JOINT RESOLUTION MAKING AN APPROPRIATION OF $400,000 TO THE COASTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT COUNCIL (CRMC) FOR FUNDING OF URI'S COASTAL RESOURCES CENTER (CRC) STORMTOOLS, CHAMP ANALYSIS, AND MYCOAST (This resolution would authorize the appropriation of the sum of $400,000 to the Rhode Island Coastal Resources Management Council for the continuation of STORMTOOLS, CHAMP, and MyCoast.)
S0923 is a joint resolution that appropriates $400,000 from the state treasury for fiscal year 2025-2026 to the Rhode Island Coastal Resources Management Council (CRMC). The funding is specifically designated to continue support for URI’s Coastal Resources Center tools and services: STORMTOOLS, CHAMP (Coastal Hazards, Analysis, Modeling & Prediction), and MyCoast Rhode Island.
The resolution describes these programs as decision-support tools used by emergency managers, state agencies, partner communities, and others to prepare for and respond to storms, flooding, erosion, and related coastal hazards. STORMTOOLS provides parcel-level flood predictions, CHAMP supports real-time infrastructure damage prediction for responders, and MyCoast collects crowd-sourced photos and data to monitor flooding and erosion, including inland flooding.
If enacted, the resolution would authorize a one-time $400,000 appropriation to CRMC and direct the state controller and general treasurer to process payments for the continued operation of these coastal hazard tools. It does not amend substantive regulatory law, but it would support state and local emergency planning, coastal resilience, flood monitoring, and hazard-response capabilities by funding existing URI/Sea Grant-supported services.
The bill appears broadly favorable in concept, as it is framed around maintaining widely used public-safety and coastal resilience tools that help Rhode Island prepare for storms and flooding. The text emphasizes practical benefits for emergency managers, regulators, communities, and the military, suggesting a consensus-oriented, service-continuation measure rather than a controversial policy change. No vote or committee transcript is provided, so there is no recorded opposition or formal sentiment beyond the bill’s supportive framing.
No specific points of contention are documented in the provided materials. Potential areas of debate, if any, would likely center on the use of general-fund dollars, the size of the appropriation, and whether the state should continue funding university-based decision-support tools through CRMC. However, the available record does not show any expressed objections, amendments, or divided votes.