essay
In this final assignment, students will complete a comprehensive analysis and evaluation of the selected CEMP by combining, correcting, and supplementing the prior assignments.
Instructions
The Student is tasked with correcting all spelling, grammatical, punctuation, and APA citation issues and errors on their three previous written assignment submissions for this course. After thoroughly editing and fixing all errors in the aforementioned previous three assignment submissions, the student should combine the three assignments, being sure to provide the inclusion of transitional paragraphs between the three assignment components of the final paper to ensure a smooth final paper read. Then, after much more editing, the student should submit the combined three assignment papers, with proper transitional paragraphically-based segues, as the final cumulative paper submission for this course.
Please include both in-text citations and a reference list. Both should be in alignment with APA 6th edition citation form and style
Running Head: FEDERAL JURISDICTION 1
FEDERAL JURISDICTION 2
Exclusive Federal Jurisdiction
Jurisdictional comprehensive emergency management plan (CEMP) is an established framework that is effective for an emergency management program. “CEMP adopts the functional approach that groups the types of emergency assistance to be provided into Emergency Support Functions (ESFs) and group’s recovery tasks into Recovery Functions (RFs)” (Havock, 2020). The city of Mount Dora that is located on Central Florida uses the CEMP framework in the management of the city emergencies. Large scale disasters that are likely to affect cities or states are considered problematic. The emergencies that might emerge are either man-made or natural disasters but they both pose a serious threat to the human life and property. The best way to ensure that life is restored to normalcy in any location after a disaster is through having an effective disaster recovery plans and framework like the CEMP. The CEMP of the Mount Dora city has various problems and challenges that need to be addressed through improvements.
The city of Mount Dora is a tourist destination and the tourist activities has contributed to the establishment of multiple shopping malls and restaurants and also known to host numerous festivals. During the festivals and on a good weather conditions the population increases annually. According to the city records, the fire department has employed 30 personnel that target on protecting the property and life and also proactive approach towards the visitors safety. Fire department has a huge responsibility in coordinating efforts on emergency management. The city has encountered multiple disasters over the years that include the hurricane in 2002 that destroyed 82,000 businesses and 28,000 homes displacing 200,000 people (Havock, 2020). The incidences shaped the existing emergency framework and also brought the attention of emergency management of the Florida state. The city tried to improve their systems but till date it has problems that makes it ineffective and require improvements.
The CEMP in place lacks a good communication approach and also comprehensive plan to respond to both man-made and natural disaster. The city lacks a formal process that would systematically guide on how to respond to disasters. I consider the deficiency as a priority because lack of systematic intervention on emergencies always gives poor results. The successful implementation of CEMP in the city requires a strong support system between the management and the personnel because the required resources have to be provided. The city implemented the CEMP plan just to satisfy their jurisdictional expectation but they are not fully determined on the importance of motivating the team through training and in the review of the existing framework to guarantee efficiency and effectiveness. The city disaster and response department fails to get alerts about disaster earlier enough due to poor coordination and also poor communication channels contributing to damages and late recovery (McEntire, 2015). The other deficiency is the lack of interdepartmental coordination like between the response team and the fire department.
I believe that the solution lies in the consultation of all the departments under the city emergency unit to promote coordination and efficient communication to handle tasks as a team. The fire department is known to have multi-skilled personnel that help in several incidences and the Florida department of emergency management should consider involving the team in the implementation and improvement of CEMP and use their connection in improving other teams (McEntire, 2015). The emergency department of the Florida state and the city should consider developing a emergency response unit and hire qualified personnel to help respond to disasters and work together with the fire department. The response team would assist increase the number of required personnel, skills and also handle multiple emergencies at the same time if they emerge. The fire department is a sophisticated mutual aid and has resources that would use to support the response team handle disasters. The employees have appreciated the implementation of the CEMP framework and have also raised concerns about issues that need to be improved on the plan to make it work efficiently.
The area of direction and control is the one that requires improvement to guide on coordination and control of operations. “I consider the development and implementation of incident management system for the emergency department to standardize the disaster response and correct problems like, communication failures, poor information management, poor coordination and the failure to provide accurate timely information” (Emergency Consulting, 2019). I propose that the incident management system be implemented to ensure the multiple emergency agencies work together when handling risks. I would propose the improvement on the implementation of the CEMP framework through training of the personnel to understand the framework further and appreciate its importance in the service delivery.
The emergency department should offer training on the CEMP framework, the incident management system and other local response systems to ensure that the team is knowledgeable in its application. The response and emergency personnel should also undergo practical training to ensure that the CEMP framework is effective. The training should include the resources available to handle an emergency and the personnel should be given their responsibilities in the CEMP framework to ensure they know what to do in case an incident occurs (Havock, 2020). The CEMP existing plan and framework should be updated to accommodate other professionals and also replace new staff and allow the delegation of new roles to personnel and the activity should be updated regularly.
References
Emergency Consulting. (2019). Development of a Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan (CEMP) – Emergency Management Consulting. Emergency Management Consulting. Retrieved 1 August 2020, from
https://www.allhandsconsulting.com/services/emergency-management/development-of-a-comprehensive-emergency-management-plan-cemp/
.
Havock. (2020). Develop a Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan. Special Events Galore, 20(4), 8-8.
https://doi.org/10.1002/speg.31337
McEntire. (2015). Emergency management theory: Issues, barriers, and recommendations for improvement. Journal Of Emergency Management, 3(3), 44. https://doi.org/10.5055/jem.2005.0031
JURISDICTION
1
JURISDICTION 4
Jurisdiction is defined as a right of either political or legal agency to practice its power over the people or territory. I have selected the exclusive federal jurisdiction, which exists in a situation where the court is powered to make a conclusive decision on a case excluding all the other courts. This jurisdiction allows the Supreme Court to makes reviews on the decisions of the different lower courts from the states. The federal court has broader jurisdiction compared to the state courts, which are limited by the boundary.
In some cases, the exclusive federal jurisdiction is exercised beyond the U.S boundaries where a party may be outside the country. The exclusive federal jurisdiction is powered to hear some patent cases provided by the constitution, such as the bankruptcy, immigration laws and policies, copyright, and lawsuits involving the military (Gugliuzza, 2014).
The comprehensive emergency management plan for the exclusive federal jurisdiction is formed based on preparedness, response, mitigation, and recovery. This framework is intended to provide a structure where the programs are uniform in the country to facilitate the interoperability between federal governments.
In the emergency plan, the CEMP provides that there are impacts that may be disruptive and destructive, which are not limited to injuries or degrading health situations by the residence. A business may be closed down due to an unfortunate economic situation and damaged resident’s properties. In its emergency operations, when a situation or a disaster exceeds the capabilities of a city and the available aid agreements, “the elected chief official is mandated to declare the situation as an emergency” (Canton, 2019). Therefore, this would seek emergency use of the resources and expenditures as well as activate the emergency plan.
In the planning and responses, the Franklin county emergency management word takes over the coordination and managing the disaster, preparedness, response mitigation, and recovery. This includes the county of Mesa and Pasco. The Franklin county emergency management compiles with the CEMP that overreach documents for every jurisdiction response plan.
Reference
Gugliuzza, P. R. (2014). Patent Law Federalism. Wis. L. Rev., 11.
Canton, L. G. (2019). Emergency Management: Concepts and strategies for effective programs. John Wiley & Sons.
Running Head: EXCLUSIVE FEDERAL JURISDICTION 1
EXCLUSIVE FEDERAL JURISDICTION 4
Assignment: Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan (CEMP) Short Essay
July 25, 2020
Exclusive Federal Jurisdiction
To begin with, achieving a full understanding of courts and the legal system in general cannot be accomplished without mentioning the concept of jurisdiction. It is correct to say that if the appropriate jurisdiction was not exercised by federal and state courts, then it means that state and federal courts would be hearing every case presented to them regardless of their nature. This would in turn result in contradictory and conducing results. Compared to state courts, federal courts have more extensive jurisdiction (Wolff, 2016). The US constitution, as seen in Article 111 Section 2, was created with the idea that state courts would have subject matter jurisdiction over any case that does not to be brought before a federal court. This way, state courts are able to achieve independence when it comes to decision making. Moreover, as revealed in the constitution, the jurisdiction of federal courts is also limited as these courts are only meant to hear cases that are based on state laws or federal laws. This limit ensures that federal courts do not interfere with cases that are not within their scope.
With exclusive jurisdiction, federal courts have the authority to oversee and make rulings over cases that cannot be touched by state courts. These are cases involving crimes in the federal level, law suits between states, cases dealing with high ranking public officials, bankruptcy cases, copyright, patent and trademark cases, maritime cases, anti-trust cases, cases that have exclusive federal jurisdiction as specified by the federal statute, and any other case where the federal government is a party. Cases of this nature, which are described as cases of national importance, cannot be filed in a state court. Exclusive federal jurisdiction brings forth heavy responsibilities upon the federal court system. Owing to the critically of the cases that federal courts have exclusive jurisdiction over, the delivery of justice is often an area of concern, particularly the timely handling of these cases by the federal judiciary.
As more federal-related cases continue piling, federal courts are becoming more overwhelmed. These cases are associated with thorough legal proceedings, and this explains why it may even take years for a case to come to halt. With exclusive federal jurisdiction came the responsibility to handle cumbersome cases of national interest, but unfortunately, the number of judgeships is not proportional to the case filings, meaning that the administration of justice by the federal judiciary will continue to persist. Exclusive federal jurisdiction brings forth bias within the federal judiciary. More often than not, federal-related cases involve powerful individuals and corporations. With the privilege to exercise exclusive jurisdiction, federal courts may be used to push the agenda of persons or corporations with special interest in a federal case (Dodson, 2016).
Favoring the interest of the powerful as the expense of the society’s most vulnerable is an outcome of exclusive federal jurisdiction that has been observed over the years. Therefore, exclusive federal jurisdiction to an extent played a definite role in creating a federal court system designed to safeguard the economic interest of powerful people or corporations involved in federal cases, making it harder for vulnerable plaintiffs to realize their rights through the federal judiciary. Exclusive federal jurisdiction gives the federal judiciary a high level of independence (Rudan, 2016). Federal judges handling federal-related cases get to make decisions without facing any personal consequences such as them being fired or political consequences such as them not getting re-elected. This independence can pave way for the abuse of power by the federal judiciary, where favoritism may be directed towards a particular party in the case. Moreover, exclusive federal jurisdiction uncovers the need to strengthen the protection of federal judges involved in these high-level cases, both at the court facilities and off-site judicial locations.
References
Dodson, S. (2016). Jurisdiction and Its Effects. Geo. LJ, 105, 619. Retrieved from
https://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?handle=hein.journals/glj105&div=22&g_sent=1&casa_token=
Rudan, C. (2016). Research on the Validity of the Selective Exclusive Jurisdiction Provision of the TPP. Tribune of Political Science and Law, 5. Retrieved from
http://en.cnki.com.cn/Article_en/CJFDTotal-ZFLT201605006.htm
Wolff, T. B. (2016). Choice of law and jurisdictional policy in the federal courts. U. Pa. L. Rev., 165, 1847. Retrieved from
https://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/pnlr165&div=56&id=&page=