[Mich-listers] ENVIRO: Sen. Levin backs away from Whitefish Point protection

[Louie Dombroski]

Below is a message that I'm passing out from the UP list-serve from Joe Kaplan, Michigan Audubon Whitefish Point Joint Committee member.
Unbelievably, Senator Levin is withdrawing his bill that would require all development at Whitefish Point be subject to any applicable laws and regulations, a bill supported by Michigan Audubon. Instead, he's offering a bill that requires that only development beyond what is in the 2002 Management Plan be subject to such laws. This is another loophole for the Shipwreck Society to get around public review of their development plans. Sen. Levin claimed in the Congressional Record back in 1996 that the sort of protective language that Michigan Audubon supports was "inadvertently omitted" from the law transferring the property to the Shipwreck Society. He can't blame the omission this time on an administrative oversight. Clearly the Shipwreck Society (which curiously claims on their tax returns year after year that they spend $0 on lobbying) is behind Sen. Levin's backing away from his own bill to protect Whitefish Point.
PLEASE write to Senator Levin and tell him how important Whitefish Point is to you, and how it does not need more development. Ask him to take out the loophole protecting the Shipwreck Society's development interests, and instead work to protect the public interest in seeing that all development proposals receive proper scrutiny and oversight. Please read on for Joe's message and contact information for Sen. Levin's aide Amy Berglund:
 
Dear Friends -

In June, Senator Levin introduced legislation in the Senate supporting
a change to the land patent of the Great Lakes Shipwreck Historical
Society (GLSHS).  The Senator's bill included critical protective
language in Section 3 (Limitations to Development) that requires any
proposed development or expansion of existing infrastructure at
Whitefish Point to be subjected to the National Historic Preservation
Act, National Environmental Policy Act and any other applicable law of
Federal, State, or local governments.  Michigan Audubon supported
Levin's bill because of the language included in Section 3.

It is with some dismay that we now learn that Levin is withdrawing
this bill to introduce a new version, along with Rep. Stupak, that
"modifies" the protective language in Section 3 to exempt development
proposed in the 2002 Management Plan from review under these
applicable Federal, State and local laws.  Development proposed in the
2002 Plan includes tripling the size of the existing GLSHS museum
building (built without permission or review on Federal property in
1986), construction of a new GLSHS staff service drive and parking lot
between the existing museum and the hawk dune, reconfiguring and
moving the existing parking lot (build with misallocated Federal
Highway money in 1986), and construction of a missing "historic"
building.   Senator Levin has not offered an explanation to Michigan
Audubon of why he is modifying the bill.

Although Michigan Audubon is not opposed to this proposed development
because of the terms of a court supervised Settlement Agreement
following a lawsuit in 1999, there are elements of the 2002 Plan that
Michigan Audubon believes may be difficult to implement without
impacting the historic and natural integrity of Whitefish Point.  It
is a concern shared by many including the State's Historic
Preservation Office.

If you care about development issues at Whitefish Point I strongly
suggest you contact Senator Levin's office immediately with your
concerns.  I believe the most effective communication is one that
expresses the importance of Whitefish Point to you and how you FEEL
about additional development at this historic site.  You should also
communicate with Michigan Audubon so we know how much consideration to
give this issue.

Contact information for Amy Berglund is provided below.

Thank you for your consideration -

Joe Kaplan
Whitefish Point Joint Committee
Michigan Audubon

________________________________________


Hello –

  I am writing to notify you of a legislative update concerning the
Great Lakes Shipwreck Historical Society’s land patent change.
Congressman Bart Stupak and Senator Levin will introduce identical
legislation (see attached) this week which will make a modification
acknowledging the 2002 Human Use/Natural Resource Plan.  Please feel
free to call if you have any questions.

Amy



Amy Berglund

U.P. Regional Representative

U.S. Senator Carl Levin

524 Ludington St., Ste LL-103

Escanaba, MI  49829

(906) 789-0052

(906) 789-0015 fax

____________________________

Section 3 in the existing Levin bill supported by Michigan Audubon

SEC. 3. DEVELOPMENT LIMITATIONS AND REVIEW.

As of the date of enactment of this Act, each development of a new
facility or expansion of a facility or infrastructure on the Property
shall be subject to—

(1) the National Historic Preservation Act (16U.S.C. 470 et seq.)
(including regulations);

(2) the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et
seq.) (including regulations); and

(3) any other applicable law of—

(A) the Federal Government (including regulations); and

(B) a State or local government.

___________________________________________

The proposed modification of Section 3 in the new legislation to be
introduced by Senator Levin and Rep. Stupak

SEC. 3. REVIEW OF MODIFICATIONS AND UNDERTAKINGS.

(a) MODIFICATIONS TO HUMAN USE/NATURAL RESOURCE PLAN FOR WHITEFISH POINT.

—Each modification to the Human Use/Natural Resource Plan for White-
fish Point, dated December 2002, described in the matter under the
heading ‘‘SUBJECT ALSO TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS’’ of paragraph 6 of
United States Patent Number 61–2000–0007 shall be subject to the
review  process established under—

(1) section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 470f); and

(2) part 800 of title 36, Code of Federal Regulations.

(b) FEDERAL OR FEDERALLY ASSISTED UNDERTAKINGS

.—Each Federal or federally assisted undertaking (as described in
section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (16 U.S.C.
470f)) proposed to be carried out within the boundaries of the
Whitefish Point Light Station shall be subject to the review process
established under—

(1) section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 470f); and

(2) part 800 of title 36, Code of Federal Regulations.


      
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.envirolink.org/pipermail/mich-listers/attachments/20090908/65379ff9/attachment.html