HomeMy WebLinkAbout040David W. Johnson
From
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
nana@hctc.com
Wednesday, March 04,201512:35 PM
David W. Johnson
Phil/Karen; gampc@wavecable.com; awharris@wavecable.com; bob@wiltermood.com; don
@ mahalo2u22.comi mzharle@hotmail.com; Barbara; John
HCEC Response David Johnson 2-19-15 offer
34-15 Response to David Johnson Jeff. Co..docx
Enclosed is our response to your offer to meet with us for a discussion of the Pleasant Harbor/Black Point DSEIS. Please
reply just so I know you received the attachment O.K.
Donna M. Simmons
HCEC
1
IIAR 0 4 am
Wednesday, March 4, 20L5
Dear Mr. Johnson,
On February 25,2075 the Hood Canal Environmental Council (HCEC) board considered your offer of
February 19 that you and the project engineer meet with HCEC representatives to discuss concerns
about the proposed Pleasant Harbor/Black Point resort. HCEC had submitted comments on January 5,
2015 to meet the extremely short deadline (considering the intervening Thanksgiving, Christmas and
New Year holidays) you allowed for comments on the Draft Supplemental Environmental impact
Statement for that project. Questions raised were why the county refused to extend the public
comment period and why you are shifting now into a non-public dialog with individual groups before the
EIS process is complete.
It was the consensus of the HCEC board that it is premature for Jefferson County staff to meet with
concerned groups and individuals before the Final Supplemental Environmental lmpact Statement is
published and that it would be improperto do so outside of a well-publicized public process, just as it is
improper for the county and the project proponent to meet together privately at this stage of the
evaluation process.
The HCEC board was particularly concerned about your statement, "Working together we can make this
project benefit everyone," which appears to show a prejudgment that the project will be approved and
a flagrant disregard of the correct process that you are charged with implementing, HCEC sees your
proper role as an impartial gatherer of environmental information to evaluate the proposal and not as a
project proponent.
After the SEPA review process is complete and the impact statement(s) published and any appeals about
the SEPA process are resolved, we trust that HCEC and other groups and individuals will be accorded
opportunities to help evaluate the proposed project, with the environmental impacts in mind, before a
decision is made on whether to approve the project, and what conditions should apply if it is approved.
ln the meantime, we await publication of the Final Supplemental EIS to determine if it adequately
addresses issues raised by HCEC and others,
We look forward to participating in the process at the proper time and forum.
Donna M. Simmons, President
Hood Canal Environmental Council