechanisms the Commission proposes to eliminate are, in other words, a process for shareholders to propose, understand, and vote on shareholder proposals which have produced much of the governance architecture on which current valuations and the free market rest, while also helping companies and shareholders to collectively act to reduce risk and to deliver increased company value.
"The Commission's position is that it has lacked authority for this rule since 1942," said Danielle Fugere, President and Chief Counsel of As You Sow. "That is a remarkable conclusion to reach after 84 years of administering the rule, defending it successfully in federal court, and amending it repeatedly with Congress fully aware of its existence. In 1934, Congress federalized proxy regulation precisely because state law had proven inadequate to protect dispersed shareholders."
The Commission frames rescission as restoring state authority and describes the current competition among states for corporate domicile as a reason to act now. But companies select their state of incorporation; their shareholders do not. Delaware, Texas, and Nevada have all recently amended their corporate codes to strengthen the position of corporate insiders relative to ordinary shareholders, and Texas has imposed share ownership thresholds that restrict who may file a shareholder proposal or a derivative suit at all.
For a diversified investor, a single national standard would be replaced by up to fifty separate frameworks, most of which do not yet exist, adjudicated in fifty separate court systems at the investor's expense. It is fragmentation with a built-in incentive for companies to relocate toward whichever regime offers to silence shareholders.
The accompanying Rule amendments only serve to further reduce information to and from shareholders. The proposed change to Rule 14a-4 would grant companies discretionary authority to vote proxies on matters raised at a shareholder meeting but absent from or minimized on the proxy card. The Commission acknowledges that it anticipates shareholders may have difficulty in having their votes counted for proposals brought forward in other ways due to the new rules. A further amendment would compress the broker search period from 20 business days to five, shortening the window in which any investor can identify fellow owners and communicate with them
Fugere notes, "the Commission's proposed changes to Rules 14a-8, 14a-4, and 14a-6 collectively demonstrate that it is not creating a level playing field for state laws to operate, instead it has tilted the field strongly in favor of shielding management from shareholder input. While the proposed Recission of 14a-8 might save companies from expending a vanishingly small percentage of their profits in responding to shareholder proposals, Rule 14a-4 imposes a significant financial burden on investors that otherwise seek to put valid proposals on a company's proxy while creating a byzantine and difficult process which favors shareholder votes going to support management."
Finally, Rule 14a-6 would eliminate the Notice of Exempt Solicitation entirely, eight months after the Commission barred most shareholders from filing one. The stated rationale is to ensure EDGAR does not become a platform communicating views not required to be publicly disseminated. The result is information asymmetry: a company's proxy statement remains mandatory and publicly filed, while shareholder analysis of that statement has no official home. As You Sow launched Proxy Open Exchange in April to preserve public access to proxy memos after the January restrictions, and that platform is now, by default, the market's primary repository.
"Taken together with the Commission's abandonment of the no-action process last month and its proposed rollback of climate disclosure, the direction is unmistakable: public companies are being permitted to operate with the opacity of private ones while continuing to hold the public's capital," said Behar. "Investors did not ask for this. The largest asset managers did not ask for this. We would encourage every institution that votes proxies, every pension trustee, and every company that has ever used a shareholder proposal as an early signal of trouble to file comments. This is not a contest between advocates and corporations. It is a question of whether American markets keep the information flow that makes them worth investing in."
As You Sow is the nation's leading shareholder representative, with a 30+ year track record promoting environmental and social corporate responsibility. As You Sow addresses a range of issues that affect shareholder value including climate change, ocean plastics, toxins in the food system, biodiversity, racial justice, and workplace diversity. See As You Sow's shareholder resolution tracker.
***
Original text here: https://www.asyousow.org/press-releases/2026/9/16/sec-proposals-to-silence-shareholders-would-undermine-property-rights-and-trust-in-public-marketsnbsp
Reason Foundation Issues Commentary: Government Agencies Must Be Held Responsible for Negative Outcomes From Their Use of AI
LOS ANGELES, California, Sept. 16 -- The Reason Foundation issued the following news:
* * *
Government agencies must be held responsible for negative outcomes from their use of AI
Government agencies must pair artificial intelligence deployment with clear rules, human oversight, and enforceable accountability for internal and vendor use.
Richard Sill
Technology Policy Analyst
September 15, 2026
Government agencies are increasingly using artificial intelligence (AI) to reduce administrative burdens and improve public services. When agencies apply AI to practical, well-defined tasks, it can
... Show Full Article
LOS ANGELES, California, Sept. 16 -- The Reason Foundation issued the following news:
* * *
Government agencies must be held responsible for negative outcomes from their use of AI
Government agencies must pair artificial intelligence deployment with clear rules, human oversight, and enforceable accountability for internal and vendor use.
Richard Sill
Technology Policy Analyst
September 15, 2026
Government agencies are increasingly using artificial intelligence (AI) to reduce administrative burdens and improve public services. When agencies apply AI to practical, well-defined tasks, it canspeed up routine work. This can free public employees to focus on complex cases and provide direct services.
However, AI can also produce errors or unfair outcomes when government agencies use it to influence decisions about people's rights, benefits, or safety without adequate testing and oversight. For example, a system used to screen benefit applications could incorrectly identify a person's application as suspicious or incomplete, delaying assistance while the case is reviewed. A law enforcement system could incorrectly connect a person or vehicle to an investigation, leading officers to question or investigate someone who is not involved. These actions can also be difficult for residents and agency staff to understand or correct. AI can magnify these existing government failures by applying the same flawed rules, inaccurate data, or biased patterns across many cases in a short period.
AI can also create privacy and security risks when government agencies or vendors collect, retain, share, or expose sensitive government information without adequate controls. A breach or unauthorized use of agency data can reveal personal information or allow data to be used beyond legal or agency-approved limits.
To minimize these harms, government agencies must pair AI deployment with clear rules, human oversight, and enforceable accountability for agencies and vendors.
Streamlining government work
AI can help public employees complete repetitive, high-volume tasks more quickly. For example, it can prepare a first draft of a routine letter, summarize an authorized case file, or pull information from a standardized form. Agencies should begin with defined, low-risk tasks and measure whether a tool is accurate, secure, and worth its cost before expanding its use.
Governments are already showing how AI can support routine work at every level of the public sector. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) uses its internal Elsa platform to assist with scientific review and operational tasks. Elsa helps staff review clinical protocols and summarize reports of harmful side effects. It can also search large document collections, compare labels, analyze data and generate code. Subject-matter experts verify the inputs, analytic processes, and implementation of AI-supported outputs.
The North Carolina Department of State Treasurer uses ChatGPT in its Unclaimed Property Division and related offices. The tool helped employees locate businesses that may hold unclaimed assets, summarize regulations and lengthy materials, analyze financial information, and draft clearer communications for businesses and residents. Pilot participants reported saving 30 to 60 or more minutes each day.
Cities are also moving beyond small-scale testing. San Francisco expanded Microsoft 365 Copilot Chat from a pilot of more than 2,000 employees to nearly 30,000 staff members. The platform helps employees analyze data, assist with project planning, and conduct research. For public servants such as social workers, these time savings can mean more time for direct services. By sharing results and lessons from these pilots, governments can build on effective practices and avoid repeating mistakes as they expand AI use.
Testing and correcting AI errors
Before a government agency uses AI to support decisions about benefits, rights, employment, education, healthcare, or access to government services, it should test whether the system is accurate for the task. The agency should compare its results with reliable information and check for patterns of error across communities and case types. For example, before using AI to flag benefit applications or generate law enforcement leads, agencies should compare its results with actual outcomes and check for false flags.
Agencies should not treat AI recommendations as a final decision or treat an AI-generated match, risk score, or investigative lead as proof that a person committed wrongdoing or is connected to an investigation. A trained employee should be required to review the relevant facts, be able to disagree with the system, and document the reason for a significant decision.
Agencies should also monitor systems after deployment, investigate recurring errors, and pause or change a tool if it produces unreliable or unfair results. They should track how often staff overrides the system, whether errors cluster in particular types of cases or among particular communities, and whether residents are experiencing delays, denials, or other harmful outcomes.
Protecting sensitive data and government records
Government agencies hold sensitive information about their residents, including health, tax, criminal justice, personnel, and investigative records. AI does not change the government's duty to protect that information. It requires agencies to apply existing privacy, security, confidentiality, and records-management obligations to new tools, vendors, and workflows. These obligations apply to other government and contractors as well, but AI deserves added attention because it can process and reuse large volumes of government information quickly, allowing a single weak control to expose more data or affect more cases. Data safeguards help prevent these harms by protecting sensitive information and preserving records that agencies may need to investigate misuse, security incidents, or problems with an AI system.
Before a government employee uses an AI tool, the agency should know where the information will go, who can access it, whether the vendor will keep it, and whether the vendor may use it for another purpose. Without those controls, an employee could enter sensitive case information into a public AI tool and expose it to a system the agency cannot audit, secure, or delete. Generative AI systems can also create privacy risks through the leakage, unauthorized disclosure, or de-anonymization of sensitive personal information.
AI can create records that agencies must retain, manage, or disclose under existing public-records law. A prompt submitted to an AI tool, the tool's chat histories, and its output may all qualify as government records depending on how they are used. For example, an AI-generated summary used to support an agency recommendation may document official business and need to be preserved. Agencies should therefore use only approved tools and prohibit staff from providing sensitive information to unapproved systems. Contracts should limit data retention, restrict access, and require deletion when the contracts end. Agencies should also use encryption to protect sensitive information, maintain audit logs to identify improper access or misuse, and establish procedures for responding to a breach or other failure. Federal guidance also cautions agencies to protect government information from unauthorized disclosure and to restrict vendors from using it to train or improve commercial products without agency permission.
Accountability for government AI use
Government agencies must remain accountable for how they use AI and for the effects of AI-supported decisions. Using AI does not excuse agencies from civil rights, anti-discrimination, privacy, or due-process obligations. When an AI-supported action affects benefits, employment, licensing, healthcare, education, or public safety, residents should be able to seek an explanation, correction, and meaningful human review.
AI can also change the scale of agency action. A mistake in a vendor's system, an inaccurate AI model, or an access setting that lets the wrong people see or use the data can affect many records, decisions, or residents at once. Agencies need controls that can detect and stop these failures before they spread.
Vendor-operated systems can also create accountability problems. For example, automated license-plate-reader systems allow police departments and other public agencies to collect and search vehicle and location information at scale. Agencies set the rules for access, retention, sharing, and auditing, but a vendor's system design and configuration can determine whether those rules are carried out as intended.
Concerns about broad data sharing, potential access by federal immigration authorities, and improper searches have led some jurisdictions to reconsider or cancel contracts for automated license-plate-reader systems. In Ventura, Calif., the police department found that a vendor-based configuration error had allowed unauthorized out-of-state law enforcement agencies to query local license-plate-reader data, even though the department's settings were intended to limit access to California partners. The city said the queries occurred without its knowledge or authorization.
The Ventura incident shows why government contracts cannot simply assume that a vendor's technical settings reflect an agency's legal and policy limits. Agencies should set rules for data access and sharing, then use audit logs to regularly test whether those rules are being followed. Contracts should require vendors to configure systems to enforce approved access limits, provide usable audit logs, promptly disclose misconfigurations and breaches, and cooperate with independent audits. They should also define who owns the data, prohibit unauthorized commercial reuse, and allow agencies to suspend or terminate a contract when safeguards fail. This would give agencies a clear way to stop using a system that does not meet required protections.
Government must always be accountable for how it uses its power, including when it uses AI. AI can improve services and reduce administrative burdens at scale, but it can also magnify errors, privacy violations, and surveillance. Strong safeguards and enforceable oversight can help ensure that governmental use of AI serves the public without allowing the government to evade responsibility for the harms it causes.
* * *
Richard Sill is a technology policy analyst at Reason Foundation.
* * *
Original text here: https://reason.org/commentary/government-agencies-must-be-held-responsible-for-negative-outcomes-from-their-use-of-ai/
More Than $600,000 in Grants Will Support San Diego Business Owners as They Start, Grow and Sustain Their Businesses
SAN DIEGO, California, Sept. 16 -- The San Diego Foundation posted the following news release:
* * *
More Than $600,000 in Grants Will Support San Diego Business Owners as They Start, Grow and Sustain Their Businesses
*
September 16, 2026 - San Diego, CA - More business owners across San Diego County will be equipped with the skills, resources and support needed to build stronger businesses through more than $610,000 in El Camino Fund grants awarded by San Diego Foundation (SDF) to nine nonprofit organizations.
The grants will help entrepreneurs at every stage of business ownership-from launching
... Show Full Article
SAN DIEGO, California, Sept. 16 -- The San Diego Foundation posted the following news release:
* * *
More Than $600,000 in Grants Will Support San Diego Business Owners as They Start, Grow and Sustain Their Businesses
*
September 16, 2026 - San Diego, CA - More business owners across San Diego County will be equipped with the skills, resources and support needed to build stronger businesses through more than $610,000 in El Camino Fund grants awarded by San Diego Foundation (SDF) to nine nonprofit organizations.
The grants will help entrepreneurs at every stage of business ownership-from launchinglicensed childcare businesses and preparing government contracts to accessing financial resources, business coaching and other tools needed to grow.
"Behind every small business is a person, a family and a vision for the future, a legacy. By investing in organizations that support entrepreneurs, we're investing in stronger neighborhoods and a more resilient regional economy," said Miguel Lopez, senior manager of development at San Diego Foundation. "Our nonprofit partners understand the opportunities before entrepreneurs and are well positioned to help them turn ideas into thriving businesses."
The announcement comes during Hispanic Heritage Month, recognizing the many contributions of San Diego's Latino community to the region's culture and economy. San Diego Foundation's 2024 State of San Diego Latinos Report highlights entrepreneurship as an important way for Latino San Diegans to build successful businesses, create opportunities for their families and contribute to a stronger local economy.
The 2026 El Camino Fund grantees include:
* Chicano Federation of San Diego County - $100,000: To support the Small Business Development Program, helping childcare providers launch and grow home-based businesses.
* Logan Heights Community Development Corporation - $100,000: To support the Small Business Development Program, providing coaching and mentorship for entrepreneurs.
* MiraCosta College Foundation - $100,000: To support its Entrepreneur Advancement & Contracting Initiative, preparing business owners for lending and contracting opportunities.
A full list of the grantees can be found here.
That investment is already making a difference for entrepreneurs like Juana Ruiz, who is cooking up a business of her own with support from the North San Diego Small Business Development Center (SBDC). Hosted by MiraCosta College and supported by an El Camino Fund grant to MiraCosta College Foundation, the SBDC provides business counseling, training and resources to local entrepreneurs.
"The support I received helped me see that I could turn my lifelong love of cooking into a real business and become a stronger leader," Juana Ruiz said. "Having guidance in Spanish, my preferred language, and from people who understood my culture made me feel welcomed, supported, and more confident. I am building a future for my family while sharing the Oaxacan food and traditions that have been part of my life since childhood."
Since its inception, El Camino Fund at San Diego Foundation has awarded $1.7 million to nonprofit organizations helping San Diegans, like Juana, build stronger businesses and stronger communities.
The fund was seeded with a $2.5 million endowment from SDF and designed in partnership with community leaders, supports and celebrates community giving and targets critical needs in the community.
About San Diego Foundation
San Diego Foundation believes in just, equitable, and resilient communities where every San Diegan can prosper, thrive and feel like they belong. We partner with donors, nonprofits and regional leaders to advance solutions that respond to community needs and strengthen San Diego. Since 1975, SDF has granted more than $2 billion to nonprofits to improve quality of life in San Diego County and beyond. Learn more at SDFoundation.org.
Media Contact
Nancy Ives Schroeder, Intesa Communications
nancy@intesacom.com
619-540-3751
***
Original text here: https://www.sdfoundation.org/news-events/sdf-news/more-than-600000-in-grants-will-support-san-diego-business-owners-as-they-start-grow-and-sustain-their-businesses/ (TNSmrp)
ITIF Welcomes Patrick Grady as Head of European Tech
WASHINGTON, Sept. 16 [Category: Computer Technology]-- The Information Technology and Innovation Foundation posted the following news release:
* * *
ITIF Welcomes Patrick Grady as Head of European Tech
*
WASHINGTON-The Information Technology and Innovation Foundation (ITIF), the world's leading think tank for science and technology policy, has welcomed Patrick Grady as head of European tech, strengthening ITIF's work on technology policy in Europe and its engagement on key global technology policy issues.
Grady brings experience spanning technology policy, public affairs, and European institutions,
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, Sept. 16 [Category: Computer Technology]-- The Information Technology and Innovation Foundation posted the following news release:
* * *
ITIF Welcomes Patrick Grady as Head of European Tech
*
WASHINGTON-The Information Technology and Innovation Foundation (ITIF), the world's leading think tank for science and technology policy, has welcomed Patrick Grady as head of European tech, strengthening ITIF's work on technology policy in Europe and its engagement on key global technology policy issues.
Grady brings experience spanning technology policy, public affairs, and European institutions,with a particular focus on artificial intelligence and emerging technologies. Most recently, he led the technology practice at a public affairs consultancy in Brussels, where he specialized in AI and emerging technology policy.
"Europe is at a pivotal moment for technology policy, particularly as advances in AI and other emerging technologies create new opportunities for innovation and economic growth," said Grady. "I'm excited to return to ITIF and help advance policies that strengthen Europe's technological competitiveness while ensuring it remains a leader in innovation."
Before returning to ITIF, Grady worked with several nonprofits focused on technology policy and with the European Institute of Innovation and Technology. He has also held external expert roles with the European Commission and World Economic Forum.
Grady previously served as a policy analyst with ITIF's Center for Data Innovation, where his research focused on artificial intelligence and content moderation. Earlier in his career, he was project lead at the Internet Commission and worked in strategy at the European Institute of Innovation and Technology. Grady holds a bachelor's degree in economics and politics, a master's degree in political science, and a master's degree in philosophy.
"Patrick's return to ITIF comes at an important time for technology policy in Europe," said ITIF President Daniel Castro. "His experience working at the intersection of technology, public policy, and European institutions will strengthen ITIF's ability to provide policymakers with rigorous analysis and practical recommendations on AI and other emerging technology issues."
Contact: Nicole Hinojosa, nhinojosa@itif.org
***
Original text here: https://itif.org/publications/publications/2026/09/16/itif-welcomes-patrick-grady-as-head-of-european-tech/
Boston Foundation: New Report Highlights How Local Permitting Delays or Derails Much Needed Housing in Massachusetts
BOSTON, Massachusetts, Sept. 16 (TNSrpt) -- The Boston Foundation issued the following news release:
* * *
New report highlights how local permitting delays or derails much needed housing in Massachusetts
Statewide zoning reforms can be undermined by process delays, negotiations, and the threat of litigation, says urbanist Jonathan Berk
September 15, 2026
-
Boston - A new report from renowned urbanist Jonathan Berk and Boston Indicators, the research center at the Boston Foundation, suggests Massachusetts' efforts to reshape zoning and spark housing construction are running headlong into
... Show Full Article
BOSTON, Massachusetts, Sept. 16 (TNSrpt) -- The Boston Foundation issued the following news release:
* * *
New report highlights how local permitting delays or derails much needed housing in Massachusetts
Statewide zoning reforms can be undermined by process delays, negotiations, and the threat of litigation, says urbanist Jonathan Berk
September 15, 2026
-
Boston - A new report from renowned urbanist Jonathan Berk and Boston Indicators, the research center at the Boston Foundation, suggests Massachusetts' efforts to reshape zoning and spark housing construction are running headlong intolocal permitting processes that can delay or stop projects entirely. Delayed by Design: How Discretionary Permitting Stalls Housing in Massachusetts, explores the gaps between what zoning allows on paper and what permitting makes possible in practice, drawing lessons from middle-housing projects in six Massachusetts communities, and makes a series of recommendations that protect review processes while reducing uncertainty and delays.
"Statewide zoning reforms like the MBTA Communities Act have created the opportunity to build more needed 'missing middle' housing, but this report reminds us that is just one step in a longer process," said Luc Schuster, Executive Director of Boston Indicators. "Jonathan highlights how the complicated local processes and the lack of administrative capacity can drive up costs and sidetrack projects that in the end could create much- needed homes."
In the report, Berk looks at the lessons that can be drawn from the experiences of six projects, demonstrating the systemic challenges of navigating discretionary review, fragmented local regulations, and prolonged timelines that put pressure on developers and builders to reshape or even abandon projects at multiple points in the permitting process.
"These projects are just examples of some of the ways that the 351 cities and towns across the state administer the local permitting process," said Jonathan Berk. "Because each community sets its own rules, the result is hundreds of different standards and timelines, and a significant amount of administrative overhead that taxes not only permit applicants but also those in each community who must manage and weigh in on the permitting process. The result is slower development and greater friction, even in places where zoning rules would suggest real opportunities for needed housing development."
The case studies, which explore the progress of developments in Salem, Marblehead, Newton, Melrose, Arlington and Lexington, highlighted how individual communities' processes and decision-making play central roles in whether or how projects get built.
In the two examples cited as "cautionary tales," the report tracks the progress of a proposal to build a 20-unit building on the site of a closed auto repair shop that has met five years of slowdowns and appeals, and an assisted living and memory care facility in Marblehead that required more than six years of hearings and appeals before opening as the Mariner in 2023.
The cases are not outliers, but rather examples of the challenges facing those trying to build new housing in a fragmented system of governance that effectively creates 351 separate sets of rules that could apply to a single proposal depending on the city or town of its location.
The researchers suggest the most lasting way to reduce permitting timelines, lower costs, and expand production is to substantially reduce, and place tighter guardrails on, discretionary review through a package of zoning, permitting, and process changes. The report lists out 18 potential recommendations to do so, including liberalizing underlying zoning rules to reduce the need for variances and special permits, rightsizing review processes and criteria to take project scale into account, measures to reduce delays and accelerate appeal processes, and state-level reforms to encourage and support more streamlined processes.
The full list of recommendations is available as part of the interactive report at bostonindicators.org.
* * *
REPORT: https://www.bostonindicators.org/-/media/indicators/boston-indicators-reports/report-web-pages/delayed-by-design/delayedbydesign.pdf
* * *
Original text here: https://www.tbf.org/news-and-insights/press-releases/2026/september/indicators-permitting-reform-report-20260915
