The City of Marquette kept its part of the agreement, conveyed property to the Coast Guard for $1, and now is going to be stuck with the bill. The problem is that the way the transfer worked out, the statutory PAYGO rules preclude inclusion of past conveyance in calculating the cost of the bill. We simply got hung up with our own legislation, our own PAYGO rules to reduce the cost of government, but now we are in the position of possibly increasing the cost of government to a local unit of government, the City of Marquette. The city's contribution to the Coast Guard cannot therefore be calculated into the cost of this bill. I look forward to the day when we will be able to work this out in a different setting.
Editor's note · Context
Oberstar discusses the financial implications of an agreement between the City of Marquette and the Coast Guard.
Share
More from James Oberstar
I rise with a very heavy heart to join fellow cyclists throughout Minnesota in mourning the untimely loss of Terry McGhauhey, father, founder, godfather, midwife, impresario of the Paul Bunyan Bicycle Trail. It was Terry McGhauhey who, 22…
I, too, have natural resources--national forests, national parks, wildlife refuges. When fire, as it does regularly, strikes the national forest, that land regenerates. The oil destroys. It likely cannot be restored by itself or by human…
I have worked with the gentleman and our committee staff to craft this language. It's important to note that these are not taxpayer dollars paying for restoration, but rather proceeds from a penalty provided in this provision that is very…
The Coast Guard Authorization Act of 2010 is a bill this committee has worked on for the past 4 years, actually 6 years, starting in the time of the Republican majority, when our committee was united, our committee was unified behind this…





