Transportation Museum Idea Is Still in Fact-finding Stage
To the Editor:

This letter is being written in response to the letter to the editor February 7 entitled "Transportation Museum Would Require Taxpayer Investment." Although that letter did bring up some valid points, there were also some confusing details and misinformation included in it.

1. The proposed transportation museum is still in the fact-finding stage and not one piece of grant paperwork has been completed. All federal and state grant programs require that local public hearings be held before grant requests are submitted.

2. I don't know what the writer is referring to as "traditional" grants, but all state and federal grants that I know of are "reimbursement" grants. This simply means that the grantee (the City) must spend the money for the project and then submit all of the necessary paperwork to be reimbursed by the granting agency for the money expended. When it comes to the state and federal government, a reimbursement grant is a traditional grant.

3. Local match will be paid by MDOT since this is technically an MDOT project in which the City/DDA would be a partner. Some people would say that it is still taxpayer money, but I contend that whether St. Ignace gets the money from the state or federal government, or Detroit does, either way, it is still taxpayer money and I would much rather that it be spent on a project in our community, if it is what the community wants, than somewhere else in Michigan.

4. The City/DDA would own, operate, and maintain the proposed museum and this is an issue that must be addressed. Museums, by their very nature, are normally not self-sustaining because people are not willing to pay large sums of money to visit them.

5. The City would be expected to execute and record an historic preservation easement to protect the federal funding investment. Each of the Michigan Natural Resources Trust Fund grants that we have received (Kiwanis Beach, American Legion Park, Dock 3) all required a commitment to maintain and keep those parks in public ownership and open to the public in perpetuity - that is standard procedure when funds are being given for specific projects in order to guarantee that those projects are protected for the public.

6. It is correct that the property and building where the proposed museum would be located would be taken off the tax rolls if the proposed museum could not be located on currently owned City/DDA property. If a privately owned building must be purchased, the pros and cons of this must be weighed as to the possible economic benefits that a facility would have in drawing tourism dollars to the area vs. property tax income that the City/DDA would lose.

7. I do not understand the writer's point about Manitowac vs. St. Ignace. I feel that St. Ignace is one of the most beautiful places in the country to live and visit and I love having a job that helps the City/DDA make it even more beautiful by bringing tax dollars back from Lansing and Washington in the form of grants.

I just want to stress to the City taxpayers that I have been the DDA director for almost 13 years and have never ever written a grant before getting input from the public at a very well publicized meeting and having everything approved by the City Council and Downtown Development Authority (and this time will be no different). We have had some successes and some letdowns in grant writing, but we have the best interest of this community and the downtown area in mind at all times.

Deb Evashevski St. Ignace DDA Director