|
Minutes Attendance: R. Ackerman, W. Clark, L. Davis, S. Edwards, R. Garrison,
D. Gillis, C. Goudey, C. Gegnon, H. Halvorson, R. Johnson, M. Jones, R.
Karney, D. Kimball, A., D. Liptack, G. Magnusson, J. O'Brien, J. Pearce,
P. Russell, S. Soares, R. Smolowitz,P. Spalt, A. Spinale, R. Taylor, R.
York Welcoming Remarks Dr. Harlyn Halvorson welcomed the group and reminded them that when SSWG was formed, with the advice of Mark Forest and John O'Brien, it was felt that this enterprise could impact economic development in the area. During the past few years our meetings were designed to inform ourselves about the technologies, opportunities and deterrents. It is appropriate now for us to return to our original theme and see what is the current role and contribution to economic development. We have been very fortunate to have been associated with CCEDC who have developed an economic plan for the region. John O'Brien will review these plans for us and give his impressions of opportunities for the future. Regional Strategies Mr. John O'Brien, Director CCEDC, congratulated the group for its persistence and noted that economic development theory is usually talked about in terms of decades. History has shown that for Cape Cod there are cycles of high's and low's every 4-5 years. Even when the business cycle is high we go through these spikes in unemployment. We are still relying on a seasonal economy which still presents a lot of problems. The unemployment rate for the Cape & Islands is a little over 6%, far larger than for the state as a whole. CCEDC is a county agency essentially but is deemed a public / private agency. He reports to a 24 member board or council made up of a cross section of business people from diverse backgrounds. CCEDC is about 5 years old, meets once a month, and has a budget of about $300,000/year. About 1/3 each comes from the county, state, and license revenues. Historically when the Cape Cod Commission Act was being discussed and legislated, the business community felt that they were not being represented and that the pendulum was swing towards a regulatory thrust. Initially they added an economic development office to the Cape Cod Commission - chaired by Jim O'Connel. Although they spend about $200,00 on economic development (total budget $3M) they are essentially a regulatory agency. Through the efforts of a citizens group to the Assembly of Delegates, CCEDC was formed. The mission of CCEDC is three fold. First (80% effort) is a retention strategy. There are 11,000 companies on the Cape - 90% with less than 8 employees. CCEDC has built a data base of companies and is aggressively trying to keep them to stay here and to expand. The efforts of SSWG fall into this category as fisheries are traditional businesses of the area. Second is a recruitment strategy. CCEDC is looking for light / clean industries. Since we have only 2 waste water treatment facilities, and we have only a single source aquifer we can not accept manufacturing companies that produce hazardous wastes. Software, telecommunications, environmental technologies and date processing are examples of industries sought. CCEDC has had some success as these companies are now relocating to areas with high quality of life. Excel and Software 2000 are two examples. The supply of computer literate people are one of their major problems for expansion. Unfortunately the regulatory atmosphere is not conducive, there is little office space available, and there are only two technology industrial parks (Falmouth, Mashpee) where the permitting is relatively easy. The regulatory process is also one of the impediments to aquaculture here. Third is community development. These involve permitting and regulatory issues. He briefly summarized the economy of Cape Cod. There are 210,000 residents who live year round n Barnstable County. In July / August there are about 600,000 people. This is about a $3.6B economy. This represents 44% tourism, 15% retirees, 10% business services, 7% commuters, and less than 5% manufacturing, 5% defense and 5% marine (including fishing). The latter, though small, has an indirect effect on tourism. CCEDC would like to see marine activity come back. We need to protect our harbors and infrastructure. We need to lay out, and regulate well, areas for aquaculture. There is plenty of room for domestic aquaculture. To help this we have a variety of services to perform. In the past five years 5 non-profit companies were formed. (a) Cape and Islands Economic Development Corporation (501C4 Corporation) which runs the Environmental Technology center on the base to attract new technology companies to start and grow. (b) The Cape and Island Community Development Corporation which is a lending program which taps local, state and federal funds ($3.5M) for nontraditional lending funds. We have a person who helps small companies (at no charge) with business plans etc. (c) A $300,000 fund from the Dept. Commerce (EDA) has been established to help people (mini-loans) in the fishing industry for fishermen, aquaculture, fish processing and retailing. Mrs. Jean Marshall is the contact person. CCEDC is in transition and is about to join the Chamber of Commerce. All of these programs will continue. In discussion Dr. Jack Pearce stressed the importance of maintaining the infrastructure on the Cape and in the importance of training programs to provide technicians. We also should be emphasizing new approaches to the fishing industries. John O'Brien responded that commercial development would take place in regional centers (Technology Parks). Also we need to stretch out our season beyond the summer months. People come for a better quality of life. The efforts for the fishing industry are not well understood. He suggested that representatives form SSWG make presentations to the Executive Committee or the Board of the Chamber. There was agreement on being available. The chambers are strong groups that can be advocates for public policy. Mr. Rick York, Mashpee, noted that since aquaculture activity was small, the attitude was that it only deserved a small part of the economic development fund. John O'Brien stressed that there are links from aquaculture to tourism that we need to consider. We need to get the determination & goals of SSWG before business leaders. CCEDC can help with marketing. Selected Public Policy Issues Mr. Fernando Quezada, Exec. Director
Biotech. Center. of Excellence Corporation - formerly a state agency,
highlighted from his previous experience the policy issues involved in
the region and how this plays with federal policies. He enumerated selected
trends areas that arise when collective bodies attempt to deal with economic
development that push us in he way of high technology and stress competitive
advantage: How much of this came out in 1992/3 from the Clinton / Gore national
technology policy that led the state to coordinate this policy? How much
have led to the states coordinating federal policies? On a state wide
level we have seen a shift of R&D funds from defense to other programs,
providing tax incentives for the private sector, and creating funds for
innovative technologies by cooperating with the private sector. Individual
states capitalize on their research base in their own strategic plans.
This state has built the technical skills of the existing and future work
force. This creates a climate to support entrepreneurs and technical based
businesses. Public Information R & D Grants This administration did come out with recommendations on biotechnology, ensured financial support, investment credits and education and training. They also have improved the regulatory climate and the state image. At the local level, towns that BCEC has been working with have passed ordinances to improve the climate for recombinant DNA technology by companies, putting together bank consortium, loan financing officers, establishing development offices and improving education. In 1985 there was not a single biotechnology company in Worcester. Through
the effort of a great number of people, including a committed Chamber
of Commerce, the city of Worcester set up a Development Corporation, obtained
100 acres adjacent to the Univ. Hospital, and established a non profit
association who developed the Biotechnology Park. The Mass Centers of
Excellence provided leveraging funds for the companies to get started.
Today, following state support in terms of land and initial funding, the
Biotechnology Park is an economic showcase for the state. In the discussion Ron Smolowitz pointed out that (1) government is made up of individuals and if everyone agreed you would not need government and (2) the role of government is to redistribute funds, and again if everyone agreed, again government would not be needed. With sea scallop aquaculture what is the goal of government and how do we go out and do this? Fernando Quezada responded that the SSWG meetings were right on track with a grass routes effort to articulating the vision of this industry. Government should be the servant of the people rather than defining the goals. SSWG should articulate the trends 5 or 6 years out -providing a public education function. Jack Pearce reminded the group that wise government beaurocrats have promoted proper areas for government support, like infrastructure, availability of water, G.I. bill, sustainable agriculture, etc., which have sustained our economic growth. In addressing the seafood trade imbalance, we all, including government, need to collectively and imaginatively seek solutions (aquaculture) - particularly in times of limited resources. Legislative Approaches Mr. David Gillis, Senator Rauchenbach's Staff, noted that there are different opinions as to the role of government. Sen. Rauchenbach believes that the best thing government can do is to provide industry access to money, and then let them take it from there. John O'Brien has provided the mechanism, and the enthusiasm, for state government to act. As a result we have the Environmental Center, the Aquaculture Center, etc. In addition Sen. Rauchenbach has provided financial support for aquaculture projects on the Cape and Islands, the Centers, monitoring, etc. So far he has been fairly successful in obtaining these funds. They do not have a message - but respond to somewhat fractured messages from constituents. They recognize there are some regulatory issues, but when they step in to address these they get complaints from the industry. There is not an open line between industry and government. Forums such as this are helpful. The process is in place - the industry needs to get together and to get a message. With Scott Soares in place as the Mass. Aq. Coordinator, the legislature has a lot of confidence in what is happening. Most things that this administration is doing revolve around economic development, including aquaculture. For many legislatures and their staff's - aquaculture is not a priority issue. Senator Rauchenbach is chairman of the Coastal Legislative Caucus and will try to raise the visibility of aquaculture, as there are so many legislators that represent coastal communities. In discussion Harlyn Halvorson commented that since even the state's Aquaculture Plan was little known among legislators, what can we do to overcome this? David Gillis replied citing similar experiences and commented that the legislator's door were always open. The upcoming state budget was an ideal opportunity to educate and prioritize. Send as much information, position papers, etc. as possible to the aides. Rob Garrison sympathized with the lack of a coherent voice from industry, nut noted that the aquaculture industry in Mass is small and has reached only about 10% of its potential. Consequently state government should take its message from the Mass. Aquaculture Strategic Plan which was developed with the help of many people and effectively states the case rather than from the existing industry. Alan Kuzirian stated that there has to be a concerted effort to educate the public about what aquaculture is and what it is about. This is particularly true for developing coastal sites for aquaculture. Ron Smolowitz asked if there was a case in which the legislature took a vote and then that became state policy. David Gillis responded that this was desirable but there is a problem with influencing the process. The best way would be the introduction of specific bills. We need to implement the Strategic Plan. Rick York reported that the shellfish industry in Mashpee was increased 50% this past year by state funding and following reporting of successes in the local paper. In response to Rollin Johnson's question if the Strategic Plan was referenced when Sen. Rauchenbach's financing bills for aquaculture were introduced, the response was no since these were not a state wide priorities. Informed Legislature: Coping with Science in a Democracy Ms. Megan
Jones, Associate Kennedy Sch. Gov., Harvard, reported on a 3 year
NSF - Carnegie Foundation study carried out under Dr. Branscomb's guidance
at the Kennedy School of Government. In 1993 Dr. Branscomb suggested investigating
how legislators got technical information to guide their decision making,
and if warranted, to make recommendations. After surveying all the states(100%
response!), eleven states were selected for the study: Analysis of the information from the eleven states showed a great deal
of similarity on the areas for which such information was needed: (11
responses) economic development; environmental protection; (10) information
technology; (8) energy; (7) agriculture etc. Having identified the need,
the survey sought to identify the internal sources of science and technology
information for policy. Six states have joint legislative research offices;
three have House and Senate offices; one state (NY) has both majority
/ minority House and Senate offices. Two states have legislative committees;
one has a S & T committee; six have legislative stall; five have legislative
libraries; three have mentors from other state legislatures. The most
impressive was Wisconsin which has had a Legislative Council Office since
1901 and currently has a nonpartisan staff of 18 lawyers, staff scientists
and a modern office. The survey also identified external sources of information
to state legislators: Lobbyists are readily available. Academic institutions have considerable information but they are hard to access. Georgia has a well organized information flow from its Universities. The most important issue mentioned by legislators and their staff was trust. Next was the issue of process. Information should be accessible, timely, expressed in non-technical language and in a convenient format. As for content it should be accurate, up to date, nonpartisan, unbiased, relevant, provide options, and be anticipatory. In response to how important is scientific and technical information - the response was sometimes. Other factors must be considered and should include constituents opinions. Recommendations Mass. State Initiatives Mr. Scott Soares, Mass. Aq. Coordinator, Dept. F&A, reported that he is still following the Strategic Plan. He summarized the activities from his office (see enclosure). A advisory group of 16 members has put forward a set of recommendations. He has formed two subcommittees. The first (MAAG with 35 members) is addressing permitting recommendations that will simplify the process. There are 4 primary considerations in permitting: species present in the system, the water source, the waste (including solids) discharge, and the structures that may be required. This still in draft form as it is circulating through various agencies. This group meets quarterly throughout the year. This has already been used for one recirculating project in Fall River, and only took several months to complete. As for the shellfish industry much of the responsibilities falls upon local communities. The SouthEastern Aquaculture Center was funded through the Dept. of Food & Ag. and the Seaport Bond Issue. Another effort is with the New England Board of Higher Education, an NSF sponsored education project called the Aquaculture Educators Network. A two day workshop was recently held at the Mass. Maritime Academy which was very successful. With funding from NRAC of an Aquaculture Information Resource Guide there will be a further outlet for this effort. The Aquaculture Coordinating team has formalized a permitting application procedure to be used in the state. This would lead to a preapplication permit meeting to assist the applicants. The Mass. Aquaculture Advisory Board has met 4 times and the next meeting will be in Feb. These are open meetings and anyone is invited to attend. The grants subcommittee came to and end Oct. 20th when the funds were distributed. Another committee to be formed next year is a promotional committee to help educate legislators. One effort will be to create a newsletter. Regarding advisory roles with various organizations (see attachment), Scott Soares has joined the National Association of State Aq. Coordinators who are now taking a more active role in the definitions of federal plans for aquaculture. The largest amount of time was spent on contract management and project support. These involve three Aquaculture centers, the Grants program and the Shellfish Propagation Projects on Martha's Vineyard and Nantucket. Dale Leavitt and Bill Burt have been identified as directors of the SouthEastern Mass. Aquaculture Center. Joe Butner will run the NorthEastern Center at Salem State College and the Cat Cove Marine Facility, obtained last year from the Division of Fisheries and Wild Life. The first round of aquaculture grants has been completed. There were 34 proposals, 5 of which were fully funded and a sixth, partially. He then reviewed the enclosed budget for '99 which includes an increase of the grants program from $190,000 to $250,000 and $300,000 support for the three aquaculture Centers. In the discussion Ron Smolowitz recommended that each successful recipient hold an open house so that the information gained would be available to all. Sandy Campbell raised the need to prioritize the project areas for future grants. It was also urged that better use of the press be sought to educate the public about aquaculture. Coming Meetings Harlyn Halvorson
|