A dissenting report was submitted to Puget Sound Energy (PSE), signed by members of Energize Eastside’s Community Advisory Group (CAG) on Dec. 22. The report challenges PSE’s stance that the $200 million Energize Eastside project is the most cost-effective way to meet the future electrical needs of the Eastside. The dissenting report also noted that the CAG final report does not represent the wishes of the community. Only one-quarter of the voting members represented neighborhoods and many affected neighborhoods had no representation at all.
The signers of the dissenting report are: Bill Taylor, Liberty Ridge Homeowners Association/Renton; David Edmonds, Olympus Neighborhood Association/Newcastle; Darius Richards, Kennydale Neighborhood Association/Renton; Lindy Bruce, Sunset Community Association/Bellevue; Norm Hansen, Bridle Trails Representative/Bellevue; Scott Kaseburg, Lake Lanes Community Association/Bellevue; Steve O’Donnell, Somerset Community Association/Bellevue; Tim McHarg, Community development director and acting public works director/City of Newcastle.
McHarg said, “The City of Newcastle supports PSE in its efforts to deliver reliable and cost effective solutions to the Eastside’s energy needs for existing and future residents and businesses. However, the CAG process did not offer sufficient depth or breadth of data, analysis or alternatives to determine the best solutions to these needs. If pursued, the resulting recommendation would have significant and irreparable impacts on homes and businesses along the routes and to our entire community, since both routes run through the middle of Newcastle. Based on the information and process to date, city staff remain unconvinced that this is the only available option. We encourage affected cities and the public to participate in the Environmental Impact Statement process for Energize Eastside to ensure a clear understanding of the nature of the problem and the impacts of feasible alternative solutions.”
“The only decision the CAG was able to consider was a choice of transmission line routes,” noted Hansen. “Before the CAG process began, PSE dismissed any other options for meeting the future energy demands of the Eastside such as increased energy conservation efforts, decentralized generating plants with microgrids, additional transformers, or grid battery-back up to help ameliorate peak loads. Any attempts by representatives to bring these alternatives into discussion were promptly deemed out of order.”
O’Donnell said, “We think the CAG was a missed opportunity. At the beginning, we expected it would bring together the community and PSE, building an agreement on the best way to serve the Eastside’s energy future. Instead, it was just a way for PSE to promote the solution they had already chosen, and the results were divisive. Fortunately, citizens will have a real chance to participate during next year’s Scoping and Environmental Impact Statement process.”
