Local leaders urge evaluation of alternative as Galveston weighs infrastructure decision tied to Gulf Coast shipbuilding and maritime expansion.

A quiet but potentially landmark shift is underway in how Galveston thinks about its future. In an exclusive interview with The 1839, Mayor Dr. Craig Brown confirmed that local officials are actively exploring a federal feasibility study for a “land bridge” alternative to the Pelican Island Bridge — a decision that could reshape the Gulf Coast’s maritime economy for generations.

Local leaders urge evaluation of alternative as Galveston weighs infrastructure decision tied to Gulf Coast shipbuilding and maritime expansion

A potentially transformative shift in one of the most consequential infrastructure decisions facing the Texas Gulf Coast is now under active consideration.

In an exclusive interview with The 1839, Galveston Mayor Dr. Craig Brown confirmed that local officials are discussing whether to pursue a federal feasibility study examining a “land bridge” alternative to the long-planned replacement of the Pelican Island Bridge.

Documents prepared for the Port of Galveston’s Wharves Board and reviewed by The 1839 show that trustees are expected to discuss whether the port should seek authorization to begin the federal study through the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

The study would examine whether a causeway-style land bridge could serve as an alternative to the elevated bridge design currently being advanced by the Texas Department of Transportation.

The Port of Galveston is one of several entities that could potentially sponsor the study, which would be conducted under Section 203 of the federal Water Resources Development Act.

The concept has gained attention among local leaders and maritime stakeholders as Pelican Island’s economic importance continues to grow.

Among those who have repeatedly advocated for evaluating the idea is mayoral candidate and former city council member John Paul Listowski, who has argued that Galveston should examine whether a land bridge and rail connectivity to Pelican Island could reduce long-term infrastructure costs while expanding the island’s transportation and industrial capacity.

“I’ve been advocating for this idea to be studied for a long time, and now is the time to do it,” Listowski said. “Pelican Island’s full economic potential depends on rail access. To make that possible, we have to seriously evaluate options like a land bridge or a lower bridge design that can accommodate rail.”

Port officials and representatives of local maritime businesses have also encouraged exploring the concept as the island emerges as a center of maritime and industrial activity.

A Decision with Regional and National Implications

While the Pelican Island crossing is often discussed as a local transportation issue, the decision carries implications far beyond Galveston.

Pelican Island sits at the intersection of several powerful economic forces reshaping the Gulf Coast, including the expansion of American shipbuilding capacity, the growth of maritime logistics tied to Gulf energy exports, and increasing federal investment in domestic maritime infrastructure.

The island already hosts Texas A&M University at Galveston, one of the nation’s leading maritime research and training institutions.

It is also the planned location of the Davie Defense shipbuilding expansion, a project expected to create thousands of high-wage jobs and strengthen the domestic shipbuilding industry.

Reliable access between Galveston Island and Pelican Island is essential to all of it.

That means the crossing between the islands is more than a bridge.

It is the infrastructure backbone of a rapidly evolving maritime and industrial corridor on the Gulf Coast.

Mayor Confirms Federal Study Discussion

During the interview, Brown confirmed that discussions are underway regarding whether a local entity should sponsor the federal feasibility review required to study the land bridge concept.

However, Brown emphasized that the Port is not the only organization that could initiate the study.

Other possible sponsors could include regional port authorities, navigation districts, or private maritime stakeholders involved in harbor infrastructure.

The Wharves Board is expected to discuss whether the Port should pursue that role.

If approved, the Port Director could submit a request to the federal government seeking authorization to begin the feasibility study process.

The action under consideration would not approve construction of a land bridge.

Instead, it would initiate the engineering and environmental review required to determine whether the concept is technically, environmentally, and economically viable.

Until that study occurs, the land bridge remains a concept rather than an evaluated infrastructure alternative.

The City’s Current Position

Brown also emphasized that the City of Galveston remains focused on the bridge replacement project it has been working on with the Texas Department of Transportation for years.

“The City of Galveston has been partnering with TxDOT for years on the elevated bridge replacement project,” Brown said.
“Our focus is to continue moving forward with the plans that we have been working on together.”

TxDOT is responsible for the design, engineering, and construction of the replacement bridge.

The Current Bridge Plan

For nearly a decade, Galveston has been working with the Texas Department of Transportation on a replacement bridge connecting Galveston Island and Pelican Island.

The design currently under development would construct an elevated bridge approximately 73 feet above the navigation channel, curving around the Texas A&M Galveston campus and allowing maritime traffic to pass beneath it.

The new bridge would be constructed adjacent to the existing bridge, allowing the current crossing to remain open during construction.

Once the new bridge is completed, the existing structure would be demolished.

The project’s cost has increased significantly over time.

Early estimates placed the project near $100 million.

Current projections exceed $350 million.

Despite the rising cost, the project has continued advancing through federal environmental review and engineering design.

Federal Funding Could Dramatically Change the Equation

One reason some stakeholders have expressed interest in evaluating the land bridge concept involves potential federal funding opportunities.

If a project ultimately advances through the Army Corps process, federal participation could potentially cover up to 75 percent of the construction cost, depending on the type of infrastructure approved.

Such participation could significantly reduce the financial burden on state and local partners and narrow the current funding gap associated with the bridge replacement project.

However, the feasibility study itself must be funded by the sponsoring entity.

Officials estimate the Section 203 feasibility study required to evaluate the land bridge could cost between $4 million and $5 million, funding that would need to come from the sponsor rather than federal or state sources.

Congressional Attention

Discussion of the Pelican Island crossing gained additional momentum earlier this week when Congressman Randy Weber convened regional stakeholders to discuss the future of the bridge project and possible alternatives.

The meeting brought together local officials, maritime leaders, and infrastructure experts to examine long-term options for the connection between Galveston Island and Pelican Island.

The crossing represents the only roadway connection between the islands, making it one of the most critical transportation links in the harbor.

The Land Bridge Concept

The alternative now being discussed is commonly referred to as a “land bridge.”

Rather than constructing a tall elevated bridge over the navigation channel, the proposal would create a “land bridge” — a solid land crossing connecting Galveston Island and Pelican Island.

Supporters say the concept could potentially reduce long-term infrastructure costs while offering new transportation possibilities for the island’s growing industrial base.

Some maritime stakeholders have also suggested the concept could reduce long-term dredging requirements in portions of the harbor.

Preliminary estimates discussed locally suggest potential savings of roughly $30 million in dredging costs, though those figures would ultimately need to be confirmed through formal engineering analysis.

Among the advantages cited by proponents:

• potentially lower long-term maintenance costs
  • possible changes to dredging requirements
  • expanded industrial transportation options
  • the potential integration of rail infrastructure connecting Pelican Island to regional freight networks

But those questions can only be answered through a formal engineering review.

Navigation Questions: How Ships Would Pass

One of the most immediate engineering questions surrounding the land bridge concept is how maritime traffic would move through the harbor if a causeway-style crossing replaced the elevated bridge design.

The existing TxDOT plan allows ships traveling between the Galveston Ship Channel and the Intracoastal Waterway to pass beneath the bridge.

A land bridge approach would require a different solution.

Possible options could include rerouting portions of the navigation channel, incorporating movable bridge structures, or altering vessel access routes within the harbor, though none of those possibilities have yet been formally evaluated.

Determining how maritime navigation would function under a land bridge design would be one of the central issues addressed during any federal feasibility study conducted by the Army Corps of Engineers.

Environmental Review Would Be a Major Factor

Environmental considerations would also play a central role in determining whether a land bridge could move forward.

Projects that alter waterways or create new land within coastal ecosystems typically require extensive environmental analysis addressing water flow, sediment movement, habitat impacts, and long-term ecological effects.

Under the federal feasibility process being discussed, those issues would be evaluated by the Army Corps of Engineers along with federal and state environmental regulators.

Whether the land bridge concept could meet those requirements is one of the key questions the feasibility study would be designed to answer.

The Rail Factor

One of the most discussed aspects of the land bridge concept involves the possibility of adding rail connectivity between Pelican Island and the mainland.

Rail access is a core component of most major industrial ports, allowing cargo and materials to move efficiently between ships, manufacturing facilities, and inland transportation networks.

If rail infrastructure were incorporated into Pelican Island’s connection to the mainland, it could significantly expand the types of maritime and industrial operations the harbor can support—including shipbuilding, offshore energy services, and logistics operations tied to Gulf Coast trade.

As Pelican Island continues evolving into a maritime and industrial hub, that level of connectivity could strengthen the long-term competitiveness of the Port of Galveston.

One question raised during recent discussions is whether, if a land bridge were to block vessel access through the western portion of the channel, it might create the possibility of modifying the existing bridge design to incorporate rail access by lowering the structure.

However, that idea remains speculative. Any such modification would require extensive engineering analysis and approval from the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT), the U.S. Coast Guard, and other regulatory authorities, and has not been formally proposed as part of the current bridge project.

What Happens Next

The next step will come when the Port of Galveston Wharves Board meets on Tuesday, March 10, 2026, to consider whether the Port should request federal authorization to undertake the feasibility study.

Board materials indicate trustees will discuss whether to authorize the Port Director to pursue the Section 203 feasibility process with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The discussion may also include presentations or comments from interested stakeholders and parties advocating for evaluation of the land bridge concept.

If the board ultimately decides not to pursue sponsorship, another regional entity could potentially initiate the process.

If the study does move forward, it would launch a detailed federal evaluation examining:

• engineering feasibility
• environmental impacts
• navigation effects
• long-term economic benefits
• potential transportation improvements

Such studies typically take one to two years to complete.

During that time, the existing bridge replacement project led by TxDOT would continue advancing through its own development timeline.

A Decision That Could Shape the Harbor for Generations

Pelican Island is rapidly emerging as one of the most strategically important maritime and industrial locations on the Texas Gulf Coast.

In addition to the Davie Defense shipbuilding expansion, the island continues to see growth tied to maritime research, logistics, and port infrastructure.

The crossing between Galveston Island and Pelican Island is the gateway to all of it.

Whether that connection ultimately remains a traditional bridge—or evolves into a different form of infrastructure—could shape the economic future of the harbor for decades to come.

For now, the question facing local leaders is simply whether the idea should be studied.

The answer to that question may come soon.

A Defining Infrastructure Decision

Whether the concept ultimately moves forward or not, the discussion itself highlights how rapidly the stakes surrounding Pelican Island have changed.

What was once viewed primarily as a local transportation project is increasingly tied to far larger questions about the future of maritime infrastructure, shipbuilding capacity, industrial logistics, and economic development along the Gulf Coast. With major investments in shipbuilding, port infrastructure, and maritime research now converging on Pelican Island, the crossing between Galveston Island and Pelican Island has taken on new strategic importance.

The decision about how that connection is ultimately built—whether through the current bridge plan, a modified design, or a different approach altogether—will help shape the economic trajectory of the region for decades.

For Galveston and the broader Gulf Coast maritime economy, few infrastructure questions carry more long-term consequence.

We will be updating this story as it develops.

Federal Contract. Local Impact.

Davie Defense’s planned expansion on the Texas Gulf Coast now carries a defined federal mission. The company has been awarded a U.S. Coast Guard contract to construct five Arctic Security Cutters, directly linking Galveston and Port Arthur to a national security program with a 2028 delivery target and long-term Arctic operations strategy.

Davie Defense’s planned expansion on the Texas Gulf Coast is now tied to a defined federal production program.

According to a company announcement summarized by Naval News, Davie Defense has been awarded a U.S. Coast Guard contract to build five Arctic Security Cutters (ASCs)—a new class of polar icebreaker intended to expand U.S. operational presence in the Arctic.

The award sits inside a broader program of up to 11 total Arctic Security Cutters, authorized under the Presidential Memorandum titled “Construction of Arctic Security Cutters.” Under the construction plan described, two cutters will be built in Finland at Davie’s sister facility, Helsinki Shipyard, to meet the Coast Guard’s accelerated schedule to deliver the first cutter in 2028. The remaining three cutters are planned for construction in Texas, at Davie’s facilities in Galveston and Port Arthur, with American shipbuilders working alongside Helsinki’s teams during early phases to accelerate capability transfer.

Davie Defense CEO Kai Skvarla said the company will anchor construction in Texas while drawing on Helsinki Shipyard’s proven expertise to meet Coast Guard requirements in “the world’s harshest environments.” The company states the ASC design is based on a platform with seven prior variants delivered from Helsinki Shipyard, all currently in service.

Ownership and Local Footprint

Davie Defense is described as the U.S. arm of INOCEA, a UK-owned maritime group with operations in Finland, Canada, and the United States. The release states that INOCEA acquired Gulf Copper & Manufacturing’s shipbuilding assets in Galveston and Port Arthur in 2025, bringing existing Gulf Coast ship repair and fabrication capacity into the program’s industrial base.

INOCEA co-founders James Davies and Alex Vicefield framed the contract around Arctic competition and execution discipline—combining proven designs and Helsinki expertise to “re-establish world-class shipbuilding capability in Texas” and deliver on schedule and budget.

What This Adds to the Galveston Story

This update strengthens the core significance of the Galveston expansion: it is not only a large industrial investment—it is directly connected to an identifiable federal shipbuilding program with a defined delivery target (2028) and a staged build plan (Finland first, Texas thereafter).

Port of Galveston Lease Rumors

Port records indicate active lease discussions connected to the transaction, including a Wharves Board agenda item addressing the assignment and assumption of an existing Gulf Copper lease, along with discussion of negotiating a new lease following that assignment.

The status and final terms of any new agreement will be key components of this story. The 1839 will continue monitoring Wharves Board proceedings and follow up as additional details become public.

One of the largest industrial investments in recent Galveston history is now underway.

On February 11, Texas Governor Greg Abbott announced that Davie Defense Inc. will expand shipbuilding operations in Galveston and Port Arthur, launching a $730 million investment expected to create more than 2,400 jobs. The project marks one of the largest industrial expansions on the Texas Gulf Coast in recent years and signals a renewed national focus on American maritime manufacturing.

A major shipbuilding expansion along the Texas Gulf Coast positions Galveston as a central player in the revitalization of American maritime manufacturing.

Governor Abbott announced on Feb 11 that Davie Defense Inc. will expand its shipbuilding capacity in Galveston and Port Arthur to construct Arctic icebreakers and other specialized vessels.

The expansion is expected to create more than 2,400 new jobs and represents over $730 million in capital investment across the two Gulf Coast communities. The State of Texas has extended a $21,771,000 Texas Enterprise Fund (TEF) grant to support the project.

What This Means for Galveston

For Galveston, the announcement signals more than job creation. It places the island at the center of a broader national effort to restore American shipbuilding capacity. Mayor Craig Brown called the investment “vital to our economic growth,” noting its implications not only for the city but for the nation’s security and industrial future.

Galveston’s assets—its deep-water port, maritime workforce, and industrial infrastructure—positioned it as a strategic site for expansion. According to local leaders, state-level support through the Texas Enterprise Fund helped secure the project amid interstate competition.

Joshua Owens, Executive Director of the Galveston Economic Development Partnership, described the investment as a catalyst: one that could attract additional defense and maritime manufacturers to the Texas Gulf Coast.

If realized at full scale, the expansion would represent one of the most significant industrial investments in Galveston in recent years.

A Strategic National Investment

Davie Defense CEO Kai Skvarla framed the project as part of a larger industrial strategy.

The company intends to make its Texas operations a cornerstone in the revitalization of the American shipbuilding industry, with a focus on polar-capable Arctic icebreakers—vessels critical to U.S. national security and Arctic operations.

The United States currently operates a limited fleet of heavy icebreakers. Expanding domestic capacity to build these highly specialized vessels is widely viewed as strategically important for defense readiness and commercial maritime strength.

Governor Abbott emphasized that Texas aims to become a “national hub for critical shipbuilding,” pointing to the state’s workforce and pro-business environment as competitive advantages.

Regional Impact: Port Arthur and Jefferson County

While Galveston stands to benefit substantially, Port Arthur will also play a major role in the expansion.

Port Arthur Mayor Charlotte M. Moses described the award as “a strong vote of confidence in our community’s workforce and resilience.”

Jefferson County Judge Jeff Branick highlighted workforce training partnerships, including collaboration with Lamar State College to prepare ship fitters and other skilled trades.

The dual-site approach suggests a coordinated Gulf Coast manufacturing corridor rather than a single-site expansion.

Understanding the Texas Enterprise Fund

The Texas Enterprise Fund is a performance-based grant program used to attract large-scale business relocations and expansions when Texas competes with out-of-state sites. Funds are awarded only when companies commit to specific job creation and capital investment benchmarks. In this case, the $21.7 million incentive supports a project bringing more than 2,400 jobs and over $730 million in private investment.

For perspective:

1. Capital Investment: $730+ million
2. State Incentive: $21.7 million
3. Job Creation: 2,400+ new positions

The ratio underscores the scale of private-sector commitment relative to public incentive support.

Workforce and Economic Implications

The projected 2,400 jobs will likely span:

1. Skilled shipbuilding trades
2. Engineering and technical roles
3. Manufacturing operations
4. Supply chain and logistics
5. Administrative and management positions

The multiplier effect—secondary jobs created through suppliers, service providers, housing, and local spending—could significantly extend the economic impact throughout Galveston County.

For a coastal city long shaped by tourism, hospitality, and energy sectors, the addition of large-scale advanced manufacturing further diversifies the local economy.

A Turning Point for the Gulf Coast?

This announcement aligns with broader conversations about American reindustrialization and national security preparedness.

If Davie Defense succeeds in making Texas a production hub for Arctic icebreakers and other specialized vessels, Galveston could emerge as a permanent anchor in a restructured domestic maritime industry.

The scale of the commitment—financial, industrial, and strategic—suggests this is not a short-term project, but a multi-decade positioning effort.

For Galveston, the question is not only how many jobs will be created, but how the island prepares:

• Workforce training pipelines
• Housing capacity
• Infrastructure readiness
• Long-term port planning

The answers to those questions will determine whether this moment becomes a headline—or a historic inflection point.

Davie Defense’s expansion places Galveston at the intersection of economic growth and national security.

If executed as announced, it represents one of the most consequential industrial developments on the Texas Gulf Coast in recent memory.

Galveston is on the brink of a transformational project. On the western end of Seawall Boulevard, where the road dips toward Cove View Boulevard and a pair of ponds still sit largely untouched, the developer Royal Crown Enterprise LLC has unveiled Sachs on the Seawall, a $540 million mixed-use complex that promises to reshape the city’s largest beachfront thoroughfare, create new housing, and reposition the island as a next-level destination for visitors and residents alike.

The Vision & Components

At its core, Sachs on the Seawall aims to blend four key elements—luxury hospitality, for-sale residences, workforce apartments, and retail/dining amenities—into a single cohesive site. Developed by Mohamed Eldawy through Royal Crown, the project spans an approximately 15–16 acre tract at 10302 Seawall Blvd.

Key features include:

• A 216-room Marriott Renaissance hotel, to sit prominently along the Seawall frontage.
• Two condominium towers, totaling about 150 units, providing luxury for-sale high-rise residences.
• A second phase of 236 apartment units, of which roughly 59 will be designated workforce housing and 59 earmarked for J-1 visa holders (international students/interns) – a novel nod toward inclusive housing in Galveston.
• Approximately 70,000 square feet of retail and restaurant space—five bars/restaurants are planned, including reported concepts like La Madeleine French Bistro (Houston Chronicle, Oct 5) and Floyd’s Cajun (according to local reports).
• About 4 acres of green space, including the preservation of the existing ponds and a nature-trail loop, coupled with the road and infrastructure improvements for the site.

As architecture firm PLACE Designers describes it, the project totals roughly 1.5 million sq ft of new construction.

Why It Matters for Galveston

For decades, Galveston’s west end has lagged the more-developed east half: fewer retail amenities, limited high-end lodging, and a stretch of Seawall still underserved by major mixed-use destinations. Sachs on the Seawall is pitched not only as a building development, but as a strategic plug-in for that missing piece. As Eldawy told the Houston Chronicle:

“We are creating a destination that can attract more visitors and create more jobs… It will attract more developers to the city of Galveston and write a new chapter for Galveston’s story.”

Economically, the project is expected to generate more than 2,300 jobs and—per local coverage—about $100,000 per month in hotel occupancy tax for Galveston.

From a tax-base perspective, the mixed-use blend of hotel, condos, apartments and retail could deliver one of the island’s largest private investments in recent years and provide long-term incremental revenues for city services, infrastructure and focal-area improvements.

Moreover, by integrating workforce and J-1 student housing on-site, the project signals a growing awareness of Galveston’s housing-workforce dynamics—especially in the hospitality and seasonal sectors. This could be groundbreaking for the island’s housing policy, which has often been heavily oriented toward luxury use rather than inclusive housing.

Hurdles & Community Considerations

Yet for all of its promise, Sachs on the Seawall also raises a number of key questions—and the community is watching closely.

Height and aviation concerns.

One of the tension points: the tallest tower will reach approximately 145 feet, a deliberate reduction from an earlier 155-foot plan to satisfy aviation clearance near Scholes International Airport. The airport, however, requested further reduction (to ~128 ft) citing potential flight-path risks. The architectural team maintained compliance with FAA standards, and the Planning Commission allowed the 145-ft height with a new requirement that future residents be notified of “excessive noise” in the area.

Infrastructure & traffic.

Seawall Blvd west of 61st Street is narrower and less trafficked than the eastern tourist stretch. Residents and city engineers alike are scrutinizing whether the existing roadway, drainage and access will handle the influx—both during construction and once the hotel/retail gets live. The developer has committed to roadway improvements and safety enhancements, yet residents remain alert to the risk of congestion or strain.

Scale vs island character.

A recurring concern among long-time Galvestonians is whether a large high-rise, glitzy mixed-use project might overshadow the island’s historic charm and scale. Some locals have likened such developments elsewhere to “resort canyons” and urged that Galveston retain its unique blend of history, beachfront living, and “walkability.” In response, the design emphasizes preserved green space, public access, and a mix of housing options—not just luxury. Still, the question remains: Will this project feel Galveston-native or more like a high-rise resort transplanted?

Execution risk.

Galveston has seen ambitious announcements before that have faltered or stalled. Some early forum posts on development boards reflect caution:

The city’s business community and residents alike are now relying on this project delivering—not just in blueprint—but in steel, glass, and open doors.

Photo credit: PLACE Designers Inc.

Anaylsis: Why This Will (or Won’t) Work

Why it could succeed:

• It fills a clear gap: west end of Galveston lacks a major destination node that blends lodging, living and dining.
• The Marriott brand provides credibility and pre-arranged hospitality infrastructure.
• The inclusion of workforce housing and mixed-income apartments gives the project a broader base of relevance to locals—not only second-home buyers.
• The tax-revenue and job-creation pitch align well with city priorities for growth and diversification away from purely cruise-oriented tourism.

Why challenges loom:

• The geographic location, though beachfront, is farther from the core Seawall activity zone; drawing sufficient guests, residents and diners out west will require strong marketing and differentiation.
• Market conditions: luxury condos are more vulnerable to economic shifts (interest rates, vacation-home demand, insurance/regulation issues in coastal zones).
• Infrastructure risk: if road, drainage, and traffic upgrades lag the development, public sentiment could sour.
• Execution complexity: bringing together hotel, retail, condo, apartment, public space and green-belt all at once is ambitious; delays in any leg could ripple.

Implications for Galveston’s Future

Sachs on the Seawall represents more than bricks and mortar—it is a statement that Galveston is ready to evolve. For The 1839’s audience, the project signals a few possible shifts:

• West end revitalization. Anchoring major development on the island’s under-developed side could diversify the geography of Galveston’s economy and reduce strain on the east end’s infrastructure.
• Mixed-income inclusion. The deliberate inclusion of workforce housing means the development isn’t only about luxury; it has broader community relevance—something civic stakeholders may appreciate.
• Public-private partnership model. While no major tax breaks are reported, the city’s collaboration on permitting and infrastructure investments positions this as a modern, coordinated build—one the island needs more of.
• Tourism-plus approach. It doesn’t just serve “tourists” passing through. It aims to keep visitors longer—and convert units into long-term residents. That shift from transient guest to part-time owner/resident could change demand patterns for Galveston.

Final Word

Sachs on the Seawall is bold. To win, it must execute—and it must deliver something more than what’s on paper. It must feel seamlessly Galveston-native while being globally appealing; it must draw both locals and visitors; and it must open on-time and on-budget (or close enough). If it does, it could mark a step-change for the island: a new destination, a new residential node, and a fresh chapter in Galveston’s story.

But if it stutters—if infrastructure lags, market conditions soften, or community engagement falters—it risks becoming a high-profile “what could have been.”

For now, the cranes have not yet risen. The decisions of the City Council, the resolve of the developer and the patience of the community will decide whether this vision becomes a landmark or a footnote. For Galveston’s future, Sachs on the Seawall may very well be among the most consequential developments in decades.

Editor’s note: This article is based on public records and on-the-record reporting. Details may change as approvals progress. Corrections? Email editor@the1839.com