[ Reply | Next | Previous | Up ]
From: Larry Sanders
Category: Shipwreck Research
Date: 07 Jun 2007
Time: 12:42:21
Remote Name: 71.10.3.223
I spoke with the MDNR this morning and was told that the following bill analysis states the MDNR position opposing the "Great Lakes State Park" legislation. This bill analysis explains the reasons for the MDNR position:
BILL ANALYSIS
BILL NUMBER: SB 429, 430, 431 & HB 4638, 4639, 4640
TOPIC: Create Great Lakes State Park
SPONSOR: Sen. McManus, Birkholz, Prusi, Rep. Lindberg, Acciavatti, Sheltrown
CO-SPONSORS: Sen. Birkholz, Prusi, Allen, Rep. Byrum, Spade, Jones, Stahl, Meekhof, Bieda, Byrnes, Mayes, Ball, Green
COMMITTEE: Natural Resources and Environmental Affairs, Tourism, Outdoor Recreation and Natural Resources
Analysis Done: May 14, 2007
POSITION The Department opposes the series of tie-barred bills related to the creation of the Great Lakes State Park. It is virtually impossible to individually analyze the relative merits of the six bills without considering the entire package that the bills create. While a laudable goal, the creation of an underwater state park as described by this series of bills fails to address critical issues of funding, administration and overall vision.
PROBLEM/BACKGROUND Great Lakes bottomlands contain a wealth of historic artifacts including shipwrecks and other items of cultural or historic interest. Currently, the management of bottomlands fall under the purview of the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) and the Department of History, Arts and Libraries (HAL). These bills would consolidate management of the bottomlands under the Department of Natural Resources (DNR), Parks and Recreation Division (PRD) and promote underwater tourism and additional commercial salvage opportunities.
DESCRIPTION OF BILL SB 429 amends MCL 324.41508 by establishing the management of great lakes bottomlands by the Department of Natural Resources. The bill also adds section 74127 which determines that all state-owned or controlled bottomlands within the territorial boundary of the state will be designated as the Great Lakes State Park. SB 430 adds section 74130 to Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act SB 429, 430, 431 & HB 4638, 4639, 4640
Page 2 May 14, 2007
(NREPA) (MCL 324.101 to 324.90106), establishes the Great Lakes State Park Preservation Fund within the State Treasury and sets the authorized expenditure categories. SB 431 allows for the creation of a Great Lakes State Park pass at a cost of $15. Purchase of the pass is to be voluntary and funds derived from the sales are to be deposited into the Great Lakes State Park Preservation Fund established by SB 430. HB 4638 alters NREPA by amending section 76103 and creating an 11 member Great Lakes State Park and Salvage Advisory Committee. The bill also designates the makeup of the board based on various interests applicable to this park e.g. tourism, salvage, diving interests, etc. and the kinds of issues to be considered within the committee. HB 4639 amends section 76101 of NREPA by changing the name of the guiding committee from the Underwater Salvage and Preserve Committee to the Great Lakes State Park and Salvage Advisory Committee. HB 4640 adds section 74128 to NREPA which indicates that the Great Lakes State Park is to be managed by the Department of Natural Resources and the Natural Resources Commission to protect and preserve its natural features while providing enhanced recreational opportunities, to include: boating, fishing, swimming and scuba diving.
SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS Pro This tie-barred series of bills establishes a program to boost tourism related to scuba diving, fishing, swimming and commercial salvaging opportunities Con This collective set of bills impacts three sections of the state's Natural Resources Law: Hunting and Shooting Grounds State Parks Underwater Preserves When the proposed changes are all incorporated into existing statute, many unanswered questions come to light: The changes do not address Native American fishing rights nor impacts to commercial fishing.
SB 429, 430, 431 & HB 4638, 4639, 4640 Page 3 May 14, 2007
Funding of this massive State Park through SB 431 and the sale of a voluntary pass at $15 would be wholly inadequate for the task. No business plan has been prepared to identify operational costs or estimate revenues. The establishment of the Great Lakes State Park Preservation Fund through SB 430 has no defined funding source beyond a $15 voluntary pass, but, defines in detail where the funds may be spent. These bills do not address how the existing Underwater Preserves, currently administered by DEQ and HAL, fit in to this new park. The bills also establish an 11 member advisory board similar to the recently-created Citizen's Committee for Michigan State Parks. The relative roles of each of these committees as they relate to this new state park are not clear. By the proposed board membership detailed in HB 4638 it appears that the focus of the park is to enhance tourism, recreational diving and commercial salvage opportunities, perhaps at the expense of resource stewardship. The apparent goals of this package will require a significant investment for water-based infrastructure not currently in place and administrative/maintenance staff not currently available. It is not feasible for the DNR to manage this program due to the lack of an initial, stable funding source. The Department cannot take on additional responsibilities due to current budget challenges. Protecting underwater antiquities, as required by the Antiquities Act, is currently difficult due to lack of staffing and funding for enforcement. Increasing access to those assets will require a corresponding increase in monitoring of those assets. The funding for such an effort appears to be unaddressed.
FISCAL/ECONOMIC IMPACT Are there revenue or budgetary implications in the bill to the -- (a) Department Budgetary: The lack of startup and continuing maintenance funds will result in significant challenges associated with the administration of this proposed new program. Revenue: A voluntary pass to be sold for $15, coupled with a fund lacking any startup capital, will not generate enough revenue to accomplish the goals
SB 429, 430, 431 & HB 4638, 4639, 4640 Page 4 May 14, 2007
of this program. This program would be revenue-negative for the Department.
Comments: None (b) State Budgetary: Unknown Revenue: Some private sector businesses may benefit through increased tourism.
Comments: None (c) Local Government Comments: None
OTHER STATE DEPARTMENTS The Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) and History, Arts and Libraries (HAL) are impacted by this series of bills. It is unclear how the current underwater preserves, administered by DEQ and HAL are to be incorporated into this new state park. ANY OTHER PERTINENT INFORMATION These bills incorporate a previous concept that included intentional sinking of ships as dive sites for the benefit of local tourism and dive shops. Those bills were problematic due to the liability and cleanup cost concerns. These bills alter that concept by transferring the liability and costs from local governments to the state. The tenuous funding mechanism for this initiative will not be sufficient to manage the administration and infrastructure needs let alone be sufficient to fund the cleanup and sinking of ships as dive sites. The Michigan Underwater Preserves Council is most likely to oppose this package of bills. Additional legislation may be required to change other statutes to declare them unconstitutional or illegal in order for this set of laws to fit.
SB 429, 430, 431 & HB 4638, 4639, 4640 Page 5 May 14, 2007
ADMINISTRATIVE RULES IMPACT Rules can be promulgated to provide for administration of the act.
_______________________________ Rebecca A. Humphries Director _______________________________ Date PRD/BSS