1 Table of Contents I. Introduction Appendix Overview 3 Engagement Efforts 3 Outreach and Publicity for Consultations 5 March Public Meeting Survey Results 7 II. Great Lakes Public Meetings Issues Raised at IJC Public Consultations 10 Great Lakes Public Forum Comments 11 Summary Reports for IJC Public Consultation Meetings to Assess Progress under the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement 29 Summary of Conclusions and Recommendations at the Public Meetings 29 Summary Report: What is a Healthy Lake Ontario to You? 43 Summary Report: What is a Health Lake Michigan to You? 49 Summary Report: Public Meeting on the Great Lakes, Your Voice: Sault Ste. Marie 55 Summary Report: Public Meeting on the Great Lakes, Your Voice: Detroit 62 Summary Report: Public Meeting on the Great Lakes, Your Voice: Sarnia 74 Summary Report: Public Meeting on the Great Lakes, Your Voice: Toledo 79 Summary Report: Public Meeting on the Great Lakes, Your Voice: Buffalo 86 Summary Report: Public Meeting on the Great Lakes, Your Voice: St. Catharines 98 III. Public Input Provided via Email or Letter List of Citizens, Organizations and Governments Who Provided Comments by Email or Letter 102 Meeting with the Métis Nation of Ontario 106 Comments provided by Individuals 108 Comments provided by Organizations 159 Comments provided by Municipalities and other Governments 239 2 I. Introduction The IJC believes strongly that public engagement is the foundation of good public policy and governance, and that achieving the Agreement’s purpose and goals will only happen if all sectors of the Great Lakes community are involved. Because of this belief and its Agreement responsibilities as laid out in Article VII to consult on a regular basis with the public, increase awareness of the lakes’ inherent value, and prepare a summary of comments on the Parties Report on Progress, the IJC conducted several public engagement activities as part of its review of Agreement progress. This included input on the Parties Report on Progress (PROP) after it was released in September 2016, and further input on the IJC’s draft Triennial Assessment of Progress (TAP) Report after it was released in January 2017. In total, thirteen public meetings, roundtables and listening sessions were held throughout the Great Lakes region. Public comment was also encouraged and received through our online democracy platform, Participate IJC, our newsletters, social media and website, and via email and mailed letters. Appendix Overview Every comment received during the IJC’s assessment process is included in this appendix, to reflect the immense value and appreciation the IJC places on each person’s shared thoughts, time and experiences. This appendix is organized more or less chronologically, according to when and how we received input. Section one, this introduction, provides an overview of the consultation process, including who participated and how they responded to the various public meeting formats. Section two includes a table of all issues raised by the public according to how often they were mentioned, followed by comments provided at the IJC’s first consultation session at the Great Lakes Public Forum in October 2016 in Toronto. A summary of conclusions and recommendations developed at the 12 subsequent public meetings around the region is next, as well as detailed summary reports from each public meeting. Comments provided at the public meetings are included in each summary report. Section three provides additional comments provided via email or letter or on Participate IJC, an online democracy website that includes information and input from all of the IJC’s public consultations throughout the Canada-US boundary region. Links to Participate IJC are provided throughout the report to view the letters and watch videos of commenters at each public meeting. Engagement Efforts After the two governments, or Parties, released the PROP, they held a three-day Great Lakes Public Forum in early October 2016 in Toronto, Ontario to present their findings. The IJC encouraged comments on these findings at four meetings held in fall 2016 – the public comment session at the Forum, two public meetings in Toronto and Milwaukee, and a scientific roundtable in Milwaukee – as well as through its newsletters, online democracy website and social media outlets. Almost 200 people attended the four fall 2016 meetings. After the Commission released its draft TAP report in January 2017, it asked for public input through the same online and media channels and held nine public meetings in March 2017 in six communities around the basin. An additional 743 people participated in these meetings. The report included draft findings and specific consultation questions for citizens to consider as they prepared their remarks. All comments on the wide range of issues impacting Great Lakes water quality also were welcomed. The IJC took these comments into account as it revised the draft TAP, and provides in this appendix a complete account of each meeting presentation and public comment, either in person or via email or letter, for use by the Parties, all levels of governments, interested citizens, nongovernment organizations, scientists and others. 3 Attendance at IJC Public Meetings. Credit: A. Voglesong and M. Mezzacapo Findings in draft TAP report. Credit: M. Myre Each public meeting for this Agreement consultation process was unique in its design to provide a variety of opportunities for participants to learn about and discuss local and regional innovative programs to address Great Lakes issues relevant to their community, followed by open time for citizens to provide their thoughts about the status of Great Lakes water quality. Their comments often reflect the specific perspectives of each community, which reinforces the adage that we may think globally, but we act locally about the issues that most affect our individual lives. At the same time, many comments reflect a broader perspective and desire for an ecosystem approach to Great Lakes management and civic engagement. Summary reports for each 4 meeting in section two of this appendix provide a thorough synthesis of the unique character of each community’s interests, as well as all comments provided at each session. 5 Outreach and Publicity for Consultations To encourage broad awareness and attendance at the meetings, the IJC completed a wide range of publicity efforts. Initial information was sent through the IJC’s monthly newsletter, Great Lakes Connection, and through social media on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram as well as the IJC online democracy platform, Participate IJC, and its website. This was followed by a series of personal invitations, news releases, pre- meeting radio and online interviews, and publicity in local radio, newspaper and partner organization outlets. Facebook advertising and posts garnered the most registrations for and attendance at IJC public meetings, followed by advertisements in traditional radio stations and newspapers, direct invitations, articles in the IJC’s monthly newsletter Great Lakes Connection, and posts to the Great Lakes Information Network. IJC Facebook Reach for January 2016 – March 2017 Total Reach 954 695 699 683 460 438 443 395 384 354 378 312 271 295 207 16-JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUNE JULY AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC JAN-17 FEB MARCH Total reach or number of people who saw IJC Facebook posts, including those in October 2016 for the Great Lakes Protection Forum and March 2017 during the IJC’s Great Lakes public meetings. Credit: Jeff Kart IJC Twitter Impressions for January 2016 – March 2017 Twitter figures in the two charts below point to strong audience engagement, readership and sharing on Great Lakes issues and events during the Great Lakes Public Forum and IJC public meeting periods, particularly as compared to those months without public meetings. Social media engagement and sharing as a result of initial linkages during the meeting time periods have continued on all IJC social media accounts since March 2017, thus expanding public awareness of Great Lakes restoration and protection efforts. IJC Twitter Engagement for September 2016 – March 2017 Highlighted sections represent months in which IJC public meetings were held. Credit: Jeff Kart Month Engagement Link Clicks, av. Retweets, av. Favorites Replies Rate % earned per per day (Likes), av. per day day March 2017 1.5 531, 17 431, 14 657, 21 28 February 1.4 411, 15 265, 9 279, 10 0 January 2017 1.3 459, 15 274, 9 319, 10 8 December 2016 1.4 495, 16 316, 10 339, 11 11 November 1.6 424, 14 246, 8 247, 8 5 October 1.1 770, 25 683, 22 591, 19 15 6 September 2016 1.2 531, 18 278, 9 245, 8 7 TWITTER IMPRESSIONS 8500 262200 Sept 3900 118000 1500 47600 July 1800 54600 2300 68700 May 2400 73500 3300 99800 March 3000 94300 2200 62700 16-Jan 1800 56000 1800 56700 Nov 2200 66000 2100 64700 Sept 1700 50400 1200 38200 July 1500 48000 1700 50000 May 1600 51000 2000 59100 Mar 1900 60000 1400 38500 15-Jan 1400 43600 0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000 300000 Total Per Day Credit: Jeff Kart Those who could not attend the Parties’ Great Lakes Public Forum could livestream or view the sessions afterwards via the Participate IJC website. More than 6,200 people from 14 countries watched various Forum sessions in this format, while another 2,400 viewed the videos via Facebook links from the IJC or Detroit Public Television, which filmed the Forum. The videos have been watched thus far more than 14,350 times and another 1,443 times via Twitter, with at least 393,600 clicks on those tweets. The local presentations at each IJC public meeting were also uploaded to the Participate IJC website for viewing, and subsequently the public’s comments as well. More than 320 people watched videos or downloaded documents from the Great Lakes Public Forum meetings in October 2016, and another 1,300 people visited to view or download materials during the IJC’s public meetings in March 2017.