DOCSLIB.ORG

Great Lakes Commission Semiannual Meeting

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Great Lakes Commission Semiannual Meeting Great Lakes Commission Semiannual Meeting MARCH 14-16, 2017 • WASHINGTON, D.C. THE MAYFLOWER HOTEL 2805 S. Industrial Hwy., Suite 100 Ann Arbor, MI 48104-6791 ph 734.971.9135 fx 734.971.9150 glc.org @GLCommission facebook.com/greatlakescommission #GLCDC17 #GreatLakesDay 1- Agenda – p. 3 2- Minutes – p. 8 3- Action Items – p. 32 4- 2017 Federal Priorities – p. 43 5- Speaker Topics – p. 53 6- Strategic Plan Updates – p. 132 7- Reference – p. 164 AGENDA – March 1 – DRAFT 2017 Great Lakes Commission Semiannual Meeting & Great Lakes Day in Washington March 14-16, 2017 The Mayflower Hotel • 1127 Connecticut Ave. NW • Washington, DC, 20036 Tuesday, March 14 All times are EDT Work Session (Commissioners & Staff Only) All Day Congressional Office Visits Capitol Hill 5:00 p.m. Commissioner & Staff Work Session State Room Call to Order Jon Allan, (MI), Chair Roll Call Tim Eder, Executive Director Resolutions & Action Items Ballast Water o Report from ballast water workshop Erika Jensen, Program Manager Contaminants of Emerging Concern 7:00 p.m. Commissioner & Staff Dinner South Carolina Room Wednesday, March 15 7:30 a.m. Commissioner & Staff Breakfast East Room 8:30-11:00 a.m. Commissioner & Staff Work Session State Room Strategic Plan Implementation Jon Allan, (MI), Chair Information Management Tim Eder, Executive Director Economic Development and Waterfront Community Revitalization; and Coastal GLC Staff Conservation and Habitat Restoration Commercial Navigation Aquatic Invasive Species Prevention and Control Water Quality and Water Management and Infrastructure Semiannual Meeting (Open to All) 10:00 a.m. Registration for Guests and Observers District Ballroom 11:30 a.m. Opening Remarks District Ballroom Jon Allan, (MI), Chair 11:45 a.m. Lunch and Keynote Speaker District Ballroom Senator Rob Portman (OH) invited 1:00 p.m. Report of the Chair and Executive Director State Room Looking to the Future: The Great Lakes Jon Allan, Chair Commission’s new Five-Year Strategic Plan Our Message for Congress and the Tim Eder, Executive Director Administration: Overview of the GLC’s 2017 Federal Priorities Special Presentation 1:30 p.m. Discussion Panel Moderator: John Linc Stine, (MN) Vice Investing in and Paying for Clean Water Chair Infrastructure: Challenges, Opportunities for Michele Nellenbach, Bipartisan Policy Great Lakes States and Provinces Center Judson Greif, US Water Alliance Pat Sinicropi, National Association of Clean Water Agencies 2:45 p.m. Break 3:00 p.m. Keynote Address TBD 3:30 p.m. Observer Comments Great Lakes Commission’s Official Observers 4:15 p.m. Business of the Great Lakes Commission Jon Allan, Chair Action Items o Review of past resolutions New Resolutions o Ballast Water o Contaminants of Emerging Concern 4:45 p.m. Great Lakes Federal Priorities Update Matt Doss, Erika Jensen, GLC staff Preparation for Great Lakes Day 4:55 p.m. Invitation to 2017 Annual Meeting Minnesota Delegation Sept. 19-20, 2017, Duluth, Minnesota 5:00 p.m. Adjourn Jon Allan, Chair 6:00 p.m. Reception at the Embassy of Canada 501 Pennsylvania Ave. NW Sponsored by the Government of Canada and the Washington, DC 20001 Healing Our Waters-Great Lakes Coalition Advance registration is required; no on-site registration or walk-ins will be accepted. Please bring a government-issued photo ID. Thursday, March 16 Great Lakes Day 8:15 a.m. Great Lakes Congressional Breakfast Reception Rayburn House Office Building Sponsored by the Great Lakes Commission and Room 2168 (Gold Room) Northeast-Midwest Institute 45 Independence Ave. SW Washington, DC 20515 All Day Congressional Office Visits Capitol Hill 2805 South Industrial Hwy., Suite 100 Ann Arbor, Michigan 48104-6791 Office 734-971-9135 ▪ Fax 734-971-9150 ▪ [email protected] EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR Tim A. Eder BOARD OF DIRECTORS CHAIR Memorandum Jon W. Allan Director Office of the Great Lakes To: GLC Commissioners Michigan Department of Environmental Quality From: Tim Eder, Victoria Pebbles Lansing, Michigan Date: March 2, 2017 VICE CHAIR Re: Purpose and Charge for GLC Program Committees John Linc Stine Commissioner Minnesota Pollution Control Agency St. Paul, Minnesota Background IMMEDIATE PAST CHAIR Kelvin Burch, Retired The 2017 Semiannual meeting will feature a session on implementing the GLC’s new Pennsylvania Department of Strategic Plan through the creation of program committees. These Committees, Environmental Protection which align with the seven program areas in the GLC’s new Strategic Plan, offer a Wayne Rosenthal basis to enable greater Commissioner engagement in implementation of the new Director Illinois Department of plan. The purpose of this on the agenda (March 15 at 8:30) session is to: Natural Resources Springfield, Illinois inform Commissioners about purpose, role and expectations of Program Committees Indiana Vacant inform Commissioners about the work under each program area; and Basil Seggos assist Commissioners to select participation on one or more Program Committees. Commissioner New York State Department of Environmental Conservation During this agenda item at the meeting, Tim will provide an overview of Program Albany, New York Committee purpose, anticipated operations and Commissioner roles (describe in James Zehringer more detail below). Commissioners will hear brief overviews of current work and Director opportunities for each program area. Staff will pass out note cards and Ohio Department of Natural Resources Commissioners will be asked to check a box indicating their preference to serve on Columbus, Ohio one or more program areas. Timothy Bruno Chief Office of the Great Lakes Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection Purpose of Program Committees Erie, Pennsylvania Program committees provide a formal structure to engage Commissioners more Pat Stevens directly in the work of the GLC. This structure allows Commissioners to provide Administrator Environmental Management Division strategic guidance and feedback for each program while leaving the day to day work Wisconsin Department of to GLC staff and associated multi-stakeholder teams which typically advise individual Natural Resources Madison, Wisconsin projects. Program committees also ensure GLC work continues to align with William Carr individual state and provincial priorities as our organization aspires to achieve the Senior Manager regional goals and objectives outlined in the GLC Strategic Plan. Program International Relations Policy Office of International committees are proposed to correspond to the seven program areas of the new GLC Relations and Protocol Toronto, Ontario Strategic Plan: 1. Water Quality Eric Marquis Québec Government Representative 2. Water Management and Infrastructure Chicago, Illinois 3. Commercial Navigation 4. Economic Development and Waterfront Community Revitalization 5. Coastal Conservation and Habitat Restoration 6. Aquatic Invasive Species Prevention and Control 7. Information Management and Blue Accounting Ensuring environmental and economic prosperity for the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence region through DRAFT Charge and Operations of Program Committees communications, policy research and development, and advocacy. Program committees are responsible for providing strategic guidance and feedback to GLC staff for each of the GLC’s program areas. Such guidance and feedback may include ways to ensure programs and projects align with member jurisdiction priorities; suggested ways to engage with member jurisdiction personnel or related initiatives; and strategic guidance on partnerships and program development (fundraising) in order to achieve the goals and objectives for that program area outlined in the GLC Strategic Plan. Program committee members are not expected to be involved in daily project work: that will remain the purview of GLC staff and associated project teams. Program committees will be expected to convene (by phone or in person) no more than quarterly, but at least semiannually and shall endeavor to have at least one meeting in person in conjunction with a regular Great Lakes Commission meeting; other meetings can be held by webinar or conference call, or similar communication technology at a frequency that is necessary and appropriate to support program area goals and objectives. Each Commissioner should participate on at least one program committee, but can participate on as many program committees as desired. Alternate Commissioners may also serve as appropriate. GLC staff will work with the Board to ensure appropriate representation and effective commissioner engagement/committee operation. Program committees shall be coordinated by a designated lead GLC staff person, identified by the Executive Director. The GLC staff lead for each program area is responsible for coordinating with the program committee to set up periodic meetings and conference calls as may be needed to ensure effective communication among and engagement by the program committee. 2 Minutes Attached for review and approval are minutes from the Commission’s 2016 Annual Meeting, held Oct. 6-7, 2016, in Toronto, Ontario. Included for your information are minutes of the Board of Directors meetings held on Sept. 15, Oct. 27 and Dec. 21, 2016; and Jan. 13 and Feb. 16, 2017. Great Lakes Commission 2016 Annual Meeting Fairmont Royal York Hotel Toronto, ONT October 6-7, 2016 Draft Meeting Minutes Summary of Actions 1. Approved minutes of the 2016 Semiannual Meeting, held February 23-24, 2016, in Washington DC. 2. Approved minutes of the July 27, 2016 Special Meeting held via conference call. 3. Approved
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A Steel-Hulled Bulk Freighter Measuring 610.9 in Length, with a Beam of 60.0 Feet, and a Depth of Hold of 32.6 Feet
    NFS Form 10-900 OMB No. 1024-0018 (Rev. 8-86) United States Department of the Interior National Park Service NATIONAL National Register of Historic Places REGISTER Registration Form This form is for use in nominating or requesting determinations of eligibility for individual properties or districts. See instructions in Guidelines for Completing National Register Forms (National Register Bulletin 16). Complete each item by marking "x" in the appropriate box or by entering the requested information. If an item does not apply to the property being documented, enter "N/A" for "not applicable." For functions, styles, materials, and areas of significance, enter only the categories and subcategories listed in the instructions. For additional space use continuation sheets (Form 10-900a). Type all entries. 1. Name of Property_________________________________________________ historic name Freighter WILLIAM A. IRVIN other names/site number N/A 2. Location street & number Minnesota Slip. Duluth Harbor I_| not for publication N/A city, town Duluth I I vicinity N/A state Minnesota code MN county St . Louis code 137 zip code 55802 3. Classification Ownership of Property Category of Property Number of Resources within Property I I private I I building(s) Contributing Noncontributing I~x1 public-local I I district ____buildings I I public-State I I site ____ sites I I public-Federal Pn structure ____ structures I I object ____ objects ____Total Name of related multiple property listing: Number of contributing resources previously listed in the National Register _Q______ 4. State/Federal Agency Certification As the designated authority under the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, I hereby certify that this S nomination EH request for determination of eligibility meets the documentation standards for registering properties in the National Register of Historic Places and meets the procedural and professional requirements set forth in 36 CFR Part 60.
    [Show full text]
  • The Mythologizing of the Great Lakes Whaleback
    VERNACULAR IN CURVES: THE MYTHOLOGIZING OF THE GREAT LAKES WHALEBACK by Joseph Thaddeus Lengieza April, 2016 Director of Thesis: Dr. Bradley Rodgers Major Department: Maritime Studies, History The “whaleback” type of bulk commodity freighter, indigenous to the Great Lakes of North America at the end of the nineteenth century, has engendered much notice for its novel appearance; however, this appearance masks the essential vernacularity of the vessel. Comparative disposition analysis reveals that whalebacks experienced longevity comparable to contemporary Great Lakes freighter of similar construction material and size, implying that popular narrative overstates whaleback abnormality. Market and social forces which contributed to the rise and fall of the whaleback type are explored. VERNACULAR IN CURVES: THE MYTHOLOGIZING OF THE GREAT LAKES WHALEBACK A Thesis Presented To the Faculty of the Department of Maritime Studies East Carolina University In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Arts in Maritime Studies by Joseph Thaddeus Lengieza April, 2016 © Joseph Thaddeus Lengieza, 2016 VERNACULAR IN CURVES: THE MYTHOLOGIZING OF THE GREAT LAKES WHALEBACK By Joseph Thaddeus Lengieza APPROVED BY: DIRECTOR OF THESIS:_________________________________________________________ Bradley Rodgers, Ph.D. COMMITTEE MEMBER: _______________________________________________________ Nathan Richards, Ph.D. COMMITTEE MEMBER: _______________________________________________________ David Stewart, Ph.D. COMMITTEE MEMBER: _______________________________________________________
    [Show full text]
  • Great Lakes Commission Info Sheet
    lllinois Indiana Michigan Minnesota New York Ohio Pennsylvania Wisconsin Ontario Québec www.glc.org The Great Lakes The Great Lakes are an environmental and economic asset for the United States and Canada. The lakes fuel a $6 trillion regional economy and hold 90% of the U.S. supply of fresh surface water, providing drinking water for more than 40 million people. More than 1.5 million U.S. jobs are directly connected to the Great Lakes and those jobs generate $62 billion in wages annually. The Great Lakes Commission To ensure that this vital resource is protected, the The GLC provides the following core services to our member eight Great Lakes states created the Great Lakes states and provinces: 1) communications and outreach; Commission (GLC) in 1955 via the Great Lakes Basin 2) information management and delivery; 3) facilitation and Compact. In 1968, Congress provided its consent to the consensus building; 4) policy coordination and advocacy; and Compact and the interstate compact agency it created. 5) regional project management. We employ these services to carry out a variety of projects and activities in the areas of: The eight U.S. states and two Canadian provinces are represented on the GLC by a delegation of government- Water Quality appointed commissioners. The GLC recommends policies Water Use, Management and Infrastructure and practices to balance the use, development, and Commercial Navigation conservation of the water resources of the Great Lakes and Great Lakes Waterfront Community Revitalization and Economic Development brings the region together to work on issues that no single Coastal Conservation and Habitat Restoration community, state, province, or nation can tackle alone.
    [Show full text]
  • Great Lakes Compact Commission
    2018 Annual Report 1 Board of Directors John Linc Stine, Chair Commissioner, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Sharon Jackson, Vice Chair Deputy General Counsel, Office of the Governor of Indiana Jon W. Allan, Immediate Past Chair Director, Office of the Great Lakes, Michigan Department of Natural Resources Wayne A. Rosenthal Director, Illinois Department of Natural Resources Basil Seggos Commissioner, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation James Zehringer Director, Ohio Department of Natural Resources William Carr Senior Manager, Government of Ontario Office of International Relations and Policy Timothy J. Bruno Chief, Office of the Great Lakes, Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection Jean-François Hould Québec Government Representative in Chicago, Government of Québec Stephen G. Galarneau Director, Office of Great Waters, Great Lakes and Mississippi River Environmental Management Divison, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources Board of Directors list is as of December 2018. Cover photo: Pictured Rocks National Lakeshore in Munising, Michigan, on Lake Superior ©flickr/74418101@N02/David Marvin. This page: Oak Street Beach in Chicago, Illinois, on Lake Michigan ©flickr/romanboed/Roman Boed. 2 John Linc Stine Darren J. Nichols Investing in a National Asset: Restoring the Great Lakes Basin Ecology and Economy ... Together MAY 2019 s the Great Lakes community of Partnership formally welcoming Ontario today, tomorrow and going forward to ensure heads into 2020 together, thank and Québec as members of the Great Lakes that we leave the Great Lakes Basin in better A you for joining us as we take Commission and as supporting partners condition and with even more opportunities a moment to reflect on the history and of the Great Lakes Basin Compact.
    [Show full text]
  • A D V I S O R
    A D V I S O R Vol. 11 No. 3 Guest editorial May/June 1998 One lakes problems mirror larger pollution Inside issues facing Great Lakes region Lake St. Clair By Rep. William Callahan, Member, Michigan Delegation to the Cleanup Great Lakes Commission ake St. Clair, as many of you know, has numerous problems. Local Even though this is just one lake—and not even one of the environmental L Great Lakes—its problems are symptomatic of the larger pol- action gets lution issues facing the Great Lakes region. One of the biggest prob- results lems facing Lake St. Clair is combined sewer overflow and high bacte- ria counts, which have resulted in closed beaches during the summer season. Lake St. Clair is of particular importance to the state of Michigan, In this issue with 60 percent of southeast Michigan’s drinking water derived from it. Also found in the Lake St. Clair system are numerous beaches, fishing, boating and other recre- Commission Briefs........2 ational and wildlife opportunities. It is easy to identify that there is pollution in a body of water, especially when there are as Another surprise for Great Lakes many problems as we’ve had with Lake St. Clair. The “closed beach” signs along our shore- community * Legislative and line in Macomb County bluntly show the public the severity of the problems. But identify- appropriations priorities * River ing pollution sources and developing solutions to the problems are much more difficult and basin organizations * Beneficial use involved processes. workshop * RAP Summit * Great I worked closely with 30 other members of Lakes Spill Protection Initiative * We have long pointed to Sediment transport modeling * the Blue Ribbon Commission on Lake St.
    [Show full text]
  • Rehabilitating Great Lakes Ecosystems
    REHABILITATING GREAT LAKES ECOSYSTEMS edited by GEORGE R. FRANCIS Faculty of Environmental Studies University of Waterloo Waterloo, Ontario N2L 3G1 JOHN J. MAGNUSON Laboratory of Limnology University of Wisconsin-Madison Madison, Wisconsin 53706 HENRY A. REGIER Institute for Environmental Studies University of Toronto Toronto. Ontario M5S 1A4 and DANIEL R. TALHELM Department of Fish and Wildlife Michigan State University East Lansing, Michigan 48824 TECHNICAL REPORT NO. 37 Great Lakes Fishery Commission 1451 Green Road Ann Arbor, Michigan 48105 December 1979 CONTENTS Executive summary.. .......................................... 1 Preface and acknowledgements ................................. 2 1. Background and overview of study ........................... 6 Approach to the study. .................................... 10 Some basic terminology ................................... 12 Rehabilitation images ...................................... 15 2. Lake ecology, historical uses and consequences ............... 16 Early information sources. ................................. 17 Original condition ......................................... 18 Human induced changes in Great Lakes ecosystems ......... 21 Conclusion ............................................. ..3 0 3. Rehabilitation methods ...................................... 30 Fishing and other harvesting ............................... 31 Introductions and invasions of exotics ...................... 33 Microcontaminants: toxic wastes and biocides ............... 34 Nutrients and eutrophication
    [Show full text]
  • US Geologic Survey
    round goby<br /><br /> (Neogobius melanostomus) - FactSheet http://nas.er.usgs.gov/queries/factsheet.aspx?SpeciesID=713 NAS - Nonindigenous Aquatic Species Home Alert System Database & Queries Taxa Information Neogobius melanostomus Collection Info (round goby) HUC Maps Fishes Point Maps Exotic to United States Fact Sheet ©Dave Jude, Center for Great Lakes Aquatic Sciences Neogobius melanostomus (Pallas 1814) Common name: round goby Synonyms and Other Names: Apollonia melanostoma (Pallas, 1814), Apollonia melanostomus (Pallas, 1814) See Stepien and Tumeo (2006) for name change. Taxonomy: available through Identification: Distinguishing characteristics have been given by Berg (1949), Miller (1986), Crossman et al. (1992), Jude (1993), and Marsden and Jude (1995). Young round gobies are solid slate gray. Older fish are blotched with black and brown and have a greenish dorsal fin with a black spot. The raised eyes on these fish are also very distinctive (Jude 1993). This goby is very similar to native sculpins but can be distinguished by the fused pelvic fins (sculpins have two separate fins) (Marsden and Jude 1995). Size: 30.5 cm; 17.8 cm maximum seen in United States (Jude 1993). Native Range: Fresh water, prefers brackish (Stepien and Tumeo 2006). Eurasia including Black Sea, Caspian Sea, and Sea of Azov and tributaries (Miller 1986). 1 of 6 7/21/2011 2:11 PM round goby<br /><br /> (Neogobius melanostomus) - FactSheet http://nas.er.usgs.gov/queries/factsheet.aspx?SpeciesID=713 Alaska Hawaii Caribbean Guam Saipan Interactive maps: Point Distribution Maps Nonindigenous Occurrences: DETAILED DISTRIBUTION MAP This species was introduced into the St. Clair River and vicinity on the Michigan-Ontario border where several collections were made in 1990 on both the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Conference Proceedings Actions Toward
    Conference Proceedings Actions Toward a Sustainable Great Lakes May 4-6, 2004 Cleveland, Ohio Sponsored by the Great Lakes Commission and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers-Buffalo District in cooperation with 25 partner agencies and organizations. Conference Proceedings Actions Toward a Sustainable Great Lakes Table of Contents Preface I. Introduction .......................................................................................... 1 II. Key Findings and Recommendations ....................................................... 1 A. Water Use Management ................................................................ 2 B. Water Quality............................................................................... 3 C. Toxic Hotspots.............................................................................. 4 D. Aquatic Invasive Species ............................................................... 5 E. Human Health .............................................................................. 7 F. Habitat/Wetlands ......................................................................... 7 G. Sustainable Waterways (Commercial and Recreational)............. 10 H. Research and Decision Support.................................................... 11 III. Conclusions and Next Steps.................................................................. 13 Appendix A. Partner Agencies and Organizations ........................................... A-1 B. Conference Program....................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Great Lakes Aquatic Invasive Species Landing Blitz 2020 Partnering Agencies and Organizations
    Great Lakes Aquatic Invasive Species Landing Blitz 2020 Partnering Agencies and Organizations Updated: June 23, 2020 Page | 1 State/Province Partner Federal Fisheries and Oceans Canada Illinois Illinois Department of Natural Resources Illinois Illinois-Indiana Sea Grant Indiana Indiana Department of Natural Resources Michigan Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes and Energy Michigan Michigan Department of Natural Resources Michigan Alcona Iosco Cedar Lake Association Michigan Barry, Calhoun & Kalamazoo Cooperative Invasive Species Management Area Michigan Black Lake Preservation Society Michigan Cass County Conservation District Michigan Cisco Chain Riparian Owners Association Michigan Fremont Lake Association Michigan Gun Lake Tribe Michigan Harwood Lake Association Michigan Higgins Lake Foundation Michigan Higgins Lake Property Owner's Association Michigan Kent Conservation District Michigan Lake Ellen Association Michigan Maceday Lotus Lakes Association Michigan Marquette County Michigan Meridian Twp. Lake Lansing Advisory Board Michigan Paradise Lake Association Michigan Pentwater Lake Association Michigan U.S. Coast Guard Auxiliary Michigan Walloon Lake Association and Conservancy Minnesota Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Minnesota Minnesota Sea Grant Minnesota Carlton County Minnesota Cook County Minnesota Lake County Minnesota Lake SWCD Minnesota North St. Louis SWCD Minnesota St. Louis County New York New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Great Lakes Aquatic Invasive Species Landing Blitz
    [Show full text]
  • Restoring the Great Lakes Economic Impact
    Restoring the Great Lakes The Great Lakes Restoration Initiative was launched in 2010 to restore and protect the lakes. Congress Every GLRI project dollar appropriated $2.5 billion from 2010 to 2017 to fund spent 2010-2016: more than 3,600 projects that have dramatically improved environmental conditions around • Will produce $3.35 of additional the region. economic activity through 2036 Over the past eight years, the GLRI has been • Will generate $1.62 in additional celebrated for the progress it has made toward economic activity in tourism- restoring and protecting the Great Lakes. Six million related industries through 2036 pounds of invasive Asian carp have been trapped and removed from the Illinois River, more than 402,000 • Produced quality of life pounds of phosphorus have been prevented from improvements worth $1.08 to running into the lakes, and more than 180,000 acres residents in coastal communities of fish and wildlife habitat have been protected or restored. The most environmentally sensitive and damaged areas are being cleaned up and toxic residue is being removed from the lakes. These accomplishments have resulted from the unparalleled partnerships between the U.S. federal government, states, cities and towns, tribes, businesses, and nonprofit organizations that the GLRI set in motion. Economic impact of Great Lakes restoration Despite strong anecdotal evidence that the GLRI helped turn the economy around in many Great Lakes communities, until recently there was no comprehensive study of the overall impact of the program
    [Show full text]
  • North Star Portwinter 2020
    NORTH STAR PORTWINTER 2020 CLURE TERMINAL WHAT HAPPENED FLEXES ITS MUSCLE TO THE MESQUITE? IMO 2020 TAKES HOLD NEW ICEBREAKER ON THE WAY? ICY ENTRIES YACHTING THE FOR WINTER LAYUP BIG LAKE A PUBLICATION OF THE www.duluthport.com THE HARBOR LINE Clure Terminal prominent in Port’s future he Duluth Seaway Port Authority is busy with a projects are deferred, growth Tvariety of activities this time of year, in spite of opportunities are forfeited, and the deceptively still cover of snow. Among them, we’re maintenance may be neglected. planning capital projects. That starts with strategy. In financial boom times, it’s Successful capital projects aren’t spontaneous. They require easier to justify expenditures Deb DeLuca, Port Director forethought and awareness of how they interconnect with on equipment (both replace- existing activities and future possibilities. From there, ment and new types to expand we compile funding, engage with engineering and design services) and infrastructure, and to feed growth projects. services and seek contractor bids. If (and only if) all of that But all of this must be done with thoughtful planning to goes well, the process finally moves into the execution avoid bringing back financially challenging times! phase. Although our cash reserves are strong, we must be Last fall, an international panel of judges selected judicious with their use, and we are conservative with debt Duluth Cargo Connect as the Heavy Lift Port/Terminal financing. Recent Port Authority grant funding pursuits Operator of the Year, a decision based partly on the Port have been aggressive but targeted. Since 2015, we’ve uti- Authority’s strategic investment in and lized $17 million in state and federal maintenance of the Clure Public Marine grants, leveraging $40.3 million in Terminal.
    [Show full text]
  • Part I - Updated Estimate Of
    Part I - Updated Estimate of Fair Market Value of the S.S. Keewatin in September 2018 05 October 2018 Part I INDEX PART I S.S. KEEWATIN – ESTIMATE OF FAIR MARKET VALUE SEPTEMBER 2018 SCHEDULE A – UPDATED MUSEUM SHIPS SCHEDULE B – UPDATED COMPASS MARITIME SERVICES DESKTOP VALUATION CERTIFICATE SCHEDULE C – UPDATED VALUATION REPORT ON MACHINERY, EQUIPMENT AND RELATED ASSETS SCHEDULE D – LETTER FROM BELLEHOLME MANAGEMENT INC. PART II S.S. KEEWATIN – ESTIMATE OF FAIR MARKET VALUE NOVEMBER 2017 SCHEDULE 1 – SHIPS LAUNCHED IN 1907 SCHEDULE 2 – MUSEUM SHIPS APPENDIX 1 – JUSTIFICATION FOR OUTSTANDING SIGNIFICANCE & NATIONAL IMPORTANCE OF S.S. KEEWATIN 1907 APPENDIX 2 – THE NORTH AMERICAN MARINE, INC. REPORT OF INSPECTION APPENDIX 3 – COMPASS MARITIME SERVICES INDEPENDENT VALUATION REPORT APPENDIX 4 – CULTURAL PERSONAL PROPERTY VALUATION REPORT APPENDIX 5 – BELLEHOME MANAGEMENT INC. 5 October 2018 The RJ and Diane Peterson Keewatin Foundation 311 Talbot Street PO Box 189 Port McNicoll, ON L0K 1R0 Ladies & Gentlemen We are pleased to enclose an Updated Valuation Report, setting out, at September 2018, our Estimate of Fair Market Value of the Museum Ship S.S. Keewatin, which its owner, Skyline (Port McNicoll) Development Inc., intends to donate to the RJ and Diane Peterson Keewatin Foundation (the “Foundation”). It is prepared to accompany an application by the Foundation for the Canadian Cultural Property Export Review Board. This Updated Valuation Report, for the reasons set out in it, estimates the Fair Market Value of a proposed donation of the S.S. Keewatin to the Foundation at FORTY-EIGHT MILLION FOUR HUNDRED AND SEVENTY-FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS ($48,475,000) and the effective date is the date of this Report.
    [Show full text]