MAIN POINTS. (See Over)
MAIN POINTS. ● Location: Summit Place School will be located in the Summit Ridge area immediately south of Santaquin, Utah. Summit Ridge is a rapidly growing development within the city limits of Santaquin. ● Anticipated Population: The current population of the Summit Place School attendance area (within a 15-minute commute) is 17,649 residents. Based on the statewide metric for determining ages, there are 3036 students in grades K-8. According to the statewide metric for charter school attendance (12% of students), it is a reasonable expectation that 364 students will attend Summit Place School. That is based on today’s data. Over the past three years, the area has grown by 18%, with signs indicating accelerated growth in the future. There is currently no school in the Summit Ridge area. All students are bused to traditional district schools. The anticipated beginning student enrollment for Summit Place School is 50 students per grade level in grades K-6, with 50 students per grade level in grades 7-8 added in the following years. ● Educational Foundation: Summit Place will provide Place-Based Education for students. The school will join Place Network Schools, a collaborative system of rural schools led by Teton Science School.
MAIN POINTS. In March 2016, governments across Canada, including the Government of Saskatchewan, agreed to take steps to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to mitigate their effect on climate (mitigation), and to reduce the vulnerability and increase the resilience of nature and people to the effects of climate change (adaptation). These governments agreed to implement GHG reduction policies to reduce Canada’s emissions by 30% from 2005 levels by 2030. This agreement does not hold the Saskatchewan Government to a specific provincial target. At January 2017, Saskatchewan did not have a provincial mitigation plan with provincial targets for GHG reduction. In addition, it did not have a co-ordinated provincial adaptation plan. Rather, it was at the policy development stage.
MAIN POINTS. 1. The recently-enacted Foreign Trade law requires MoCI to publish in an easily accessible manner certain information under its jurisdiction (quantitative restrictions, prohibitions, licenses, fees, etc.), which includes some of the TFA-required information; however, there are no clear specific formal, legal or policy measures at present that impose a similar publication obligation on other border agencies or on government authorities generally.
2. The draft Customs Code, if enacted, will require Customs to publish information of the kind described by the TFA measure, including forms, notices and explanations, and to publish such information via the Internet, where feasible.
3. Border agencies do not appear to have established procedures for the publication of information (e.g., to ensure published information is accurate, coordinated, regularly reviewed and updated, when necessary).
4. In practice, laws and regulations are said to be printed in “handbills,” in an “Official Gazette,” and in local newspapers and/or are posted at government offices. These print publications are difficult to access. An “Official Gazette,” in the usual sense of a record of the business and proceedings of a government and public or legal notices published on a regular basis, does not appear to exist in practice.
5. Some of the border agencies maintain websites where their respective laws, regulations and/or, in a few cases, guides to import or export procedures, are published. The quantity and quality of information (including its accuracy and currency) published on government websites is varied, and there do not appear to be government-wide standards or procedures established for website publication.
6. A not-for-profit Liberian organization, LiberLII, currently maintains a free online database of Liberian legislative acts, and plans to include administrative regulations and international agreements.
MAIN POINTS. 1. With some exceptions, border agencies have not developed and published on the Internet practical guides of their import or export procedures or required forms and documents. To the extent Internet publication of requirements exists, it is generally only in the form of the text of legal acts (laws and regulations) for download.
2. There are no specific formal legal or policy measures that require or allow border agencies to prepare and publish on the Internet guides of their procedures or required forms and documents, and no formal polices or procedures have been developed on website publication.
3. The draft Customs Code, if enacted, would require Customs to publish notices, forms and explanations necessary for persons to comply with the customs laws on the Internet, where feasible.
4. There is a significant variation in the quality and quantity of information presented by border and trade-related agencies on their respective websites, possibly due to financial or technical constraints.
MAIN POINTS. 1. Liberia has not established a trade enquiry point of the kind required by the TFA measure, and has not yet made plans to do so.
2. There are no specific laws, formal policies or procedures yet developed for the implementation of an enquiry point of the kind described in the TFA measure.
3. In actual practice, the MoCI and LRA do operate information centers where persons can obtain copies of required forms and request information concerning import/export permits and taxes from information staff in person or by email.
MAIN POINTS. 1. The new Foreign Trade law contains provisions that would appear to require MoCI to publish for comment rules, regulations or guidelines issued under the authority of that law. There appear to be no similar legal or policy provisions that would require Customs and other border authorities to publish proposed legal acts and procedures for comment by stakeholders as required by the TFA. Formal procedures have not been established to notify interested parties of proposed changes in laws and regulations or to process any comments received.
2. Consistent with the TFA measure, the draft Customs Code, if enacted, will require the Commissioner General to provide interested persons with a reasonable opportunity to comment on proposed customs rules or regulations, and to publish any such rules or regulations at least 30 days prior to the date of entry into force, subject to justified exceptions.
3. As a matter of recent practice, Customs and other border authorities have consulted with their stakeholders on legislative or policy proposals.
4. With the exception of the new Foreign Trade law, there are no legal provisions requiring publication prior to entry into force of a law or regulations, as the TFA requires; generally, it appears that legislative acts and administrative regulations enter into force immediately on publication or, possibly, after the signature of the President or relevant Minister.
MAIN POINTS. 1. There do not appear to be at present any formal legal or policy provisions requiring border authorities to hold regular consultations with their stakeholders, or any formal procedures established by border agencies for carrying out such consultations.
2. The draft Customs Code will require that Customs hold regular consultations with persons whose activities are covered by the customs laws and other authorities.
3. In practice, the quality and frequency of stakeholder consultation is said to vary among the different border agencies: Customs (which has received WCO training on stakeholder engagement) reports that it holds regular quarterly meetings with an agenda and action items; other border agencies conduct stakeholder consultations less frequently, on an “as needed” or issue basis, or not at all.
MAIN POINTS. 1. There are at present no legal provisions that require or authorize the issuance of binding rulings on tariff classification and origin or any other customs matters.
2. Under the draft Customs Code, Customs shall issue binding decisions on questions of country of origin, tariff classification, and such other matters as the Commissioner General may prescribe by regulation.
MAIN POINTS. 1. Administrative and judicial rights of appeal against customs decisions related to payment of duty are defined in the Revenue Code, which provides for an independent Board of Tax Appeals to hear the appeal. No further implementing procedures, measures, instructions, guidelines or information concerning appeals have been published. There are no specific provisions concerning rights of further appeal in the event that the Board of Tax Appeals decision is delayed.
2. The draft Customs Code, if enacted, would clarify and expand rights of appeal against customs decisions.
3. The new Foreign Trade law creates a right of appeal to an independent administrative tribunal with respect to decisions of the Minister of Commerce and Industry under that law, and further appeal to a court.
4. Persons subject to decisions of other border agencies appear to have a right of appeal direct to the Circuit Court.
5. In addition to the formal right of appeal provided under the Revenue Code, it appears that Customs provides for appeal to the Commissioner and subsequently to the LRA legal office before accessing the Board of Tax Appeals. This procedure does not appear to be defined in law or otherwise published.
6. In practice, Customs and other border agencies are said to provide reasons for their decisions.
