Sears Island Planning Initiative
Third Steering Committee Meeting

Outright sale of the Island, as with any property owned by Maine DOT, is authorized by 23 MRSA Section 61, which provides that land acquired for transportation purposes and deemed no longer necessary for those purposes may be sold by the Governor, acting on the recommendation of Maine DOT. Proceeds of the sale must be deposited into the Highway Fund. Any such sale involving Sears Island would, however, first be subject to approval by the Transportation Committee under LD 277.

Questions/Issues Raised:

• Any transfer from MDOT, whether by sale, gift, etc. would be by a deed and would be required to be by a Governor’s deed under 23 MRSA Section 61.
• Transfer of conservation properties must be made by a supermajority of the legislature, but Sears Island would not qualify as a conservation property. (JP)
• Why was the original title of LD277 changed and who authorized it? Note: Title of bill has no legal significance. The state website displays original bill titles. The new/current title is: “An Act Regarding the Management and Use of Sears Island.”
• What was the motivation behind the offer to withdraw LD 277 and grant Searsport two-thirds of the island if the town entered into an MOU?
• Senator Damon can speak about LD277 at a future meeting.

4. What path to implementation would any particular proposal have to follow; what entities (town, legislative, Transportation Committee) would have to review and approve a particular use?

Any proposal that would alter the current ownership, land use or agency jurisdiction of the Island that differs from its current use (i.e., virtually any use) must be reviewed and approved by the Transportation Committee under LD 277. Further, any proposed use of the Island that would be outside of Maine Dot’s statutory jurisdiction, i.e., construction, improvement and maintenance of transportation projects under 23 MRSA 153, would require legislative approval.

Questions/Issues Raised:

• If consensus is reached and a proposal requiring a structure to be built is agreed upon, what would happen to keep it public and not under MDOT management? JP: The legislature can make this happen.
• Re: levels of permanency: Is it conceivable that the legislature could transfer a permanent conservation easement to a land trust? Otherwise, it seems that future uses could change depending upon each administration and/or future needs/desires of the MDOT.
• If consensus is reached to sell “X acres” of Sears Island to the Town of Searsport for $1.00, would that require legislative approval? [To illustrate the debate of whether MDOT owns Sears Island or not – hinges on disposition of property vis-à-vis the legislature.
• If the legislature can change the terms of island use anytime, why is MDOT determined to reserve 30% (280 acres) of the island?
• JP: The legislature has complete power over the MDOT except with regard to constitutional issues, e.g. use of highway funds.
• A transfer may also take place between MDOT and another agency.
• Does the “current use” provision recognize the actual current use (not transportation) or its intended use (transportation)? Again, Senator Damon may address.

5. What is the obligation of the State to study alternative means of meeting transportation needs (such as fully utilizing Mack Point to meet those needs through expansion of existing facilities prior to new facility on Sears Island) under the Sensible Transportation Act?

The Sensible Transportation Policy Act requires Maine DOT to evaluate the …full range of reasonable transportation alternatives for all significant highway construction or reconstruction projects and give preference to… improvements to the existing [highway] system, and other transportation modes before increasing highway capacity through road building activities.

Questions/Issues Raised:

• Regarding a series of questions asked and statements made pertaining to legislative intent, the Steering Committee requested that the SC be provided copies of the resolutions and bond issues during the 1980’s and 1990’s regarding building a cargo port on Sears Island.
• Cautioning the group on concentrating too much effort on historical information, it was noted that much of the information being requested will be important only if it affects the implementation of an agreement reached by the Steering Committee, and such agreement is yet to come.
• It was further noted that the context of this discussion should be described as legal opinion and not fact.

IV. Mack Point Overview -- Sprague Energy, MMA Railroad

Displaying an aerial photo, Jim Therriault of Sprague Energy, provided an overview of the Mack Point facility, describing its current uses, plans, and potential future capacity. He stated that the facility has an area with existing unused tanks that could be upgraded for future use if additional space is required. In addition, there are two tracts of land not in use, 18 and 25 acres, with a portion owned by the Port Authority and leased by Irving. With regard to the dock, he stated that Sprague did not install a fendering system because there was no demand at the time. Additional information was shared in response to questions as follows:

• The vessel limit is 650 ft. (dimensions = 800ft.) in length and 106 ft. in width. The ships are requiring a maximum draw of 35 ft. (one required 38 ft.).
• There is 250 ft. between the two docks, so two smaller vessels can occupy the area. With larger vessels (e.g. 106 ft.) a decision must be made about which ship takes precedence.
• Sprague is currently using approximately 100,000sf of warehouse space and has the capacity to build 1 million to 1.25 million sf of warehousing; Sprague currently uses 40% of berthing capacity, and more for liquid. No plans are in place for expansion, as a need must be established first.
• Maintenance dredging takes place approximately every 5 years, depending on the siltation.
• Sprague could not accommodate a world-class container facility, as there is not enough space to dock a vessel parallel to Long Cove and operate a crane to offload containers.
• A cargo port on Sears Island would handle the same traffic as does Mack Point (i.e. be a Sprague competitor) – unless it is a world-class container port.
• The proposed LNG terminal would have shut down shipping within a certain radius to docking LNG ships.
• The state bond to build the dock was approximately $16mil. Sprague is paying this amount in installments, and is ahead of schedule on repayment.
• Sprague can do small/feeder container business, with 40-50 per week with the current capacity.
• Placing a facility on Sears Island would not pose a navigational hazard as the turning channels are clear of each other.
• Fishermen, including the Maine Lobstermen’s Association were involved in the designation of channels and traffic management.

Fred Yoakum, of MMA RR stated agreement with Sprague’s warehouse and transload limitations and expansion capabilities, but stated that future container shipping port on Sears Island would be a major public benefit to Searsport, the State of Maine, and beyond. The benefits flow to the State of Maine generally though channels of commerce and are important to those that wish to move goods (manufacturers) and those that wish to receive them (consumers). He stated that building a container port on Sears Island is one of the railroad’s “very few growth opportunities” in the Montreal to Searsport line.

Issues/Questions:

• What would the effect of opening the causeway have on dredging?
• What are the figures for number of vessels and tonnage over the past thirty years?
• If Mack Point reaches capacity, can dock(s) be added to the west of the existing two? In the past, there were three additional docks there.

V. Requests for future presentations, research needed; additions to Index of Information

Karin Tilberg distributed the following information in response to past information requests: Map of Sears Island Study Area and Text regarding Maine shoreline miles and number of miles conserved (from the State Planning Office); and, a map entitled “Maine Freight System 2006”. In addition, she distributed a list of members of the Sears Island Planning Initiative Steering Committee (As of July 12, 2006), and asked that the group review and report any errors. It was noted that Jane Sanford should be added to the list.

It was noted that many additional information requests have emerged in today’s discussions and those would be forwarded to the Education Subcommittee.

New Requests for Steering Committee Membership

The following individuals asked to be included as members of the Steering Committee:

• Don Grant: Former Town Manager of Searsport and member of the Maine Port Authority, representing unmet and unspoken needs of the northern counties in Maine who depend on and benefit by the Port of Searsport.
• Stan Moses: City of Bangor Economic Development Office, representing the City’s interest in Sears Island and transportation generally. His interest is in preserving infrastructure and maintaining transportation opportunities that exist now and in the future.
• Sandy Blitz: Interest in promoting economic development projects in the State of Maine.
• Joelle Madiec, of Stockton Springs, representing the interests of Squaw Point Association.

The question of inclusivity was discussed, with Reitman stating that a balance must be made between limiting it to a reasonably sized group while being inclusive of diverse voices. There also comes a point at which too much time has passed to accommodate new additions to a group. Tilberg noted that, from an administrative standpoint, it is getting increasingly difficult to manage the numbers.

Consensus was reached to accept the four new members and consider the Steering Committee complete as of today. Others may participate through affinity groups and resource circle. In addition, in response to concerns raised about the difficulty of participation by those living great distances from meeting locations, Tilberg will investigate videoconferencing options from Aroostook County for the next phase of Steering Committee meetings.

A number of questions or requests for future information were raised throughout the meeting (and by email to Reitman and Tilberg). These will be compiled and forward to the Education Committee for review and consideration.

VI. Guidance from Open Space Public Meeting

Tilberg distributed the Transcription of Notes from Flip Charts developed at the Open Space Meeting and asked that they be reviewed for accuracy. All agreed that this was an important meeting with many ideas coming forward and the Steering Committee will discuss at a future meeting how to best utilize the information.

VII. Presentation and Discussion of Affinity Group Visions for Sears Island

Reitman asked that representatives from affinity groups come forward to present visions that have been crafted with the intent of meeting both their own interests as well as the interests of others around the table.

The following Affinity Group Visions were presented:

1. SEARS ISLAND - AN INNOVATIVE PARTNERSHIP OF PRESERVATION AND PROFITS (Bob Ramsdell).

Our vision is to preserve the ecological integrity of Sears Island, building on the state's commitment to benefit from the lucrative, global market for eco-tourism, and encouraging the further expansion of Mack Point as protection for the island and a strong local economy.

In order to accomplish this vision for Sears Island, a microcosm of the Penobscot Bay ecosystem, the island must remain undeveloped and free from any motorized vehicles, with the exception of those used for emergencies and maintenance.

The following is a list of suggestions that we see as possible to maintain our vision:

1. A small kiosk that would include trail maps, a visitors log for signing in/out with a space for comments and dog waste disposal bags.
2. Interpretive signs along the trails.
3. A small fishing pier.
4. Development and management of trail systems.
5. A couple of composting toilets (up to three).
6. Use of an off-site educational facility that could tie in the Penobscot Marine Museum, Maine colleges, area technical schools and the new program in tourism offered at the Hutchinson Center. Educational programs could focus on research, marketing and administration with special events for each season.
   
   Our vision builds on the following economic assets while protecting one of the largest undeveloped, publicly owned islands on the east coast of the United States for future generations.

Maine's tourism industry: According to a recent Margaret Chase Smith Policy Center study, the overall contribution of state parks to the Maine economy last year was $95.7 million dollars, including 1,449 jobs, earning $3.1 million dollars. Park guests spent $48.7 million dollars on everything from lodging to souvenirs. Specifically, Sears Island can contribute to this aspect of the state's economy as a sole destination -- and as a link connecting three existing state parks in the Searsport-Bucksport area. Currently, visitors to the state must travel either as far south as Camden Hills State Park or as far Downeast as Acadia National Park to take advantage of such varied outdoor resources.

Expansion of Mack Point: Our vision acknowledges the economic benefits derived from Mack Point, and encourages the growth of Mack Point as a strategy that both enhances the state and local economy and protects Sears Island.

Economy of Searsport: In addition, our vision supports the growing economy and revitalization of downtown Searsport and outlying businesses, lodgings, restaurants, antique and gift shops, and the new historical society building.

2. “Protecting the Maine Taxpayer’s Investment of $26million” (Maria Fuentes). It is clear that this investment of public monies were intended to develop a port terminal on Sears Island, and the island should be used to honor that vision. Two different bond issues reaffirmed this purpose. In 1997, this bond issue was the only one which passed, demonstrating voter support. The current Taxpayers’ Bill of Rights (TABOR) shows voters’ concerns about use of tax monies.

3. FAIR PLAY FOR SEARS ISLAND'S VISION (Harlan McLaughlin).

The members of Fair Play For Sears Island have a plan to develop Sears Island into a protected public, non-developed, non-motorized, family recreation area . This plan will limit sprawl and retain the island's wild qualities. It will blend nicely with the four existing State Parks in the area. Though not a State Park itself, Sears Island will be the unique centerpiece of a large regional collection of parks. This is an attractive opportunity to elevate the visibility of Penobscot Bay as a destination with a diversity of examples of Maine's geography to visit. This will increase visitor usage and produce revenues.

We intend to develop specific recreational opportunities for as many different groups as possible for all four seasons. We want increased access to the shore for handicapped individuals, seniors and families. We want hiking trails with interpretive signage crisscrossing the island and becoming more primitive as one proceeds south. Most of these trails already exist in an overgrown condition. The main attraction of the trail system will be the existing perimeter trail that will be the longest maintained oceanside trail in New England [ 4.57 mi ]. These trails will be developed and maintained by a group made up of volunteers, including students from local colleges. The trails will double as cross country and snowshoeing trails during the winter [if it ever snows again]. We plan to encourage wild life and bird watching and beach exploration among enthusiasts.

We believe the potential for generating tourist dollars and the accompanying regional growth is far greater when the island is left in its natural condition. If non-consumptive, nature based tourism is practiced, in a "leave no trace" manner, our island will be the economic engine that drives our local communities well into the future. It will become more valuable each year, as the available sea shore vanishes. [ All the available sea shore has already vanished! ] This type of resource management is low in overhead/maintenance costs and takes advantage of the current popularity of nature based tourism. It is also the route to Gov Baldacci's creative economy.

Some local schools are using the island now and others have expressed interest. We have several schools offering courses that pertain to the resources available on the island and it is a natural choice for field study. That demand is growing. The extent of involvement by the educational community will depend on the wildness of the island and unfettered access to the interior as well as the shore.

In addition to the educational component, the recreation area will provide locals and tourists alike with a seashore experience that is not available anywhere else in New England. We expect to persuade many of the people traveling along route 1, [30,000 cars on a typical summer day] from Camden to Bar Harbor, to stop in Searsport and experience the island in their own way [ then go to Searsport to eat, sleep and spend ]. The advertising for the recreation area would be added into the state advertising package and budget. The town of Searsport will be so proud as to post information about the island on their official website. The local bread and breakfast establishments already list this as an attraction on their commercial websites [and they say it is a big draw]. The other advertising will be accomplished by word of mouth. None of these advertising methods increase the local cost of promoting the area. The State of Maine must be convinced of the feasibility and profitability of this type of land use, as it is pushing the rest of the state in that direction. We must take into consideration the value of open space and the public access to the water and sea shore and contrast that with the results of commercialization [can you say "the goose that laid the golden eggs"? ]. We must look into the future to foresee the incredible value of this proposal 20-30 years out.

Those that favor some unspecified type of port development will admit they don't have their plans fully developed at this time. Their ideas and "wants" seem to run in no common direction. They seem to be agreed on one point though, it will be better for the people of Maine if we allow the island to sit barricaded and vulnerable to capitalistic whims, while they develop the details of their ideas, just in case.

We maintain there is no indication of an increase in shipping traffic that Mack Point will be unable to handle in the foreseeable future. We understand it isn't wise to try to bind the future with exclusionary legislation and that any sitting legislature can change the rules as they see fit.

So therefore, we suggest a compromise. The people of Maine will add Sears Island to their collection of protected public lands as a non-motorized, non-developed family recreation area. This will include a land management plan similar to those required by LMF that includes a state agency [or 2], a local friends type group and a land trust organization. We understand if or when there appears a legitimate need for a different use of the island and that use is approved by the legislature, the use will change [per 277]. We think it would be nonsensical to keep the people of Maine from enjoying this unique resource until the other side can get its ideas organized. They still have a great deal of work to do. The only reasonable thing to do is implement our idea and wait for them to submit theirs.

4. Friends of Sears Island (Jan Flint). We support about ½ of option 1 in the publication: "Options for the Future" – with use of Sears Island limited to low-impact uses, education, and economic development, maintaining as much of its current state as possible while encouraging development on the mainland and at Mack Point. In addition to Bob’s list, above, would include access for disabled persons and trash containers. FOSI and the state would partner to manage the island, keeping business in Searsport proper, enhancing the economic picture through tourism and education with a fundraising component of public/private donations and grants. FOSI is now incorporated as a 501C(3), non-profit organization.

5. “To Assure a Competitive, Responsive, Multi-modal Business Environment within the Port of Searsport” (John Melrose). Recognizing the shifting climate in energy, transportation, cargo movement, potential changes in Jones Act (Federal Act restricting all foreign ships to one U.S. port stop only). There is a dredged berth at Sears Island now, and to give that up would take away Searsport’s competitive edge. In response to a question, Melrose stated that the vision could conceivably accommodate preservation of a large part of Sears Island if future competitiveness can be assured.

6. “No Development of Any Kind” (John Hyk), Waldo County Commissioners. Hyk further distributed a Resolution dated July 11, 2006 on the Future of Sears Island by the Waldo County Commissioners resolving that Sears Island should be set-aside as land to be retained in its natural state for the use and enjoyment of the public.

7. Maximizing the Three-Port System on behalf of users of the Port of Searsport from a nine-county area (Sandy Blitz)

Tilberg thanked the groups for sharing their visions, noting the following concepts that appeared to emerge:

1. There appears to be consensus that at least part of the island should be free from development, devoted to light recreational use.
2. We should maximize (“build out”) capacity at Mack Point

Tilberg suggested that each affinity group should ask: How can transportation based visions be further detailed to account for conservation interests and needs? And, conversely, how can conservation based visions be further detailed to account for transportation interests and needs?

In response, Harlan McLaughlin presented a statement detailing how keeping Sears Island wild will meet the needs of other affinity groups:
..........the townsfolk that want to make some $ off the island......
..........the town will be the primary beneficiary of the business generated by a wild island....
..........the town doesn't want to incur a lot of expenses with whatever happens.....
..........THE TOWN WILL HAVE VERY SMALL FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITIES WITH A WILD, MANAGED ISLAND....
.........the searsport comp plan wants only marine uses for the island.......
.........this includes public recreation [i think].....WHICH IS A WILD ISLAND
.........the local business don't want competition for their services on the island......
...........there will be no place to spend $ on a wild island.....
..........the siauc wants to be sure nothing is done out there that is not on their shopping list.......
...........there is nothing about a wild island that has not already been approved by the siauc........
......the governor is urging us all to work towards a noncosumptive use of resourses....
...... he pushes creative economy and admits tourism is #1 industry in maine.......
......a wild island meets all these needs......
..........senator damon wants to be sure this is considered a statewide issue......
..........the close association of a wild island to the LMF movement makes it a statewide issue.....
...........the trans comm wants to be involved [277] in deciding on any changes to the current use....
...........the actual current use is a non motorized public recreation area,no action is required.....because ...........a wild island will not be a change in current use........the current use is transportation purposes.....the island will still be used as a buffer for mack point.. ....and a recreation area at the same time.......... .
..........the dot wants to retain guardianship of island....
..........a wild island can accommodate that in fact we suggest they be the sponsoring state agency along with doc....
.........that way they can save face and not have to publicly give up their claim to the 280.....
............nor will they have to give up guardianship of the island.....
.........dot wants the island used for transportation uses....[they say that's where the $ came from to buy it]....
.........a buffer zone for a port is a transportation use....... ...........a wild island will be a buffer zone for mack point......
.........3 out of 4 voters in maine want more land protected.......
.........governor wants more $ for buying land......
........a wild island will protect a significant resource that is already paid for......[paid for with our tax money]........
........people in stockton want to develop their harbor, one of the last undeveloped harbors in maine, in a manner consistent with a wild island.....
........that includes the selectmen as well as many residents......
........a wild island can accommodate that......
........ mr melrose has stated he would prefer an undeveloped island to act as a buffer for mack point...
......... a wild island does that......
........sprague energy does not want competition from a port on the island....
........ the wild island offers no competition.....
.........ms Fuentes wants to maintain the 3 port system...
.........mr Gelinas want to ensure the 3 port system remains viable.......
..........a wild island allows for mack point to remain a part of the 3 ports........
.................it will even protect mack point
..........the lobster fishermen want to be able to continue to catch lobsters around the area...
...........they will be happy that a wild island will not ruin their fishing [it will help preserve it the lobster nurseries.....and don't forget the value of eel grass]....
...........sierra club rep has said publicly she favors removing the causeway....
...........a wild island can accommodate that idea........

Developments such as Plum Creek will leave very little undeveloped land left in Maine, making it even more important that Sears Island remain wild.
• There is only one way on and off the island and shared uses (conservation/transportation) could be incompatible.
• Those visions to preserve the island have specific components, but those with transportation visions are vague with no direction or plans. This makes them difficult to respond to.
• Before any development occurs, a need should be established.
• While MDOT does not have a specific plan or “an immediate need” for Sears Island at this time, it does recognize the valuable resource of the deep-water berth, which may be required in the future to address needs we cannot even imagine now. MDOT reported that Maine has just entered into an agreement with 4 states and 7 provinces to undertake a transportation marketing study over the next 15 months. The Northeast Can Am Study will look at all forms of transportation. MDOT is also in the process of updating its 5-year freight plan, which includes deep-water issues and examines the Three-Port Strategy. For more information on the Can Am Study, see: http://www.canamconnections.com/
• Sears Island is crucial to fisheries. It was requested that Matthew Simmons be asked to present information on this topic. The phone number for Matthew Simmons, author of Twilight in the Dessert, is 236-3555.
• Sears Island can be an example for the world of a way to save wild land while preserving economic development. There are many educational establishments in this area with new ones emerging. The possibilities for marine research are great.
• Searsport is seeking ways to better support itself, so it is important to ask where the money will come from to support a particular vision. An objective of the town is to generate enough money from the island to maintain it, without losing money or losing the island itself. Searsport residents see the island as a source of revenue. If we are asked to give that up, are there other areas nearby which can be developed and generate revenue?
• The Steering Committee is lacking information to make a decision. We shouldn’t “rush to judgment” until questions are answered. For example, Statements have been made that a cargo port is necessary. Is it? Why? Why can’t it be at Mack Point? Can it even be built at Sears Island? Is the deep-water pocket there suitable for this type of port?
• A more permanent outcome should be sought than keeping the status quo until a documented need arises sometime in the future.
• Publication “Options for Sears Island” was cited.
• Jim Grossman made the following proposal:

Current Steering Committee becomes a nucleus for a corporation, nominally called FRIENDS OF SEARS ISLAND (even though that name is already taken). FOSI meets annually, elects a BOD charged with the jobs of:

1-writing bylaws

2-formulating a 5 year plan for the island

3-making presentations to the corporation and the legislature

4-managing the corporation’s finances.

BOD meets twice a year, (or more often as needed).

Members of the corporation meet annually (more often as needed)

Corporation approves, modifies or rejects 5 year plan.

Corporation may grow, raise funds, solicit membership and support. FOSI corporation are directly involved in the maintenance and improvement of the island’s physical assets.

Corporation lobbies the legislature for any changes in current use of the island.

OPTIONS:

Corporation may extend future plan interval to 10 or more years.

Corporation may shorten future plan interval.

Corporation may advocate for "forever wild" status of the island, converting status to State Park, or candidate for Land For Maine’s Future program.

Corporation may recommend development of a port facility if the need becomes undeniable.

IN THE INTERIM: Town of Searsport markets the island as a tourist destination. Visitors can employ tour guides, rent out electric golf carts to the disabled, kayaks and bicycles. Town develops publicity program to promote the Sears Island experience. Local businesses take advantage of new market for hospitality, restaurant, vehicle maintenance, pleasure boating services and chandlery, sales of general merchandise and so forth .

Shipping/transportation interests make full use of the facilities at Mack Point which has the potential to expand to accommodate a growing industry.

VIII. SC Work Plan between now and September

Tilberg stated that there is no rush to make a decision, but the next meeting date should be set and discussions take place on how to use the ideas generated today to move forward in the process. It was suggested that affinity groups meet prior to the next meeting to further refine their visions. Some affinity group representatives may choose to meet with representatives from other groups.

Subsequent meetings were set as follows:

Education Subcommittee: Wednesday, July 26, 2006, 1:30-4:30 pm at the Town Hall

Steering Committee: Tuesday, September 12, 2006, (time TBA) at the Hutchinson Center

IX. Adjourn

The meeting was adjourned at 4:50 pm.

Meeting Summary Prepared by Kimberly Vogel and Jonathan Reitman