Gulf County leaders discuss floating dry dock and Maritime Academy; no formal vote taken

At a Gulf County workshop, county commissioners and newly appointed Port Authority commissioners discussed plans for a proposed floating dry dock and an associated Maritime Academy, exploring site visits, funding sources and partnership agreements; the group did not take a formal vote. The meeting included conversation about channel dredging, revenue-sharing approaches, a nearby 2.5-acre parcel tied to an annexation petition and a pending legal matter that could affect industrial land adjacent to the port. The discussion also covered a decades‑long proposal called the Gulf-to-Gadsden Freight Logistics Zone and options for drawing state and private funding.

The discussion matters because proponents said the dry dock and academy would create year‑round, higher‑paying jobs for local residents and provide a revenue stream for the Port Authority, while opponents and some city officials raised environmental and aesthetic concerns and questioned scale. Commissioners and staff repeatedly emphasized workforce development — apprenticeship-style training tied to local industry — and noted existing workforce investments that county officials view as successful.

Key points from the meeting: - No formal action or vote was recorded. Participants discussed next steps including visiting existing floating dry docks and ports, further talks with state legislators and the private property owner, and additional intergovernmental outreach. Several commissioners urged a joint, coordinated presentation to state grantmakers. - Joint application and revenue sharing: County staff presented that the planned project would be a joint application between Gulf County and the Port Authority. County participants said earlier planning assumed a proportional co‑ownership tied to the parties'contributions; one example discussed was the county contributing a dredging allocation while a partner contributed a separate amount, leaving ownership shares proportional to those inputs. Commissioners discussed lease revenue from an operator (identified in the discussion as Eastern Shipbuilding) and the potential to use mooring or lease fees and leases for buildings on port land to generate Port Authority revenue and to pay project debt. - Dredging, scale and cost estimates: Participants differentiated the relatively small dredge volumes needed for the dry dock pocket from the much larger channel dredging that would be required to develop a full commercial port. Estimates cited in the meeting included a prior planning figure of roughly $30–$50 million for earlier dredging and rail work, and a larger industry estimate of up to $500 million to build a full‑scale port with laydown yards and cranes. One county staff estimate for the dry dock pocket described dredge quantities on the order of tens of thousands of cubic yards (one speaker used the figure ~70,000 cubic yards as an example), described as much smaller than the millions of cubic yards required for a full channel project. - Environmental and aesthetic concerns: Commissioners acknowledged ongoing public concerns about impacts to the bay, algae blooms and tourism aesthetics. Several speakers proposed fact‑finding site visits to existing facilities and increased monitoring and permitting as part of project development. County staff repeated that the dry dock permitting would follow ‘‘normal permitting’’ rather than a special permit, as had been discussed in the workshop. - Property and annexation issues: Staff briefed attendees on a nearby 2.5‑acre parcel owned by a private principal (identified in the meeting as Kay Haddock) that has been the subject of an annexation petition to the City of Port St. Joe. County attorneys and staff said there were two lawsuits recently filed that could affect that property, and that the parcel sits adjacent to land that Eastern Shipbuilding and the Port Authority use; participants said a county purchase or negotiated relocation of the parcel owner was being discussed as a way to preserve industrial land and avoid residential uses immediately adjacent to port operations. - Intergovernmental coordination and letters of support: County staff asked Port Authority members to urge the City of Port St. Joe to rescind a recent city letter opposing the floating dry dock. Meeting participants described the city vote as a 3–2 outcome and said changing one city vote could restore a city letter of support; they emphasized the value of unified partner letters for state grant processes. - Workforce and training connections: Participants tied the Maritime Academy concept to local training programs and apprenticeship structures. Several commissioners cited recent uses of Triumph Gulf Coast dollars and other grants that county leaders say expanded nursing and welding capacity locally and argued that the academy could similarly expand long‑term local employment opportunities.

The meeting left several open questions: how ownership percentages would be finalized, how dredging would be financed and permitted, whether the City of Port St. Joe would change its letter of support, and whether the county and Port Authority would finalize an operating agreement with Eastern Shipbuilding or another operator. Workshop participants proposed organizing site visits to existing floating dry docks and ports, continuing conversations with The St. Joe Company and state legislators, and preparing coordinated grant presentations to federal and state funding bodies.