Nelson

1
Parks and Recreation Division Strategic Planning
Update
Presented by Paul N. Curtis
2
Timetable

• Step 1 Analysis/Assessment of the Vision 2020
  Plan and the Waterways Commission Strategic Plan
  (2000-2005) November, 2007
• Step 2 Conduct Workshops with PRD Districts and
  interact with Department EcoTeams to introduce
  them to the effort and process and to gain their
  input. Perform SCOT Analysis of V2020, MSWC
  Plan, and PRD as an agency January April,
  2007
• - January 30Cadillac, Gaylord, and Roscommon
• - February 9Plainwell and Rose Lake
• - March 7Bay City and Pontiac
• - April 10Baraga

3

• Step 3 Conduct five Public Input Workshops
  across the state for assessment of PRD and its
  programs. (Notewe will coordinate the UP
  meeting(s) with the scheduling of a meeting with
  the Baraga District staff) February April 2007
• Step 4 Conduct a Visioning Workshop April
  25-26, 2007
• Step 5 Develop a Draft Strategic Plan and
  conduct public review workshops May - October,
  2007
• Step 6 Finalize the Strategic Plan for DNR
  approvals November - December, 2007

4
Vision of Michigan State Parks (MSP)

• MSP in 2020 (defined vision)
• Leader in protection/preservation of Michigans
  natural and historic/cultural resources.
• Have stable and sufficient funding for quality
  staff, facilities, and services.
• Barriers to access have been eliminated for
  Michigan citizens and visitors.
• Education/interpretation opportunities are
  emphasized to promote enjoyment and stewardship.
• Contribute to local and state economy and
  contribution is recognized.
• Strong public support for system built on
  partnerships with users, host communities, and
  private sector.
• Are valued and appreciated by Michigan citizens
  and visitors.

5
Vision 2020 - Six Major Goal Areas

• Secure long term, stable funding.
• Strengthen and expand interpretation.
• Improve quality and variety of camping and
  lodging.
• Improve quality and variety of recreation
  opportunity.
• Improve park planning and evaluation of a dynamic
  MSP system, and, improve MSP resource
  stewardship.
• Better market MSPs consistent with the mission
  and strategic plan.

6
Assessment of Vision 2020 Goals(Results from
CCMSP meeting of 11/29/2006)

• GOAL 1 - Build long-term Stable Financial Base
  Secure a permanent endowment for Michigan State
  Parks (MSP) through a one-cent sales tax increase
  for one year. Explore other nontraditional
  sources of funding for the system.
• What are the Strengths you can associate with
  this goal?
• We do have a Trust Fund (current balance is 120
  million?)
• Fall 2006 Proposal 1 to protect the funds and
  citizen support.
• We are not only part of DNR with a funding
  problem.
• Citizens Committee reformed and established by
  statute.
• Division Chief and Director expertise.
• State Park Foundation exists even if it is not
  currently active.
• Resource base.
• Visits over 24 million.
• Partnerships models.
• Innovative staff.
• Citizen support of State Parks and Recreation
  programs.

7

• What are the Challenges you associate with this
  goal?
• Lack of public knowledge of state park system.
• Lack of tourism industry recognition of state
  parks.
• The longer you survive on less the harder it is
  to get more.
• How do we explain the need?
• Clearly identify the believable consequences of
  inadequate funding.
• How do we compete with other leisure time venues?
• Total funding picture for the state is grim.
• Establishing new users/younger.
• Need to retain existing users, particularly older
  ones who serve as the gateway to outdoor
  recreation for their grandchildren when parents
  are too busy.

8

• What are the Opportunities to be realized with
  this goal?
• Form a coalition of local, regional, and state
  support across public and private sectors.
• Future grant opportunities.
• Regularly quantify and showcase the economic
  impact of state parks on local communities, and
  Michigan as a whole.
• Reconnect with the disconnected (former) users of
  state parks.
• Image of and pride in state parks is good and
  needs to be fostered.
• Use state parks as opportunities to re-create
  family.
• Strengthen public education about state parks and
  their role in conservation.
• Keep up with trends.
• Health and wellness activities in state parks.
• Engage under-represented public.
• Cooperation among conservation interests to find
  long term stable funding for conservation in
  Michigan (e.g. across the DNR and other partners)

9

• What are the Threats you can associate with this
  goal?
• Failure to recognize the differences of internal
  vs. external values.
• Business as normal/usual.
• Bad customer service.
• In-flexibility
• No lost value (Parks will always be there)
• Perception we serve only upper-level.
• Replacement of single business tax appears to be
  leaving DNR (including state parks) out of the
  loop
• Have any other funding sources been explored?
  (List and describee.g. State Park Foundation)
• Yes.
• Missouri uses a conservation sales tax as does
  Arkansas.
• The Michigan State Park Foundation exists but is
  not functioning.

10

• Is this still a valid goal?
• Valid goal.
• Not just for parks.
• Total DNR support.
• Build long-term stable funding with other
  partners.
• Would you modify this goal? (How?)
• Include a goal of users providing full funding
  for day-to-day operations beyond basic resource
  stewardship through the fee system and a long
  term stable funding source fully capitalizing the
  State Park Endowment Fund to provide capital
  funds for new and renovated facilities on a
  rational replacement schedule.
• Would you establish any other goals related to
  this topic? (What?)
• Encourage and reward innovation in regards to
  improved efficiency, use of energy saving
  technology, etc. Promote green initiatives and
  efficiency challenge goals.

11

• GOAL 2 - Provide Interpretive Programs in the
  Parks Establish interpretive programs as a
  cornerstone for the activities provided in the
  parks system.
• What are the Strengths you can associate with
  this goal?
• Interpretation is a primary reason people visit
  parks Value added experience.
• Cornerstone.
• Minimize negative effect of recreation use on
  natural resources to be good stewards.
• Understanding ? ownership ? responsibility ?
  preservation of Michigans natural and cultural
  resources.
• Environmental stewardship learned in state parks
  transfers to stewardship at home/state/global.
• Provides opportunity to educate park visitor on
  department/DNR issues.

12

• What are the Challenges you associate with this
  goal?
• Development of interpretation plans a lot of
  work.
• Value of Interpretive opportunities should be a
  key factor in park acquisition decisions.
• Funding and staffing (quality-quantity).
• Complex Supervision within MDNR-PRD-DHAL.
• Utilization/reliance on inexperienced low paid
  staff.
• Integrate park staff rangers into overall
  interpretive effort (begin a program).
• Perceived disconnect between interpreters and
  marketing of state parks.

13

• What are the Opportunities to be realized with
  this goal?
• Allow Interpretive program to expand beyond the
  traditional.
• Expand interpretive program to harbors and BAS.
• Take advantage of technology and innovation.
• Build relationship with state park foundation.
• Build partnership with private sector/corps for
  programming.
• Better integrate interpretation into each park
  (not as an add-on) with all park employees
  translating story of resources, orientation
  information, management information in many ways
  including through informal contact.
• Outreach programs
• Traditional and non traditional users/non-users.
• Leave no child inside.
• More effectively train seasonal employees to
  provide basic, useful interpretive information to
  customers.

14

• What are the Threats you can associate with this
  goal?
• Lack of professional development.
• Lack of funding.
• Lack of understanding of importance of
  interpretation as marketing tool, etc.
• Did we establish interpretive programs as the
  cornerstone for the activities provided in the
  parks system?
• More work to do but some good work
  done/underway.
• To what degree is interpretation linked to
  activities in the park?
• Some but greater linkage needed.
• Is this still a valid goal?
• Yes!
• Would you modify this goal? (How?)
• Broaden focus on DNR and PRD goals.
• Increase focus and funding for natural resource
  stewardship.
• Focus and for natural resource stewardship.
• All PRD employees can provide some basic
  interpretation with customers
• Would you establish any other goals related to
  this topic? (What?)
• - (No responses)

15

• GOAL 3 - Improve/Expand Camping and Lodging
  Facilities Upgrade existing camping and lodging
  facilities and work in partnership with the
  private sector to create new overnight
  accommodations.
• What are the Strengths you can associate with
  this goal?
• Knowledgeable staff.
• Locationgeographical diversity/variety.
• Resources (natural and cultural/historical)
• Key revenue source for state parks.
• Increasing variety of accommodations.
• Raw material source.(?)
• Un-met demand (certain locations and times)
• Central Reservation System.
• Potential grant funding (foundations)
• Program to build upon.
• Loyal customer base.
• Good image.
• Land to expand.
• Valued Campground Host program.
• Valued interpretation program.

16

• What are the Challenges you associate with this
  goal?
• Financial. (e.g. lodging provision is expensive
  requiring 24 hour per day coverage)
• Utility costs continue to rise.
• P.I.L.T. (Payment In Lieu of Taxes)
• Maintaining trained workforce (significant
  turnover of seasonal staff.)
• Need current use data (most recent study from
  1997)
• Park users are not a diverse group (white, middle
  class)
• Aging infrastructure.
• Private industry perception of unfair competition
  from state parks.
• Keeping quality summer staff.
• Filling vacant positions, particularly in
  mid-season.
• Government regulations such as health department,
  drinking water, etc. are sometimes onerous.
• Red tape regarding permits, etc.

17

• What are the Opportunities to be realized with
  this goal?
• Partnerships with other agencies (e.g. county or
  private sector) for maintenance, or campground
  operation.
• Volume buying power (utilities)
• Green initiatives (wind, solar, combustibles).
• New campground layouts to better protect
  environment, link to recreational assets (e.g.
  trails, lakes) and provide universal access.
• Expand definition of group camping to include
  wider cross-section of potential group campers.
• Continue to diversify lodging opportunities.
• Attract eco-tourists/corporate tourists for
  retreat/team building.
• Better use technology (e-newsletter, list serve,
  e-comment cards, etc.) to increase satisfaction
  of customers.
• Restore outdoor centers (historic structures)
• Identify future trends in camping and lodging.
• Form community partnerships.
• Expand programming to attract visitors to
  lengthen stay.
• Attract and accommodate special user groups.
• Learn from other entities and states.
• Attract cultural diversity (staffing and users).
• Target seniors/grandchildren (takes into account
  two wage earner households, early retirement by
  baby boomers, and the strong camping orientation
  of baby boomers).

18

• What are the Threats you can associate with this
  goal?
• Legislative mandates.
• Financial inability to maintain/renovate existing
  infrastructure such as roads, water, sewer, and
  electrical systems.
• Vandalism to park facilities and potentially by
  park visitors to neighboring property.
• Trespass by park visitors on neighboring
  property.
• Social changes between different generations with
  some in the younger generation not exposed to
  camping.
• Weather.
• Urban sprawl which creates more park border
  neighbors.
• Overall lack of funding.
• Reduced staff hours directly impact presence and
  quality of service.
• Lack of public awareness.
• Private competition forces increasingly higher
  prices to provide parity with private sector.
• Over dependence on fees limiting ability to
  provide camping opportunity to people of limited
  means.

19

• Has PRD worked in partnership with the private
  sector to create new overnight accommodations?
  (other than design/construction)
• Nofocus has been on expanding options within the
  state park system using former employee housing
  and innovative designs (e.g. yurts)
• Is this still a valid goal?
• Yesprovides important revenue stream for state
  parks and increases opportunities for
  interpretive interaction and area-wide outdoor
  recreation and appreciation of park resources.
• Would you modify this goal? (How?)
• (No response)
• Would you establish any other goals related to
  this topic? (What?)
• (No response)

20

• GOAL 4 - Improve/Expand Recreation Opportunities
  Provide the facilities and information needed by
  the public to enjoy a range of activities
  throughout the parks system, and encourage new
  visitors to enjoy the parks' resources.
• What are the Strengths you can associate with
  this goal?
• The ability to partner.
• The ability to diversify.
• Wide range of resources and facilities.
• Improvements in facilities are bringing in new
  users.
• Friends groups/stakeholders often help in
  expanding and improving recreational offerings.

21

• What are the Challenges you associate with this
  goal?
• Access from Urban areas may be difficult due to
  lack of mass transit, fees.
• Programming for new activities is historically
  not a priority of PRD.
• Lack of staff and money.
• Create more partnerships.
• Interfacing with P.A. 59 (2 tax on lodgingwould
  this apply to camper lodging?)
• Training/change attitudes/enable administrators.
• Need to think aheadidentify new trends in
  recreational activities, etc.

22

• What are the Opportunities to be realized with
  this goal?
• Partner with AARP.
• Partner with community-vendors, local park and
  recreation agencies, community education, etc.
• Having Demo Day provide more events.
• Connect DNR PRD resources with community
  resources.
• Provide concierge services.
• More varieties level of challenge.
• Expand Go Get Outdoors.
• Expand No Child Left Inside.
• Create ORV at compromised sites in Southern
  Michigan (e.g. Bass River)
• What are the Threats you can associate with this
  goal?
• Attitudes.
• Non-flexibility in MVP.
• Liability.
• Funding priority.
• Better understanding potential impacts of new
  activities on park resources and existing
  activities.

23

• How do non-resource based activities fit in with
  the park system? (e.g. Model Aircraft Flying
  Fields?... others?)
• - Need assessment for different activities at
  different parks.
• Is this still a valid goal?
• - Yes (based on discussion at the session
  wrap-up). Still need to keep in mind protection
  of the resource first. If resource is reasonably
  well protected, new activities may be warranted.
• Would you modify this goal? (How?)
• - (No response)
• Would you establish any other goals related to
  this topic? (What?)
• - (No response)

24

• GOAL 5 - Establish Programs for Stewardship, Park
  Evaluation, and Park Planning Initiate inventory
  and management programs that help protect
  sensitive historic and natural resources in the
  parks. Improve the park planning process through
  better use of resource information and public
  participation. Adopt criteria that can be used to
  evaluate individual parks, or to guide future
  park acquisitions.
• What are the Strengths you can associate with
  this goal?
• - Stewardship
• Protect/sustain resource.
• Meets mission/law.
• New planning process.
• Inventory Natural and Historical.
• Diversifies management.
• - Planning
• New planning process.
• Ability to set priorities statewide.
• Provides meaning.
• Sensitivity to natural features.

25

• Inspired other groups/advocacy.
• Allowed for more interpretation/education.
• Facilitated cooperation/partnerships.
• Provides model for planning.
• Promotes volunteerism.
• What are the Challenges you associate with this
  goal?
• Funding, etc.
• Preserving cultural built resources.
• Preserving archaeological resources.
• Stewardship vs. outside political interference
  and economic development.
• Inability to get prescribed burning done.
• Ecological restoration is long-term management,
  not a one-time activity.
• Accelerating and completing the planning process.
• Preservation vs. recreation (enjoying it to
  death).
• Public education.
• Getting public to recognize themselves as
  stewards.
• Changes in leadership.
• Efficiency.
• Urban sprawl.

26

• What are the Opportunities to be realized with
  this goal?
• Geo-Tourism. (tourism focused on place) leads
  to appreciation and protection of those places.
• We have the authentic natural and cultural
  resources coming together.
• Expanding education, interpretation and
  volunteering friends groups.
• Take the message outside parks.
• We have infrastructure for access to resources.
• Connecting natural landscape to the
  story/history.
• Pod casts/technology.
• Tying Wi-Fi hotspots to appreciating resources.
• Radio broadcasts for interpretation.
• Changes in leadership.
• Better emphasize the links with hunting/fishing
  interests who support habitat, clean water, clean
  air.
• Better using habitat related grants for
  environmental restoration, acquisition of key
  inholdings to protect resource integrity.

27

• What are the Threats you can associate with this
  goal?
• Eco-poachers.
• Funding.
• Invasive species (including nuisance native
  species).
• Climate change.
• Hydrologic change.
• Losing resources due to benign neglect/lack of
  resources.
• Overuse (love it to death).
• Improper uses of sensitive sites (e.g. illegal
  ORV/snowmobile use, etc.)
• Changes in leadership.
• Outside uses conflicting with resources.
• Continued decline of funding relative to need.

28

• Has PRD improved the park planning process
  through better use of resource information and
  public participation? (How?)
• Yes, Management Planning incorporates
  stewardship and stakeholder/public inclusion in
  the planning process.
• Is this still a valid goal?
• - Yes.
• Would you modify this goal? (How?)
• - Expand outside parks (e.g. to Boating)
• - Incorporate technology.
• - Growing (?)
• - How to show success.
• - How to quantify success continue/expand.
• Would you establish any other goals related to
  this topic? (What?)
• - Education/outreach.
• - Technology.
• - Establish separate goals for stewardship and
  planning?
• - Accelerate planning process.
• - Regional/Ecoregional planning.
• - Linking DNR planning with other community
  planning.

29

• GOAL 6 - Create a Marketing Program Develop a
  marketing program for the state parks system that
  would give the public more information about the
  opportunities available in the system, and
  provide park managers with information to guide
  future decisions on park facilities, activities,
  and programs.
• What are the Strengths you can associate with
  this goal?
• Our stakeholder groups are doing it for us.
• Default marketing.
• Missing (not many strengths).
• The ability to partner and diversify products.
• Public support of state parks.
• What are the Challenges you associate with this
  goal?
• Partnerships.
• Lack of public support of state parks.
• Making the public aware of our funding issues.
• How do we market to harbor users. (and BAS users)
• Identify market/users.
• No cohesive marketing plan its continually
  rediscovered that we need to do marketing.

30

• What are the Opportunities to be realized with
  this goal?
• Cross market.
• Create a marketing plan identify expected
  outcome.
• Re-visit current policies.
• Identify and segment users and non-users and why
  they are/are not using parks.
• Informing public of opportunities at underused
  parks.
• Create an activity directory of each park and
  post it on the web.
• Work with the corporate sector.
• What are the Threats you can associate with this
  goal?
• A 5 walk-in-fee and increased fees in general
  may deter use.
• Policies/directives.
• Lack of training preconceived attitudes of what
  marketing is and does.
• Concession contracts may limit the ability to
  effectively market to meet customers needs.

31

• Does marketing provide guidance to park managers
  in making decisions on park facilities,
  activities, and programs?
• - (No Response)
• Is this still a valid goal?
• - Yes (based on discussion at the session
  wrap-up)
• Would you modify this goal? (How?)
• - Set specific goal to have a marketing plan in
  place with measurable objectives related to
  visitation as a result of marketing, and measure
  of user satisfaction.
• Would you establish any other goals related to
  this topic? (What?) - (No Response)

32
(No Transcript)
33

• The Commissions Vision Statement
• Through continuing efforts over the next 50
  years, the Michigan State Waterways Commission
  and staff envision and will work toward a future
  where
• Michigan is a national and international resource
  for boaters and others seeking water-related
  recreational opportunities.
• All Michigan residents and visitors have easy,
  convenient access to all the states lakes,
  rivers and streams through high-quality public
  facilities.
• Michigans Great Lakes Harbors-of-Refuge network
  has been completed and is being operated and
  maintained to provide transient boaters with
  safe, high-quality public facilities using the
  latest, most appropriate designs and technology.

34

• All of these public boating facilities are
  adequately funded and are developed, maintained,
  and operated in a customer-oriented, ecologically
  responsible manor.
• Where appropriate, these public boating
  facilities are being operated through partnership
  with local communities, public agencies,
  conservation groups, friends groups, and
  concessionaires.
• Michigans residents and public officials are
  aware of and appreciate the contribution of
  boaters funds to acquire, develop and maintain
  the States public boating and public water
  access facilities.
• Access to waterways is supported because of the
  contribution that recreational boating makes to
  the local and state economy.
• The Commissions work underscores the value and
  benefit of citizen oversight, input, and
  guidance.

35
The Commissions Goals For The Next Five Years

• Upgrade and Maintain Existing Facilities
• Create New Boat Access Site Facilities
• Create Harbors of Refuge
• Strengthen Internal Structure and Efficiency

36
Assessment of MSWC Goals(Results from MSWC
meeting of 11/30/2006)

• GOAL 1 - Upgrade and Maintain Existing Facilities
  Through a careful process which begins with study
  and thorough inventory, the Commission will
  create a maintenance schedule and prioritize the
  upgrades of existing Harbor Facilities and
  Boating Access Sites. Specific benchmarks will
  include
• By year one, complete the harbor electrical
  study.
• By year two, complete the Boating Access Sites
  infrastructure study.
• By year three, complete the harbor infrastructure
  study.
• By year three, develop a preventive maintenance
  schedule for boating access sites.
• By year five, upgrade electrical infrastructure
  at 12-15 harbors (at the rate of 4-5 per year,
  with priority determined by the electrical
  study).
• By year five, upgrade a number of boating access
  sites.

37

• What are the Strengths you can associate with
  this goal?
• Continue utility upgrades.
• Retain and attract new users.
• Framework exists.
• Loyal following.
• Preventative Maintenance.
• What are the Challenges you associate with this
  goal?
• Determining appropriate capacity of
  electric/utilities today and future.
• Need for technology updates.
• Need for utility upgrades.
• Funding.
• We have to maintain what we have.
• Upgrades pressure nearby facilities to duplicate.
• Preventative maintenance.
• Economy up/down.
• Maintaining/sustaining internal expertise (boat
  crews).

38

• What are the Opportunities to be realized with
  this goal?
• Determining trends and respond with facility(s).
• Market analysis.
• Maintaining high level of quality.
• Preventative maintenance.
• Economy ups/downs.
• Incorporate in harbor features new trends, or
  changing needs (pavilions, clubhouses, kayak
  rack).
• Internships.
• Partnerships.
• What are the Threats you can associate with this
  goal?
• Fuel costs, economy.
• Regulatory changes, laws, rules.
• Expectations.
• Water levels (up and down).
• Invasive species hydrills, milfoil, z-m. (all
  types)
• Trainingramp builders.
• Funding.

39

• Is this still a valid goal?
• Yes.
• Would you modify this goal? (How?)
• Include technology (what users desire).
• New construction trends, tools, materials.
• Alternatives. (e.g. Green products and
  buildings).
• Would you establish any other goals related to
  this topic? (What?)
• Establish annual goals with priorities.
• Combine IMA and MRBIS into electronic unit.
• Modify facilities to respond to new trends.
• Continue to improve universal accessibility.

40

• GOAL 2 - Create New Boat Access Site Facilities
  The Commission will increase the number of
  Boating Access Sites in areas of limited access
  by 5 to 10 sites to better serve the needs of
  recreational boaters. The Commission will
  pro-actively create partnerships and garner local
  support in creating these sites. The
  Commissions work will depend on
• The identification of high priority areas for
  public access
• The establishment of a Boating Access Site
  Committee
• The consistent use of survey methods to test for
  and gain local support.
• What are the Strengths you can associate with
  this goal?
• Increase activity.
• Revenue available to construct sites.
• Awareness of boating.
• Other DNR opportunities.
• What are the Challenges you associate with this
  goal?
• Process not known to the Commissioners.
• Land availability.
• Future demands and type of demands.
• No revenue from kayaks (or other non-registered
  watercraft)
• No sustainability of program.

41

• What are the Opportunities to be realized with
  this goal?
• License vs. registration to gain more revenue.
• Navigable lakes and streams.
• Expand Grants-In-Aid program.
• Elevate boating potential where it currently does
  not exist.
• Register non-motorized craft.
• Stronger partnership between fishing and boating
  (also wildlife).
• Political support.
• Synergy of activities.
• Expand funding, i.e., federal grants.
• Create a Boating Foundation (similar to the Parks
  Foundation).
• John Dingell. (In strong political position for
  the next 18-24 months)
• Partnerships with historic/cultural interests
  (e.g. HAL, Foundations, etc.)
• What are the Threats you can associate with this
  goal?
• Supporting current sites.
• Negative public reaction.
• Environmental impacts.

42

• Is this still a valid goal?
• Yes.
• Would you modify this goal? (How?)
• Develop a strong process to assess and support
  the development of new sites (all watercraft).
• Would you establish any other goals related to
  this topic? (What?)
• Develop a strong process to assess and support
  the development of new sites (watercraft).

43

• GOAL 3 - Create Harbors of Refuge The Commission
  will complete the Cedar River project and seek an
  alternate design/site for a harbor of refuge at
  Cross Village. The Commission will also complete
  a needs study for harbors of refuge in Lake
  Superior. In all efforts, the Commission will
  work with the Army Corps of Engineers to identify
  navigational issues in site selection, and the
  Congressional delegation to seek federal funding
  to establish harbors.
• What are the Strengths you can associate with
  this goal?
• Complete the safety net.
• Increase navigation.
• What are the Challenges you associate with this
  goal?
• Piping Plover and environmental issues.
• Availability of funds.
• General infrastructure expenses.
• Disposal sites (adequate).
• Permitting issues.
• Continue to validate program needs.
• Marketing.

44

• What are the Opportunities to be realized with
  this goal?
• Marketing opportunity.
• Future trends and demands.
• Partnerships with private sector.
• What are the Threats you can associate with this
  goal?
• Goal 2 and 3 are mirrored in many factors.
• Is this still a valid goal?
• Yes.
• Would you modify this goal? (How?)
• Yes, explore type of boat and market to serve.
• Would you establish any other goals related to
  this topic? (What?) - (No response)

45

• GOAL 4 - Strengthen Internal Structure and
  Efficiency
• A) The Commission will utilize Standing
  Committees to better manage the boaters needs
  in the State of Michigan. They will include
• - Facilities
• - Operation/Policy
• - Boating Access
• - Public/Governmental Relations
• - Finance
• B) The Standing Committees will work to bring
  outside constituency groups into the public
  process of the Commission.
• C) The Commission will direct staff to utilize
  the Bureaus Field Structure to assist in
  statewide compliance of regulations, project
  agreements, and policies pertaining to all
  Waterways Commission sponsored facilities.

46

• What are the Strengths you can associate with
  this goal?
• Standing Committees work issues out beforehand.
• Can address issues quickly with core
  subcommittee.
• Can map out opportunities to subcommittee tasks.
• Committees help organize boaters.
• What are the Challenges you associate with this
  goal?
• Commissioner turnover.
• Information, meetings, sharing.
• Communities unhappy with audits.
• Staff training/scheduling/planning.
• Need to represent unorganized boating public.
• What are the Opportunities to be realized with
  this goal?
• - Can fully discuss an issue.
• What are the Threats you can associate with this
  goal?
• Boaters not an organized groupMSWC can bring
  these constituents together.

47

• Is this still a valid goal?
• Yes
• Would you modify this goal? (How?)
• Yes, but look at subgroups differently (have
  added strategic plan too).
• Part C using field structure modify language
  to be current but keep basic goal.
• Would you establish any other goals related to
  this topic? (What?)
• Knowledgeable/trained staff available for
  harbor/BAS public.
• Seek new methods for MSWC to reach out to boating
  public (comment cards, meeting announcements,
  meeting times, etc.).

48
(No Transcript)
49
District Meetings

• Step 2 Conduct Workshops with PRD Districts and
  interact with Department EcoTeams to introduce
  them to the effort and process and to gain their
  input. Perform SCOT Analysis of V2020, MSWC
  Plan, and PRD as an agency January April,
  2007
• - January 30Cadillac, Gaylord, and Roscommon
• - February 9Plainwell and Rose Lake
• - March 7Bay City and Pontiac
• - April 10Baraga

50
Cadillac, Gaylord, and Roscommon Districts on
1/30/2007

• Excellent participation (approximately 70)
• Meeting notes sent out 2/15/2007

51
Plainwell and Rose Lake Districts on 2/9/2007
(Sorryno photos)

• Againexcellent participation (approximately
  50)
• Meeting notes sent out 2/15/2007

52
RAM Center Visioning WorkshopApril 25-26, 2007

• Conduct a Visioning Workshopwith backdrop of
  SCOT Analysis and planning assessments. The
  Visioning Workshop is the key step in this whole
  process, where all elements for our strategic
  plan development come together in a working
  session. Here, diverse interests will interact
  and collaborate during a 2-day workshop
  involving ,CCMSP, MSWC, key stakeholders, and
  PRD/DNR staff at the RAM Center (central location
  and a setting conducive for group interaction and
  synergy for collaborative work on this plan) -
  Scheduled for April 25-26, 2007

53
Workshop outcomes for the PRD Strategic Plan to
include

• Vision statement (Insightful portrayal of PRD
  and how it relates to the DNR and the public it
  serves)
• Why does PRD exist? (What is its purpose and
  significance?)
• What distinguishes PRD from other DNR programs?
  (Mission)
• Is there a priority to the four components of the
  Mission Statement? (Example are natural
  resources or historic/cultural resources a higher
  priority than education or recreation?)
• What are PRDs opportunities and threats?
• What will PRD be like in 2020?
• Who will be PRDs customers and potential
  customers

54

• Goals (Clear and concise description of what the
  future condition will be for the PRD Parks and
  Recreation Area Program and the Boating Program)
• Define the role of PRD in the DNR.
• Identify the key issues or goals previously cited
  that are still relevant.
• Add and define any new goals.
• Objectives (What are the specific results of
  program efforts that will result in meeting the
  identified goals?)
• Specify the desired objectives to attain each
  goal.
• Identify the tools needed to accomplish the
  objectives, including human resources, capital,
  and technology.

55
Following the Workshop, the next steps will
involve

• Actions (What specific actions can be taken to
  accomplish the desired results?...developed with
  PRD Staff input)
• Develop a thorough list of actions for each
  objective.
• Each action shall identify a responsible position
  and a target date for completion.
• Actions shall be measurable.
• Plan Review and Update
• Establish mechanism for regular plan review and
  update (5-year minimum) to keep the process
  dynamic.

56
(No Transcript)
57
Working on

• Location for Bay City-Pontiac District(s) Meeting
  
• (March 7expect approximately 40 staff)
• Date/location for Division Staff Strategic
  Planning Meeting (Sometime in March expect
  approximately 40 staff)
• Baraga District Meeting (April 10expect
  approximately 40 staff)
• Interaction with and input from Department
  EcoTeams
• Scheduling Public Input Workshops
• - March 20, 21, and 22 (Lower Peninsula)
• - April 9,10 (Upper Peninsula)
• - NOTE.stakeholders specifically invited to
  attend
• Setting up a Web site for info on the new PRD
  Strategic Plan

58
Thank You