HomeMy WebLinkAboutC_Public_Comment_74.aPSE Energize Eastside Renton Hearing — January 8, 2020
Submitted by:
Sue Stronk
12917 SE 86th Place
Newcastle, WA 98056
Dear Mr. Hearing Examiner—
The EIS is does not comply with state law for this
Energize Eastside project.
As a Hearing Examiner, I would assume you would know that alone the DEIS is a
716 page document violating WAC 197-11-425 (4) which states in part:
“The EIS text shall not exceed seventy-five pages, except for projects of unusual scope or
complexity, where the EIS shall not exceed one hundred fifty pages.”
This should not be trivialized. As a reviewer, I claim this does not comply with
state law and residents are hindered in reviewing and understanding these
lengthly documents in providing enough time for educated commenting.
In addition, an overly long EIS like this is not as useful to agency decision
makers —such as yourself.
These lengthily documents have discouraged citizens and hearing examiners
from proper participation and created confusion.
There are almost 10,000 pages of documents for this Energize Eastside project!
Are you going to read them all?
The authors of these documents have failed miserably throughout this process.
When written for decision makers to read—this is too long and contains too
much PSE-biased perspectives on various alternatives, comments and quotes
by PSE hired consultants—which should be totally unbiased, before and after
pictures not representative of the full damaging impacts and pictures not
updated as PSE continued to change pole heights and designs.
PSE should not be writing the EIS! It is supposed to be an independent review
and it was not!
At the Bellevue Hearing, the Examiner said that he heard many testify that
Energize Eastside was not needed. He turned to the PSE staff and attorneys
and asked how long it would take for them to re-evaluate the project with
current data to determine if was still needed? PSE all huddled- whispering,
huddled, no response, huddled more. Then it was 5:10PM and the Examiner
closed the hearing for the day. The next day, it was not mentioned again, no
response by PSE was required to a very important question—the whole basis of
the citizen and CENSE opposition to PSE Energize Eastside.
After ruling in PSE’s favor for the project, the Hearing Examiner was quoted in
the Seattle Times that his decision was just “common sense”. Thus, proof that
he never looked into the opposing side testimony and documentation.
When an Examiner hears two opposing positions and both sides are under oath
—there is a liar in the room! Should not a good Examiner question and cross
examine evidence to find the truth—before just siding with the city staff for
which he represents and is paid. I hope you do a better job!