This is the season for annual report releases, and if your in-box is like mine, it's stacked full of glowing tributes to the accomplishments of Great Lakes-related agencies large and small. The casual reader, quite understandably, might flip through these reports and conclude that all is well. Indeed, if we're all doing such a great job, Great Lakes management and protection efforts must be just where we want them!

Sounds logical, but most will agree that we're far from where we need to be. How is this possible in light of all our individual accomplishments? Why does the whole appear to be less than the sum of its parts? In my view, it's because no single Great Lakes institution -- even if it performs in an exemplary manner -- is capable of achieving regional environmental and economic prosperity on its own. Simply put, even a team full of all-stars won't make the playoffs unless they work together.

The Great Lakes region has a well-deserved, global reputation for intergovernmental and public/private sector partnership. And, on an issue-specific basis, we've seen some tremendous accomplishments when all the players work together. We're now faced with our greatest challenge, however, and, hence, our greatest opportunity. We need (as I've argued in this column for the past year) a single, unified, large-scale legislative and appropriations package that offers Congress a vision and a means to achieve it. The Great Lakes Commission, on behalf of its member states, has taken its kick at the can with a "Great Lakes Program" identifying priority actions to achieve seven goals: cleaning up toxic hot spots, shutting the door on invasive species, controlling nonpoint source pollution, safeguarding our water resources, restoring our wetlands and critical coastal habitat, strengthening our decision support capability, and enhancing the commercial and recreational use of our waterways.

Is the Commission's "Great Lakes Program" the one and only answer? No, and it's not meant to be. Rather, it's our contribution to a larger effort. Other members of the Great Lakes team — congressional task forces, citizen environmental interests, user groups and business/industry associations — are all in the process of contributing, as well. In fact, it's gratifying to see such a heightened interest in a federal legislative and appropriations package that, at long last, might give the Great Lakes the attention they deserve.

Now comes the defining moment. Can we, as individual members of the Great Lakes team, find the common ground on our respective priorities and move a single package forward? I believe we can, and I believe we must. We need a "Priorities Summit" in the immediate future that will give our Great Lakes Congressional Delegation exactly what it needs for the 107th Congress and beyond. The building blocks, such as the Commission's "Great Lakes Program" and related efforts, are now being forged. The next step is to assemble them into a solid foundation. Then, and only then, will the whole be greater than the sum of the parts.

The Great Lakes Commission, chaired by Nathaniel E. Robinson (Wisconsin), is a nonpartisan, binational compact agency created by state and U.S. federal law and dedicated to promoting a strong economy, healthy environment and high quality of life for the Great Lakes - St. Lawrence region and its residents. The Commission consists of state legislators, agency officials, and governors’ appointees from its eight member states. Associate membership for Ontario and Québec was established through the signing of a "Declaration of Partnership." The Commission maintains a formal Observer program involving U.S. and Canadian federal agencies, tribal authorities, binational agencies and other regional interests. The Commission offices are located in Ann Arbor, Michigan.