performance report - eup-planning.orgeup-planning.org/pdf/rpi-ceds/plans/2016 ceds... · this...

2016 PERFORMANCE

REPORT

on the

UPPER

CEDS

EASTERN

PENINSULA’S

2015 - 2019

EUP CEDS 2016 Performance Report

TO BEGIN This document is the annual performance report on and update of the Eastern Upper Peninsula’s Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS), Elevating the Eastern Upper Peninsula: 2015-2019 Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy & 2015-2019 Regional Prosperity Plan. Elevating the Eastern Upper Peninsula, as suggested by its full title, combined the required elements of the U.S. Department of Commerce – Economic Development Administration’s (EDA) CEDS and Michigan’s Regional Prosperity Initiative (RPI) processes. This annual performance report and update is required of regions which receive federal funding to develop a CEDS. This document was produced by the Eastern Upper Peninsula Regional Planning & Development Commission (EUPRPDC). EUPRPDC is the District Organization for the Eastern Upper Peninsula, 1 of 14 EDA-recognized Economic Development Districts in Michigan.

Address: 1118 East Easterday Avenue, Sault Sainte Marie, Michigan 49783 Phone number: 906.635.1581 Fax number: 906.635.9582 Email: [email protected] Website: http://eup-planning.org

Funding for the production of this document comes from EDA, which is matched with funding support from the three counties that comprise the Eastern Upper Peninsula Economic Development District—Chippewa County, Luce County, and Mackinac County. To view the 2015 – 2019 CEDS click here or type in this address to your web browser: http://eup-planning.org/PDF/RPI-CEDS/Plans/Elevating%20The%20EUP_EUPRPDC.pdf

EUPRPDC BOARD OF DIRECTORS:

Chippewa County Mr. Conor Egan Mr. Don McLean Mr. Kelly Freeman Mr. Jim Moore Mr. Joe Dobrowolski Mr. Eric Becks Mr. Richard Timmer Mr. Jeff Holt Ms. Michelle Walk

Luce County Ms. Mary Archambeau Mr. John Waltman Mr. Charles Cleaver Ms. Colleen Duflo

Mackinac County Mr. Jim Hill Ms. Diane Patrick Mr. Gary Reid Mr. Dean Reid Mr. Steve Paquin

https://www.eda.gov/ceds/

http://www.michigan.gov/dtmb/0,5552,7-150-66155---,00.html

http://eup-planning.org/elevating-the-eup

mailto:[email protected]

http://eup-planning.org/

http://eup-planning.org/PDF/RPI-CEDS/Plans/Elevating%20The%20EUP_EUPRPDC.pdf


EUP CEDS 2016 Performance Report

TABLES

OF CONTENTS The Essentials ......................................................................... 1

The REDAC ............................................................................. 2

The Projects ............................................................................ 4

New Projects ........................................................................ 5

Priority Projects ................................................................. 17

Project In Need of Funding ............................................... 19

Projects Planned with Funding ......................................... 22

Transportation Projects .................................................... 25

Completed Projects ........................................................... 26

The Data ................................................................................ 27

The Blueprint ........................................................................ 33

Appendices ............................................................................ 46

Appendix 1: Acronym Reference ....................................... 46

OF FIGURES Figure 1: REDAC Activity since Adoption of Revised CEDS 2

OF TABLES Table 1: REDAC Attendance from November 2015 through

April 2016................................................................................ 3

Table 2: Priority Projects ..................................................... 17

Table 3: Projects that Need Funding .................................. 19

Table 4: Projects with Funding ........................................... 22

Table 5: Transportation Projects ........................................ 25

Table 6: Projects Completed in 2016 .................................. 26

OF MAPS Map 1: EUP in Relation to Surrounding Major Markets ....... 1

1 EUP CEDS 2016 Performance Report

THE ESSENTIALS The Eastern Upper Peninsula (EUP) has had a Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS) since 1970. The Eastern Upper Peninsula (EUP)—Chippewa County, Luce County, and Mackinac County, Michigan—has been an Economic Development District (CEDS) designated by the U.S. Department of Commerce – Economic Development Administration (EDA) since the initial CEDS was composed. Having a CEDS brings several benefits to the region: it allows projects that will aid private-sector job growth, through stating them in the CEDS, to be eligible for federal support from several grant programs; it declares a vision for the region, provides goals to achieve the vision, and strategies and actions that will help to accomplish the goals, which is based on stakeholder input and data analysis; and it provides the District Organization, the entity in the EDD responsible for producing the CEDS, in the case of the EUP, the Eastern Upper Peninsula Regional Planning & Development Commission (EUPRPDC), with federal support to produce and update the CEDS as well as provide technical assistance to local partners on matters including master planning, zoning, preparing EDA grant applications, and the like. In 2015, EUPRPDC produced a revised CEDS, which was combined with its state-funded economic development program, Michigan’s Regional Prosperity Initiative (RPI). Michigan’s RPI gives its regions an opportunity to apply for funding that can be used on a variety of projects; however, to be eligible to apply for RPI funding, a region needs a 5-year economic development plan—very similar to the CEDS process. EUPRPDC combined the two into one plan, Elevating the Eastern Upper Peninsula: 2015 – 2019 Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy & 2015 – 2019 Regional Prosperity Plan. CEDS are revised every 5 years and updated with a performance report annually. This performance report will update the data, blueprint, and projects listed in the CEDS; it will also shed light on progress the region has made towards accomplishing what it set out to in 2015. The RPI side of this report does not require the same annual update; however, EUPRPDC sees this performance report as an enhancement to Elevating the Eastern Upper Peninsula as a whole. The EUP consists of 39 local units of government: 3 counties, 3 cities, 2 villages, and 31 townships. EUPRPDC strives to ensure all interests in the region are represented and have a chance to benefit from what the CEDS brings to this part of Michigan.

Map 1: EUP in Relation to Surrounding Major Markets

Source: EUPRPDC





THE REDAC EUPRPDC organizes an oversight committee to steer the development and maintenance of the CEDS. The CEDS and RPI planning processes each require an oversight committee, with composition requirements differing and overlapping. EUPRPDC combined the two to ensure the group represented economic interests of the region as best as possible. EUPRPDC believes that this group’s main function, and that of the CEDS and RPI processes, is to strengthen the relationship between the public and private sector; to ensure the private sector is getting as much as they need from the public sector in order to grow, diversify, and solidify the regional economy. Although it appears that private sector employer attendance is lacking, EUPRPDC seeks their participation for every meeting and will continue to do so to ensure their needs are being fulfilled. Figure 1: REDAC Activity since Adoption of Revised CEDS

April 2015: 2015 -2019

CEDS adopted

November 2015:

Broadband Update; RPI

2016

February 2016: RPI

2016 Grant Award;

Federal Panel Discussion

March 2016: Annual CEDS

Priority Project

Ranking

April 2016: Performance

Report Review,

Adoption, and Submission to

EDA


Table 1: REDAC Attendance from November 2015 through April 2016

Meeting:

Sector Subsector Name Organization 11.5.15 2.4.16 3.17.16 4.14.16

TOTAL 29 31 20 21

Regional Eric Wedesky EUPRPDC x x x x

Jerald Wuorenmaa WUPPDR x

County Tom Ewing Chippea County EDC x x x x

Jeff Holt Sault Ste. Marie EDC x x x x

Tammy Henry Luce County EDC x x x x

Caroline Crecelius Mackinac County Economic Alliance x x x x

Municipal Debra Evashevski St. Ignace DDA x

Justin Knepper Sault Ste. Marie DDA x

Private Tina Thibault Kanava International LLC x x x

Jane Merrell x

State Donna LaCourt MDARD x

Amy Berglund MEDC x

Federal Josh Billington SBDC x x x

Lee Shirey USEDA x

Lori Krause USDARD x

Don Gerrie USDARD x

City Oliver Turner Sault Ste. Marie x

Robin Troyer Sault Ste. Marie x

Village

Township Jim Moore Kinross Charter Township x

Gary Reid Clark Township x x x x

County Don McLean Chippewa County x

Chamber of Commerce Amy Polk Les Chenaux Islands x x x x

Tony Haller Sault Ste. Marie x x x x

Convention and Visitor Bureau Linda Hoath Sault Ste. Marie x x

University Michelle Walk Michigan State University Extenstion x x

Federal Patrick Wilson USCBP x

Robert West USFS x

Marv Pichla Inspiring Innovations LLC x

Nikki Craig Consulting x x

Dean Reid Forrestry consultin x x x

Jeff Hagan MI Works! / EUPRPDC x x x x

Kim Wilcox MI Works! x x x

Sharon Houghton MI Works! x x

Adult Bill Henry Consolidated Community Schools Services x x x x

Higher Tom Pleger Lake Superior State University x

Eric Becks Lake Superior State University / SMMART Inc. x x x

K-12 Steve Gordon Eastern Upper Peninsula ISD x x x x

Tim Hall Sault Area Schools x

Minority Groups Tribal Larry Jacques Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians x

County Richard Timmer Chippewa County Road Commission x

Public Transit Chuck Moser Eastern Upper Peninsula Transportation Authority x x x x

Bridge Authority Bob Sweeney Mackinac Bridge Authority

State Dawn Gustafson MDOT x x

Vince Bevins MDOT x

Dan Dasho Cloverland Electric x x x

David Goudreau Northern Wings Repair, Inc. x

Joe Dobrowolski Superior Fabrication Co. LLC x x x

Labor Groups

Private Sector

Employers

REDAC Meeting Participation

Economic

Development

Transportation

Education

Workforce

Development

Private

Individuals

Community

Leaders

Public Officials


THE PROJECTS One of the main reasons for annually updating the CEDS is to add the new projects being undertaken in the region—both those eligible for EDA funding and not. Furthermore, EUPRPDC believes in reporting on the projects that were completed in the region that helps it towards realizing the vision set forth last year. This section will discuss new projects, recently completed projects, the updated priority project list, and other project lists EUPRPDC maintains. EUPRPDC revised its collection method for projects. In the past, EUPRPDC asked those submitting projects to fill out a separate form if it wished to be considered a priority. This year EUPRPDC did away with that, required one form for all projects and scored each project submitted based on the amount of information provided. To view the forms used to collect information on new or recently completed projects, follow these steps:

1. Follow this link: http://eup-planning.org/elevating-the-eup. 2. At the top will be 8 tabs; chose the one titled “Materials.” 3. Under materials, there will be 6 toggles; chose the one titled “Call for Projects Materials.” 4. Here one can view any materials EUPRPDC used to collect project data.

PROJECT SCORING SYSTEM

EUPRPDC uses this scoring system to evaluate projects.




NEW PROJECTS This section has all the information that was submitted for new projects in 2016. Only projects with a preliminary score (everything besides the regional impact, which is decided by the REDAC) high enough to equal 10 if it received a regional impact of 5 were presented to the REDAC. Thus, projects with a 0 were not voted on by the REDAC.

Project Title Little Bear Sports Park 13

Submitting Entity St. Ignace DDA

Project Partners No data provided

Project Cost $425,000

Job Creation No data provided 0

Job Retention No data provided 0

Matching Funds Yes 5

Type Tourism and natural resources

Project Readiness Planning stage 1

In Plan No data provided 0

EDA Priorities 4

Regional Impact 3

Funding Source DNR Trust Fund, local match

Description No data provided

Project Title Storm and Wastewater Asset Mapping 14

Submitting Entity St. Ignace, City of


Project Cost No data provided




Type Infrastructure

Project Readiness In progress 5


EDA Priorities 3

Regional Impact 1

Funding Source DNR Trust Fund, local match

Description Locate and map storm sewers and

sanitary sewers

Project Title Tahquamenon Outdoor Recreation

Complex 19

Submitting Entity Village of Newberry


Project Cost $2,500,000

Job Creation 1-2 direct; 10-12 indirect 2


Matching Funds No data provided 0



In Plan Village of Newberry Community Parks,

Recreation, Open Space and Greenways

Plan 5

EDA Priorities 4

Regional Impact 3

Funding Source Donations, Grants


Project Title State St. Pocket Park 10

Submitting Entity St. Ignace DDA



Job Creation 4 2

Job Retention 0 0





EDA Priorities 2

Regional Impact 1

Funding Source Searching

Description Build bathrooms in downtown St. Ignace


Project Title North State Wastewater Improvements 17

Submitting Entity City of St. Ignace



Job Creation 8 2

Job Retention 0 0


Type Infrastructure



EDA Priorities 2

Regional Impact 3

Funding Source SRF

Description Replace sanitary sewer lines along Lake

Huron east of N. State St.

Project Title Fitch and Truckey Water Main

Replacement 15

Submitting Entity City of St. Ignace



Job Creation 8 2

Job Retention 0 0


Type Infrastructure



EDA Priorities 2

Regional Impact 1

Funding Source Urgent Need Grant

Description Repairing 1,800 ft. of water main on Fitch

and Truckey streets

Project Title Atlas Park Renovation 18




Job Creation 0 0

Job Retention 0 0



Project Readiness Shovel ready 3

In Plan Luce County Recreation Plan 5

EDA Priorities 2

Regional Impact 3

Funding Source DEQ Trust

Description Renovation of park

Project Title Water Well Heads Fencing 2




Job Creation 0 0

Job Retention 0 0


Type Infrastructure



EDA Priorities 1

Regional Impact 0

Funding Source Still searching

Description Fencing around municipal water well

source


Project Title Wastewater Treatment Plant 8




Job Creation 0 0

Job Retention 0 0


Type Infrastructure


EDA Priorities 2


Regional Impact 1

Funding Source S.R.F.

Description Renovation of wastewater treatment plan

Project Title Water Main Replacement Project 8




Job Creation 0 0

Job Retention 0 0


Type Infrastructure



EDA Priorities 2

Regional Impact 1

Funding Source USDA


Project Title Minor Pavement Repairs 4

Submitting Entity Chippewa Co. Road Commission






Type Infrastructure



EDA Priorities 1

Regional Impact 0

Funding Source No data provided

Description Minor repairs throughout the county

Project Title 12 Mile Road Culvert Replacement 4







Type Infrastructure



EDA Priorities 1

Regional Impact 0


Description 12 Mile Road over Charlotte River


Project Title Sugar Island Causeway Project 10


Project Partners EUPRPDC, GLS





Type Infrastructure



EDA Priorities 2

Regional Impact 5


Description Redevelopment of causeway to improve

habitat and condition of St. Marys River

Project Title Gogomain Road 4







Type Infrastructure



EDA Priorities 1

Regional Impact 0


Description M-129 to Pennington Road

Project Title North Huron By-Way 8

Submitting Entity DeTour Area EDC

Project Partners DeTour Township, Village of DeTour,

EUPRPDC, Clark Township








EDA Priorities 4

Regional Impact 3



Project Title St. Marys Water Trail 21



EUPRPDC







In Plan St. Marys River Island Explorer Water Trail

Plan; DeTour Area Recreation Plan 5

EDA Priorities 3

Regional Impact 3

Funding Source RPI, CZM



Project Title Salt Dome 3


Project Partners DeTour Township, Village of DeTour





Type Infrastructure



EDA Priorities 2

Regional Impact 0

Funding Source USDA loan


Project Title North Caribou Lake Road Re-Surfacing 2



MDOT





Type Infrastructure



EDA Priorities 1

Regional Impact 0



Project Title Assisted Living Facility 2







Type Health care



EDA Priorities 1

Regional Impact 0



Project Title New Fire/Ambulance Building 2







Type Infrastructure



EDA Priorities 1

Regional Impact 0




Project Title Malette Park Upgrade 11








Project Readiness Development stage 3

In Plan DeTour Area Recreation Plan 5

EDA Priorities 2

Regional Impact 1

Funding Source DNR

Description Upgrade to park

Project Title Water/Sewer Infrastructure 3







Type Economic and workforce development,

infrastructure



EDA Priorities 2

Regional Impact 0

Funding Source EDA

Description Improve water and sewer infrastructure in

DeTour Business Park

Project Title DeTour Streetscape 3








natural resources, infrastructure



EDA Priorities 2

Regional Impact 0

Funding Source EDA

DescriptionImprove water and sewer infrastructure in DeTour Business Park

Project Title Veterans Memorial Park 2








natural resources



EDA Priorities 1

Regional Impact 0

Funding Source EDA

Description Improve water and sewer infrastructure in

DeTour Business Park


Project Title MEA Broadband Community Pilot 16

Submitting Entity Mackinac Economic Alliance







Infrastructure


In Plan MEA priority project for 2016 5

EDA Priorities 5

Regional Impact 5

Funding Source First 3 communities may get Graymont

Community Dev. Grant Funding

Description To judge the interest of 4 communities in

supporting research costs and potential

funding with respect of extending

broadband coverage to residents, etc.

Project Title Graymont Community and Economic

Development Fund 0

Submitting Entity Graymont Community and Economic

Development Fund

Project Partners Servicing townships of Garfield,

Hendricks, Hudson, Pentland, and Trout

Lake


Job Creation No data provided

Job Retention No data provided

Matching Funds $100,000 available yearly for 5 years


tourisma and natural resources

Project Readiness In progress

In Plan No data provided

Regional Impact

Funding Source Graymont Mining

Description Developed to provide financial support for

economic and community development in

areas directly and indirectly impacted by

the Rexton (mining) Project.

Project Title EUP CTE Millage to Establish & Operate

Training Programs 19

Submitting Entity EUPISD

Project Partners All Public Schools in the EUP 3 counties

Project Cost $23,000,000 over 10 years

Job Creation 20 Full Time & 20 Part Time 6

Job Retention 10 2

Matching Funds No data Provided 0

Type Education, Economic and Workforce

Development, Infrastructure


In Plan No data Provided 0

EDA Priorities 5

Regional Impact 5

Funding Source Regional School Millage

Description Regional Enhancement Mill for Career

Technical Education, 1 mill for 10 years

Project Title Parking & Access Improvements,

Whitefish Point Light Station 25

Submitting Entity Great Lakes Shipwreck Historical Society

Project Partners Michigan Audubon Society; US Fish and

Wildlife Service; Chippewa Co. Road

Commission


Job Creation 4 2

Job Retention 33 6


Type Tourism and natural resources,

infrastructure


In Plan Human Use Plan for WFP 2002; 2013

Scenic Byways Project = Plans &

Specifications; Tahquamenon Scenic

Byways 5

EDA Priorities 1

Regional Impact 3

Funding Source Grants (not yet

secured)/fundraisers/private funds

Description Environmentally repave, expand, add new

trails, bike path, and habitat to parking

area of northern terminus, Whitefish Point

Road, to serve audience of three site

partners per 2002 plan


Project Title Rehabilitation of historic 1929 Navy Radio

Building 27



Wildlife Service


Job Creation 2 2

Job Retention 33 6




In Plan Human Use Plan for WFP 2002;

Tahquamenon Scenic Byways 5

EDA Priorities 1

Regional Impact 3

Funding Source State grants (secured); fundraisers /

private funds

Description Stabilize building; rehabilitate interior;

introduce programs to audience inside

building

Project Title Rehabilitation of historic 1923 Motor

Lifeboat House 27



Wildlife Service


Job Creation 2 2

Job Retention 33 6




In Plan Human Use Plan for WFP 2002;

Tahquamenon Scenic Byways 5

EDA Priorities 1

Regional Impact 3

Funding Source State grants (secured); fundraisers /

private funds

Description Stabilize building; rehabilitate interior;

introduce programs to audience inside

building

Project Title Bay Mills Community College

Administration/Classroom Facility 20

Submitting Entity Bay Mills Community College






Type Education

Project Readiness Planning stage, anticipate going to bid

mid-February 1

In Plan Yes 5

EDA Priorities 6

Regional Impact 3


Description Construct a new facility and demolish

existing administration building.

Project Title Mackinac County Jail 18

Submitting Entity Mackinac County Sheriff Department

Project Partners Mackinac Co. Planning Commission (Dean

Reid)


Job Creation 30 6

Job Retention 2 2



infrastructure

Project Readiness Planning stage, acquiring 2 houses in foot

print: $200,000 est 1

In Plan CIP of Mackinac Co. 5

EDA Priorities 1

Regional Impact 3

Funding Source Local, state, federal grants; low interest

federal loan; millage and/or bonding

Description Build a new new county jail to 56 beds as

existing jail 25 beds and is full some out-

sources. Jail is past life expectancy of 30

years as it was built in 1972.


Project Title Friends of Pickford Community Library

Building Project 10

Submitting Entity Friends of Pickford Community Library

Project Partners Pickford Community Library: Ann Marie

Smith, Library Manager, and several

invested community members.and

organizations

Project Cost $450,000 (Just a guess, waiting on

estimate from engineer)

Job Creation 1 part time, 1substitute 2

Job Retention 1 full time, 2 substitutes 2



education, tourism and natural resources,

agriculture and local food systems

Project Readiness Planning stage, Entered into contract

with local engineer to identify best

location and develop feasibility study of

building/remodeling project. Will begin on

project as soon as best location is

identified. 1


EDA Priorities 2

Regional Impact 3

Funding Source USDA Rural Development loan and

fundraising efforts

Description Develop a permanent home for Pickford

Community Library

Project Title Paradise Downtown Enhancement 20

Submitting Entity Whitefish Township

Project Partners WTCS, PACC, PATC



Job Retention 75 8



education, tourism and natural resources,

agriculture and local food systems


In Plan Whitefish Township Recreational Plan 5

EDA Priorities 3

Regional Impact 3

Funding Source Seeking MDOT, MEDC

Description Streetscape Enhancement

Project Title Community Center Waterfront

Accessibility 10

Submitting Entity Whitefish Township



Job Creation 0 0

Job Retention 0 0


Type Tourism and natural resources,

infrastructure


In Plan Whitefish Township Master Plan 5

EDA Priorities 3

Regional Impact 1

Funding Source DNR

Description Handicap Accessibility to the waterfront


Project Title Revolving Loan Fund 15

Submitting Entity Mackinac Economic Alliance (MEA)

Project Partners USDA Rural Development; MI Small

Business Development Center (SBDC)

Project Cost $80,000 available in loan fund

Job Creation At least one job created or retained for

each loan below $10,000; at least two

jobs created or retained for each loan of

$10,000 or more 0



Type Economic and workforce development



EDA Priorities 2

Regional Impact 3

Funding Source USDA Business Development Grant

($40,000); First National Bank ($5,000);

Mackinac Island Comm. Foundation

($5,000); Graymont Port Inland Plant

($10,000); Les Cheneaux Comm.

Foudation ($5,000); Central Savings Bank

($2,500); mBank ($5,000); Old Mission

Bank ($5,000); MEA ($2,500)

Description The Revolving Loan Program was created

by a USDA grant and generous donations

from Mackinac County banks and

businesses. The program is based on job

creation and is designed to help

businesses expand in Mackinac County.

Project Title The North Huron Birding Trail 3

Submitting Entity Friends of the North Huron Birding

Project Partners Les Cheneaux Community Foundation,

MDNR, Chippewa County Community

Foundation, Drummond Island Tourism

Association

Project Cost 18,500$

Job Creation 0 0

Job Retention 0 0




In Plan 0

EDA Priorities 2

Regional Impact 0

Funding Source Les Cheneaux Community Foundation,

MDNR, Chippewa COunty Community

Foundation, Drummond Island Tourism

Association

Description Development of a birding trail in


Project Title Leadership Training 10

Submitting Entity Sault Area Chamber of Commerce

Project Partners





Type Economic and workforce development



EDA Priorities 2

Regional Impact 3

Funding Source USDA RBDG, Sault Area Chamber of

Commerce, Private Sponsors

Description Leadership and Entrepreneurship Training

Project Title Fiber and Wifi Connectivity 16

Submitting Entity Rising Tides Steering Team

Project Partners Newberry Village, EDO, County






education, health, infrastructure,

agriculture nd local food systems


In Plan Luce and Newberry Master Plans (in the

works) 5

EDA Priorities 5

Regional Impact 5

Funding Source Connect Michigan

Description Surveys

Project Title LSSU Product Development Center 22

Submitting Entity Lake Superior State University

Project Partners LSSU and USDA-RBDG

Project Cost Total of $150,000 over two year project

life

Job Creation 0 0

Job Retention 2 2


Type Education, economic and workforce

development



EDA Priorities 5

Regional Impact 5

Funding Source USDA / LSSU

Description Matching client revolving fund to enable

underfunded projects to move toward

commercialization. Also salary expense

support and marketing funds for redefined

PDC focus

Project Title DeTour Area Farmers Market 24

Submitting Entity The Village of DeTour

Project Partners DeTour Township


Job Creation 5 2

Job Retention 10 2



health, infrastructure, agriculture nd local

food systems


In Plan Master Plan 5

EDA Priorities 2

Regional Impact 3

Funding Source USDA, DeTour Village, DeTour Township,

Sault Tribe of Chippewa Indians, Assorted

companies and individuals

Description Build a pavillion to sell local farmers'

produce


Project Title GLBBS Expansion Project - Feasibility

Study 13

Submitting Entity Great Lakes Boat Building School

Project Partners (potentially) LSSU, BMCC, & CTE

Project Cost Unknown

Job Creation Unknown 0

Job Retention Unknown 0

Matching Funds 0

Type Education, economic and workforce

development


In Plan CEDS 5

EDA Priorities 4

Regional Impact 3

Funding Source Unknown

Description The project is a feasibility study to

determine best plan for expanding Great

Lakes Boat Building School facility. We

have graduated 97 students since

opening in 2007. Our job placement rate

last year was 100%. We are not able to

produce enough graduates to meet the

demands from employers seeking to hire

graduates from our 1-year and 2-year

programs in Traditional and Contemporary

Wooden Boat Building. Our current

facility serves 18 students ideally (12 in

Yr 1 and 6 in Yr 2 programs). Our goal is

to grow our student enrollment by

expanding our current facility and thereby

meet industry demand for our graduates.

According to a 2013 study by the

Department of Economics at Central

Michigan University, the school has an

annual economic impact of $750,000 on

the local area and surrounding

communities, which would increase as the

student enrollment rises.

Project Title St. Marys River Ferry System Upgrade 11

Submitting Entity EUP Transportation Authority

Project Partners MDOT, Local Governments

Project Cost 9,000,000$

Job Creation 0 0

Job Retention 6 2

Matching Funds None required 0

Type Infrastructure

Project Readiness Planning Stage 1

In Plan EUPTA Strategic Plan 5

EDA Priorities 3

Regional Impact 0

Funding Source FHWA (TIGER Grant Program)

Description Upgrade service to Sugar Island and

facilitate replacement of 70-year-old

Neebish Island vessel

Project Title Praire Road Project 16

Submitting Entity Rudyard Township

Project Partners Chippewa Co. Road Commission





Type Infrastructure


In Plan 2015 Hazard Mitigation Plan 5

EDA Priorities 1

Regional Impact 0

Funding Source General fund, special millage

Description To lift and rebuild 4.75 miles including

paving


PRIORITY PROJECTS Below is a list of priority projects. To be considered a priority project, the project needed to have a score of 10 points-or-higher.

Table 2: Priority Projects


Priority Projects continued:


PROJECT IN NEED OF FUNDING Below are projects listed being pursued in the region with funding not yet secured. They are listed by location.

Table 3: Projects that Need Funding


Projects in Need of Funding continued:


PROJECTS PLANNED WITH FUNDING Below are projects being undertaken by entities within the region. Projects are listed by location.

Table 4: Projects with Funding


Projects Planned with Funding continued:


TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS Below are planned transportations projects in the region. They are listed by location.

Table 5: Transportation Projects


COMPLETED PROJECTS Below are projects that were completed in 2015. They are listed by location. For projects completed in previous years, please consult the CEDS document or past performance reports.

Table 6: Projects Completed in 2016



THE DATA Elevating the Eastern Upper Peninsula contained a large amount of data on the EUP, some of which has not been updated in the year since it was adopted. This section presents data on key economic indicators and, in some instances, expands on what was included in the revised plan. For figures 1 -10, please note that the colored circles with numbers in them represent percentiles, where the 1st percentile equals the best and the 99th percentile equals the worst. Additionally, the color scheme represents quintiles: dark green is the best quintile (1-20), light green is the second best, yellow is the middle, orange is the second worst, and red is the worst (81-100).



THE BLUEPRINT The blueprint—the nuts and bolts of Elevating the Eastern Upper Peninsula—was prepared to guide those working towards developing the regional economy into one that is diverse, sustainable, and ripe with opportunity. This section will examine the blueprint and provide an update on where various initiatives laid out are currently at. This is only the first year since the plan was adopted, more progress will be made in the coming years as the plan gains traction. The blueprint has a vision, 6 goals (1 for each focus area), multiple strategies to achieve each goal, and action items and action partners were identified to work each strategy. Action partners can be viewed in the full document (link above in blue). For your reference: “S” stands for “Strategy”; “AI” stands for “Action Item.”

FOCUS AREA: EDUCATION

The Goal: Region-wide access to educational opportunities that support learning, career-preparedness and self-efficacy.

Initiative 2016 Update S 1.1: Strengthen and, where feasible, expand career-technical education opportunities. AI 1.1.1: Map career-technical education assets and where demand exists; determine costs, implementation methods, and locations for expanded services.

EUPRPDC worked with CUPPAD and WUPPDR on developing a career-technical education (CTE) asset map (full URL below). Currently, only 5 of 18 districts in the EUP participate in CTE due to logistical issues.

EUPISD is seeking the passing of a millage that would give every 11th and 12th grader access to, at a minimum, 2 CTE courses.

SACC works with local business leaders to guide course offerings and programs.

VISION Michigan’s Eastern Upper Peninsula will be a region in the world attractive to enterprise, students, tourists, and residents alike: where one can be immersed in a natural setting yet access 21st-century amenities; and where opportunity prevails through the application of

modern techniques, collaboration, and mindful allocation of resources.


https://cuppad.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=3d169c7c02c34e59aa5ab5b16673df69


AI 1.1.2: Work with the Upper Peninsula partners during the development of career technical education marketing tools, messages and implementation procedures for the Upper Peninsula.

The Upper Peninsula Collaborative Development Council (UPCDC), regional planning commissions, and local partners worked together to develop CTE marketing materials.

AI 1.1.3: Pursue additional classes integrating academics with career technical education.

EUPISD, through the passing of a millage, would provide added support to be able to incorporate more academics into all CTE programs across the region.

AI 1.1.4: Incorporate additional business and community leaders into discussions and development of career technical education programs to build support, anticipate future demand, and capture new ideas.

SACC works with local business leaders to guide course offerings and programs. If the millage EUPISD proposed passes, more business leaders will need to be brought to the table to discuss new programs that will be offered.

If EUPISD’s millage passes, many new CTE programs would be added in the region, all of which will require local advisory groups.

S 1.2: Promote the utilization of opportunities provided by enhanced-enrollment programs. AI 1.2.1: Assess how enrollment programs are promoted to students, faculty and parents.

EUPISD, not satisfied with 2/3 of its students not being able to access CTE courses, is seeking to pass a millage to improve CTE offerings. This effort has been promoted through presentations to workforce boards, in pamphlets, and comparable information outreach.

AI 1.2.2: In-depth discussions amongst education stakeholders to address funding mechanisms, programmatic intricacies, and consistency of region-wide offerings.

The discussions with all EUP school superintendents and school boards has led to the EUPISD seeking the passing of a CTE Millage in May of 2016.

AI 1.2.3: Use successful cases of early/middle college programs to determine practicality for replication in the Eastern Upper Peninsula.

The Middle College discussion is continuing and there is interest in setting it up for the whole EUP Region, with a focus on CTE programs.

S 1.3: Expand LSSU’s scope both in terms of target market and educational opportunities offered. AI 1.3.1: Improve internal and external communications, increase visibility, student enrollment and retention.

No update.

AI 1.3.2: Provide comprehensive higher education and workforce training programs and services of superior quality that are affordable and accessible and meet individual, business, and community needs.

No update.

AI 1.3.3: Continue development of unique programs that distinguish the university.

LSSU is pursuing the development of their Aquatic Research Laboratory. This will provide their fisheries program with a world-class facility in the heart of the Great Lakes. This will also be located downtown, which will help to merge the city and university, thus increasing visibility.

http://handsonmichigan.com/

http://handsonmichigan.com/


FOCUS AREA: ECONOMIC AND WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT

The Goal: A business environment where one can create, grow, or relocate a business knowing one will be able to access the labor, infrastructure and amenities necessary to thrive sustainably and profitably.

Initiative 2016 Update S 2.1: Build reputation as a desirable location to conduct business through steadfast attention to the growth and sustainability of businesses located within the region. AI 2.1.1: Promote successes of local businesses across relevant mediums.

The Sault Ste. Marie EDC hosted its annual Manufacturer’s Appreciation Luncheon, which was promoted in local publications.

The Sault Area Chamber of Commerce promotes local business success at its annual economic luncheon; EUPRPDC and UPWARD sponsor this event.

Local chambers of commerce actively promote their member businesses on the internet.

AI 2.1.2: Region-wide appreciation and award ceremony to celebrate and bring together business leaders and recognize exceptional employees.

No update.

AI 2.1.3: Encourage local businesses and entrepreneurs to utilize the SmartZone when developing new products.

City staff, the Sault Ste. Marie CVB, COC, EDC, and DDA, the SBDC, SSMart Inc. (SmartZone), and EUPRPDC have come together to form the Economic Resources Alliance. This group will help attract and grow businesses in Sault Ste. Marie. One of the assets that will be touted is the SmartZone.

AI 2.1.4: Promote grant and loan opportunities and available resources for business development and improvements.

EUPRPDC frequently forwards grants to both the REDAC as well as other entities on its mailing list; the Small Business Development Center also active in promoting grant opportunities available; the Mackinac Economic Alliance has promoted both its USDA Revolving Loan Fund as well as the Graymont Economic and Community Development Fund.

AI 2.1.5: Work with local governments to ensure policy does not inhibit opportunity.

EUPRPDC has provided technical assistance to local governments regarding the Gilbert v. Reed U.S. Supreme Court ruling in 2015. This consultation will help municipalities avoid issues stemming from their zoning ordinances.

http://www.sooeveningnews.com/photogallery/MI/20151208/PHOTOGALLERY/120809996/PH/1

http://www.sooeveningnews.com/photogallery/MI/20151208/PHOTOGALLERY/120809996/PH/1

http://www.mackinaceconomicalliance.org/resources/revolving-loan-fund/

http://www.mackinaceconomicalliance.org/resources/revolving-loan-fund/

http://www.mackinaceconomicalliance.org/resources/graymont-community-and-economic-development-fund/

http://www.mackinaceconomicalliance.org/resources/graymont-community-and-economic-development-fund/


AI 2.1.6: Continue to assess and develop exporting initiatives. EUPRPDC has prepared a RFP to develop a transportation logistics study. This will study the current transportation infrastructure in the region and market conditions to determine the feasibility of a hub-type facility in the EUP. EUPRPDC will try and leverage local dollars with federal and state funding sources.

S 2.2: Use regional branding to change mindsets from remote location to desired destination. AI 2.2.1: Meet with leaders of the Great Waters initiative to discuss the use of the brand they developed across all modes of bringing people to the region—tourism, recreation, business attraction, workforce retention, and education.

Although EUPRPDC has not done more with Great Waters than attend several meetings, Great Waters has formalized with by-laws and board structure. Furthermore, Great Waters continues to promote the vast variety of outdoor activities one can pursue in the region.

AI 2.2.2: Incorporate regional brand into advertising efforts. No update. S 2.3: Use strategic placemaking in a manner that is unique, exciting, sustainable, and conducive to commercial activity. AI 2.3.1: Establish networks with owners of vacant and undeveloped property within downtowns to assess plans for investment, redevelopment and attraction of businesses.

EUPRPDC has licenses to Zoom Prospector, which it will use to advertise available commercial property in the region. Luce County EDC is already using this to promote sites within Luce County.

AI 2.3.2: Define trade areas and utilize target market analyses for business districts to concentrate marketing and advertising efforts.

No update.

AI 2.3.3: Employ best practices from comparable locations that are prospering in a manner adjusted to the needs and uniqueness of the region.

EUPRPDC continues its grant program through Michigan Council for Arts and Cultural Affairs to provide EUP communities means to develop high quality arts and cultural projects.

EUPRPDC also rolled out another community development grant program in early 2016, the Community Development Mini-Grant Program. This will use RPI funding to make grants for placemaking projects in the EUP.

AI 2.3.4: Study local policies addressing the attraction of new enterprises as well as the growth and sustainability those already established.

The Sault Economic Response Alliance, comprised of city management, city planning, the downtown development authority, chamber of commerce, Sault Ste. Marie EDC, SSMart Inc. (SmartZone), EUPRPDC, and the Small Business Development Center, is a new group purposed with facilitating the growth and attraction of enterprise in Sault Ste. Marie. This group aims to streamline processes and ensure timely and effective responses to interested parties.

http://www.thegreatwaters.com/

http://eup-planning.org/mca-minigrants

http://eup-planning.org/cdmgp

http://eup-planning.org/cdmgp


AI 2.3.5: Continued construction of regional geographic information system databases.

EUPRPDC developed GIS plans in 2012 to work with Chippewa and Mackinac counties. Since 2013, EUPRPDC has maintained digital parcels in Mackinac County; since 2016, in Chippewa County. This information can be used to generate land-value maps, sales maps, and delinquent-parcel maps, which help public officials and developers make critical decisions.

EUPRPDC continues to work with 911 in Chippewa and Mackinac counties.

AI 2.3.6: Increase supply of housing in downtowns. EUPRPDC, CUPPAD, and WUPPDR have commissioned a target-market analysis to be completed by Land Use | USA, a private firm. This will provide essential information in each county of the U.P.—including population centers—on the types of people interested in living in the U.P. as well as the types of housing they desire and how much they will demand. This will benefit local decision makers and private developers alike.

S 2.4: Improve customer service. AI 2.4.1: Through curriculum, training, and personalized services, equip service-industry employers with resources to further develop their employees.

Pending.

AI 2.4.2: Create a hospitality development program that would provide regional businesses an affordable option to develop their staff, services and functionality.

Kanava International sought to develop such a program in the Sault—even marketing its availability. It targeted management staff and was not free. Response was poor to the extent that it did not justify putting on the program and was subsequently canceled.

AI 2.4.3: Replicate the “Sault Certified” initiative on a regional scale to establish a consistent knowledge of regional activities and facts amongst workforce.

No update.

AI 2.4.4: Develop a forum or feedback system to gauge improvement and showcase positive encounters; create competition to provide best service.

No update.

S 2.5: Increase visibility and proactivity of workforce development agencies. AI 2.5.1: Develop a demand driven system for accessing and utilizing workforce programs.

During the past year, as part of the consolidation of the workforce system in the U.P., we have added a business services team member and a talent advocate to really push forward on the infrastructure needed to develop the demand drive system.


AI 2.5.2: Establish a coordinated Business Services Team to assist in meeting the needs of employers across the region.

Business Services Team (BST) member was hired in January and is actively working with businesses across the region. Their goal is to reach 16 business per week.

AI 2.5.3: Identify and pursue resources to adequately market the existing workforce development agency, programs and services available to job seekers and employers in the Region.

Due to the recent consolidation of the system in the U.P. to the UPWARD Talent Council this item will be pursued, but is currently on hold.

FOCUS AREA: HEALTH CARE

The Goal: A health care system focused on the community with active collaboration amongst providers, agencies and coalitions.

Initiative 2016 Update S 3.1: Continue, build upon and increase collaborative efforts. AI 3.1.1: Use the healthy relationship already established between health care institutions, county health care entities and tribal health entities to come together with greater frequency in order to facilitate discussions addressing issues and identifying opportunities for collaboration.

No update.

AI 3.1.2: Replicate agreement that exists amongst the three hospitals in the region for rehab service where feasible with other services.

No update.

AI 3.1.3: Work with long-term skilled-nursing and short-term rehabilitation centers in the region to understand their needs, requirements and plans to ensure citizens will have necessary care options available.

No update.

AI 3.1.4: Examine the feasibility of a surgical team that could be shared between the three hospitals within the region.

No update.

AI 3.1.5: Examine the feasibility of sharing coding specialists between the three hospitals and tribal health entities.

No update.

S 3.2: Retain physicians within the region. AI 3.2.1: Work with physicians coming into the region to understand their needs and desires for where they would ideally practice.

War Memorial Hospital is currently working with Sault Area Hospital (Ontario) on plans to recruit and share physicians where possible.

AI 3.2.2: Continue to develop relationships with medical schools.

No update.

AI 3.2.3: Study cases where rural regions have been successful in accommodating specialty physicians and reducing time on call, addressing vacation concerns and the like.

War Memorial Hospital is working on case studies of other border towns where cross-border health care has succeeded.


AI 3.2.4: Work closely with economic, downtown and planning organizations to express requirements for retaining physicians.

The target-market analysis EUPRPDC has commissioned (AI 2.3.6) should help shed light on the portion of this action item that can be affected through housing.

War Memorial Hospital is working with the Sault Ste. Marie Economic Development Corporation (Ontario) to study how the area might tackle cross-border health care.

S 3.3 Continue to develop capacities necessary to train and develop health-care workforce within the region. AI 3.3.1: Continue exploring a partnership with LSSU in regards to developing a nursing simulator facility.

War Memorial Hospital is still working with LSSU on developing a simulation center, something that the Canadian hospital is also interested in.

AI 3.3.2: Identify opportunities to get students into health-care facilities earlier to improve preparedness upon entry into the workforce as well as to retain students upon graduation.

No update.

S 3.4: Open cross-border access to health care. AI 3.4.1: Work out legal intricacies of cross-border health care provision.

War Memorial Hospital, Sault Area Hospital, and the Sault Ste. Marie EDC (Ontario) are still pursuing the opening of cross-border health care in the Twin Saults. They are currently studying its feasibility and the requirements of opening the borders.

AI 3.4.2: Work with hospitals in Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario. Same as above. AI 3.4.3: Continue study of cases where this occurs elsewhere in the United States.

Same as above.

AI 3.4.4: Work with physicians and insurers to provide clarity.

No update.

AI 3.4.5: Advertise to desired target markets. No update. Strategy 3.5: Establish a long-term care facility for Department of Corrections. AI 3.5.1: Establish contact between local health-care providers and Michigan’s Department of Corrections.

No update.

AI 3.5.2: Identify the feasibility of establishing a long-term health care facility at Kinross correctional campus.

No update.

FOCUS AREA: TOURISM AND NATURAL RESOURCES

The Goals: Increased engagement of local residents around tourism and recreational use of our natural resources to promote quality of life and desirability of our region for family and business.


Initiative 2016 Update S 4.1: Promote existing outdoor activities as well as further develop the range of outdoor activities available within the region. AI 4.1.1: Develop materials for specific outdoor activities. For example: “Fish the Great Waters”; “Hike the Great Waters”; “Swim the Great Waters”.

Great Waters has published its guide to the region that provides insights both on things to do as well as what each individual community offers in terms of recreation.

AI 4.1.2: At major tourist attractions, promote other destination within the region.

Most tourist attractions have stands with brochures to other attractions; however no formal effort has begun.

AI 4.1.3: Use the fact that one can see three Great Lakes in one region to strengthen promotional materials.

Great Waters actively promotes this feature of the region.

AI 4.1.4: Support water trail planning to increase awareness of access points along Great Lakes’ coastline.

In 2015, EUPRPDC finished its water trail planning (all coastlines now have a plan) when it wrapped up the St. Marys River Island Explorer Water Trail Plan. This includes an inventory of public-access sites as well as a gap analysis of facilities. In addition to the informational website with an interactive map developed last year with a Coastal Zone Management grant, EUPRPDC is coordinating communications, developing memorandums of agreement, creating signage, and branding for the water trail. EUPRPDC is developing waterproof atlases for trail users as well.

AI 4.1.5: Engage local birding experts to gauge viability of birding throughout the region.

The North Huron Birding Trail tremendous addition to the region that showcases the birding opportunities in the EUP. It promotes the variety of birds on can see in the unique landscape from St. Ignace to Drummond Island and from Les Cheneaux to Pickford.

AI 4.1.6: Invite members of the International Mountain Biking Association to assess mountain biking opportunity in the region and steps to move forward.

No update

AI 4.1.7: Increase awareness of the Regional Outdoor Center located at LSSU.

The Regional Outdoor Center has now been open for 2 years and awareness has increased steadily. As it continues to host events in the region, awareness will grow.

AI 4.1.8: Study interest of youths in outdoor activities available throughout the region.

No update.

AI 4.1.9: Identify new trail segments that could link communities for both motorized and non-motorized travel.

Mackinac Economic Alliance completed a Safe Routes to School Grant for Clark Township in 2015. EUPRPDC and Portage Township are poised to begin work on a non-motorized transportation plan in 2016.

http://www.publishingbyavanti.com/Flipbooks/2015GreatWatersTG/

http://www.eup-planning.org/PDF/WATERTRAILS/StMarys%20River%20Access%20Inventory%20Final.pdf

http://www.eup-planning.org/PDF/WATERTRAILS/StMarys%20River%20Access%20Inventory%20Final.pdf

http://www.upwatertrails.org/

http://www.upwatertrails.org/

http://www.northhuronbirding.com/

http://www.sooeveningnews.com/article/20160314/NEWS/160319462


S 4.2: Update recreation plans to be able to access funding opportunities. AI 4.2.1: Create a regional recreation plan for the region. Due to issues with guidelines when EUPRPDC began the

region-wide recreation plan process, it decided to develop individual recreation plans for communities using RPI grant funding. By providing technical assistance to communities who would otherwise not have a recreation plan, EUPRPDC ensures that local partners are able to access DNR by meeting the first requirement: having a recreation on file with the DNR. EUPRPDC was able to provide these services at no cost; the program will continue into 2016.

AI 4.2.2: Educate municipalities on what the regional recreation plan means for their communities.

EUPRPDC met with 10 municipalities in 2015 and it sent out notices to all municipalities and counties in the EUP in 2015. Staff explained why recreation plans are useful in the EUP, the grants they can help obtain, and how EUPRPDC can go about helping them to put a plan together.

AI 4.2.3: Collaborate on grant applications. No update. S 4.3: Use regional branding to convey the range of unique recreational activities available in the region. AI 4.3.1: Support regional branding efforts currently underway.

EUPRPDC has supported Great Waters by attending meetings. EUPRPDC sees this is as the preeminent brand for the EUP at this time.

AI 4.3.2: Encourage brand use beyond tourism. EUPRPDC has suggested that this brand be used for more than tourism, yet the concept has gained little traction.

FOCUS AREA: AGRICULTURE AND LOCAL FOOD SYSTEMS

The Goal: An agriculture and food sector able to increase production, add value to products, and reach new markets through collaborative efforts and development of aggregation, processing, storage and distribution infrastructure.

Initiative 2016 Update S 5.1: Educate consumers about eating locally produced food. AI 5.1.1: Discuss with institutions why they should source 20 percent of their food products from Michigan growers, producers and processors and how to access the supply chain.

Several meetings have occurred with various buyers in the region to discuss opportunities to increase utilization of local products on their menus. A restaurant survey will be conducted later in 2016 to be able to assess current utilization rates.


AI 5.1.2: Work with schools to identify how they can and why they should incorporate food and agriculture into the pre-K through 12th grade curriculum.

There are currently at least 6 schools in the region that are actively working on projects. MSU Extension/FoodCorps has talked with several other schools but are not aware if they have begun any programs or projects yet.

AI 5.1.3: Increase awareness of when and where locally-grown products can be purchased.

There are discussions about how to promote all the farmers markets in the region together during market season. Individual markets are increasing their utilization of tools such as Facebook to promote what is available at market and when the markets occur. The UP Food Exchange has just transitioned its food and farm directory to partner with Taste the Local Difference which will provide professionally printed regional marketing materials noting where farms and businesses are located and provide an easier online platform for searching.

S 5.2: Obtain necessary infrastructure to aggregate, process, store and distribute products within the region. AI 5.2.1: Justify investments by demonstrating increased local demand.

Currently there is a meat processing feasibility study occurring that includes the entire Upper Peninsula to determine demand and supply for USDA processed meat products and determine if there is a need for additional USDA processing facilities. There is also discussion with custom processors in the EUP region that have expressed an interest in expanding to USDA processing. This study will be complete by the end of 2016.

AI 5.2.2: Work with farmers in the region aggregating, processing and storing on a small scale to determine if their operation can be transitioned to larger scale.

Through individual and small group meetings, these discussions continue to occur.

AI 5.2.3: Increase regional food production. Several small farms have increased what they are doing for food production and several new farms began operations, including a new establishment of Amish farmers in the Sault Ste Marie area.

AI 5.2.4: Identify and apply for grant funding. MDARD Strategic Growth Initiative grant received by Marquette County for $127,000 to conduct a meat processing feasibility study. This is a UP wide study that is being done in conjunction with partners such as MSU Extension and UP Food Exchange. Sault Tribe Early Head Start received a Michigan Farm to Institution implementation grant for $2,000.


AI 5.2.5: Study where and how products are being shipped to be aggregated, stored, processed and distributed.

The UP Food Exchange continues to do extensive work in this area and now has an agreement with Vollworth in the Western UP to assist with distribution across the UP. Storage and aggregation has increased in the western and central UP but we are still struggling with this piece in the EUP.

S 5.3: Maintain support systems for farmers. AI 5.3.1: Support and distribute information on agribusiness opportunities for local businesses/farms to sell product outside of the region and state.

MSU Extension and the UP Food Exchange continue to conduct regular meetings and trainings to support farmer development across the UP. This semester marks the first course that Bay Mills Community College offered in their developing Ag Tech program. And April marks the formation of the North Country Growers guild – a networking and discussion group for EUP farmers. This group is currently being coordinate by the CLM Conservation District MAEAP technician.

AI 5.3.2: Address legislative and regulatory obstacles that create barriers for local production and consumption.

Michelle Walk with MSU Extension participates in a statewide group that is working to address how to help farms be in compliance with the new FDA Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA) and was part of a group that provided input throughout the rule development process. Recently, in part due to the work of RMG Maple Syrup producers, Michigan legislation exempting transportation of certain agricultural products from springtime road weight restrictions was expanded to include sap.

S 5.4: Create a protocol for developing new farmers. AI 5.4.1: Identify models for mentorship for new farmers or existing farm transition to a non-family member.

April 2016 marks the formation of the North Country Growers guild – a networking and discussion group for EUP farmers. This group is currently being coordinate by the CLM Conservation District MAEAP technician. The MSU Upper Peninsula Research and Extension Center had its first successful apprentice farmer program in 2015 and will have a full program for the 2016 season.


AI 5.4.2: Develop methods for attracting new and young farmers.

This semester marks the first course that Bay Mills Community College offered in their developing Ag Tech program. MSU Extension again hosted its beginning farmer webinar series. The MSU Upper Peninsula Research and Extension Center continues to develop its beginning farmer training program which it hopes to launch in 2017. Continuing to work with school garden programs in another way to create interest among youth in understanding that agriculture can be a career choice.

AI 5.4.3: Engage youth in food and agriculture with entrepreneurial opportunities.

The MSU Extension Federally Recognized Tribes Extension Program (FRTEP) continues to support Tribal Youth Farm Stand programs within the Eastern UP.

FOCUS AREA: INFRASTRUCTURE

The Goal: Maintain functionality of existing infrastructure and implement sustainable improvements where funding permits.

Initiative 2016 Update S 6.1: Sustain and expand public transportation options. AI 6.1.1: Map usage, gaps and surplus of public transportation throughout the region to ensure efficiency.

EUPRPDC worked with the Eastern Upper Peninsula Transportation Authority (EUPTA) to develop an interactive online map containing information on bus and ferry routes and schedules. This will access for those in the EUP using public transit options.

AI 6.1.2: Develop a long-term maintenance schedule for vehicles.

EUPTA maintains records of maintenance, which are audited annually by MDOT. In the long term, there is a replacement schedule for vehicles which is supposed to be followed once a vehicle is eligible and funding is available.

AI 6.1.3: Work with governmental entities to increase funding.

EUPTA engages Chippewa County and Luce County for funding ($30,000 and $9,000, respectively). These amounts have been funding for several years and last year no pitch was made for an increase.

AI 6.1.4: Study cases of other small-scale public transportation systems who have experienced success in a rural, low-density service area.

The State of Michigan commissioned a study of public transportation throughout the state. This will show best practice suggestions to improve public transit offerings statewide but also specifically in the U.P.

http://euprpdc.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=d2b02d8166454ff2905fc9488fc6c62e

http://www.kfhgroup.com/michigan/statewidetransitplan.html


S 6.2: Maintain roads, bridges and key infrastructure. AI 6.2.1: Utilize PASER rating and comparable rating methods to quantifiably understand the condition of infrastructure.

EUPRPDC continues its PASER rating work that it does annually with the Chippewa County Road Commission, Luce County Road Commission, Mackinac County Road Commission, and the City of Sault Ste. Marie.

S 6.3: Improve broadband access throughout the region. AI 6.3.1: Collaborate on vertical asset mapping inventory with other Upper Peninsula regional planning entities to identify areas needing investment.

EUPRPDC developed maps and collected data, which are held internally, and then shared the information with CUPPAD and WUPPDR. CUPPAD will be producing the final product.

AI 6.3.2: Carry out actions proposed in County Technology Action Plans.

EUPRPDC have developed a broadband survey that it will send out in summer of 2016 to the entire region to help generate a business case for improved broadband access throughout the region.

EUP Telecommunications Consortium, EUPISD, EUPRPDC, Connect Michigan, local units of government, and broadband providers are collaborating on a fiber build project that aims to result in the construction of new fiber in the EUP east of I-75. Not only will this benefit schools, the primary reason for the project, it should help improve broadband access for businesses and residents in the area.

S 6.4: Increase stock of attractive, affordable housing in the region. AI 6.4.1: Use target market analyses to have insights on who desires to occupy this type of housing in the EUP.

EUPRPDC, CUPPAD, and WUPPDR have commissioned a target-market analysis to be completed by Land Use | USA, a private firm. This will provide essential information in each county of the U.P.—including population centers—on the types of people interested in living in the U.P. as well as the types of housing they desire and how much they will demand. This will benefit local decision makers and private developers alike.

AI 6.4.2: Work with housing authorities, development authorities and developers to convey needs to those able to construct new developments.

Once the aforementioned target-market analysis is complete, EUPRPDC will convene meetings with local stakeholders and developers to share the information, market potential, and needs assessment in an attempt to encourage development.


APPENDICES

APPENDIX 1: ACRONYM REFERENCE In the economic development world there exists many long and sometimes cumbersome titles that are often reduced to acronyms. Below is a list of acronyms used in this document accompanied by their expansion for your reference. CEDS: EDA-funded Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy COC: Chamber of Commerce CTE: career-technical education CUPPAD: Central Upper Peninsula Planning and Development CVB: Convention and Visitors Bureau DDA: Downtown Development Authority DNR: Michigan Department of Natural Resources DTMB: Michigan Department of Technology, Management and Budget EDA: U.S. Department of Commerce – Economic Development Administration EDC: economic development corporation EDD: EDA-recognized Economic Development District EDO: economic development organization EUP: The Eastern Upper Peninsula of Michigan EUPRPDC: The Eastern Upper Peninsula Regional Planning & Development Commission EUPTA: Eastern Upper Peninsula Transportation Authority GIS: geographic information systems LSSU: Lake Superior State University MDOT: Michigan Department of Transportation REDAC: The Eastern Upper Peninsula Regional Economic Development Advisory Collaborative RPI: Michigan’s Regional Prosperity Initiative SACC: Sault Area Career Center SBDC: Small Business Development Center SSTOCI: Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians UP: The Upper Peninsula of Michigan UPCDC: Upper Peninsula Collaborative Development Council WUPPDR: Western Upper Peninsula Planning and Development Region

performance report - eup-planning.orgeup-planning.org/pdf/rpi-ceds/plans/2016 ceds... · this...

Documents