Submitted by Ken Watts

The Idaho Transportation Department will hold meetings on the US-20 Ashton to SH-87 Project on Wednesday in Ashton (5-7 pm at the Community Center and Library) and Thursday, August 22 in Island Park (5-7 pm at the EMS Building).  ITD has down selected to a 4-lane, high speed, limited access, FREEWAY option only. They will show you configuration alternatives at the meeting, but only one option.  This is classic Delphi Technique where you are lead to believe you are providing meaningful input but you are just discussing variations to ITD’s preferred design, not what you really want.  Many people expected this  pre-determined outcome years ago.  The design screening team was dominated by engineers from ITD and their contractor/consultant engineering company.  The engineer’s primary goal for this project was to move vehicles from Ashton to SH-87 as fast as they could.  This requires high speed and limited access to the highway as stated by ITD.  It is also very expensive and results in profound environmental damage.  Engineers will take a lot of money from the taxpayers.

Imagine a different scenario where the design screening team was dominated by conservationists, environmentalists, and local citizens who use US-20 every day.  The outcome of the screening process would have been far different.  The purpose and need statements would have been different.  There would have been a requirement to minimize environmental damage.  There would have also been statements regarding minimizing the effects on the wildlife, cultural, social, historic, access, etc. aspects of the area.  This new screening team would likely have focused on real safety as it balanced the needs of the community.  This team would have rejected the four lane concept in the first screening meeting much like ITD rejected a two lane bypass concept.  They would have balanced the needs of those using the highway with the needs of the community and the environment.  It is quite possible they would have chosen the alternating passing lanes design put forth by the community and JUB Engineers.  This is a balanced approach which respects the environment while still making vast improvements to mobility and safety.  Quite possibly this new screening team would have prioritized stop lights at Elk Creek, Mack’s Inn, and Island Park Village to have a near term positive effect on safety.  ITD has proven that a stop light works very well on US-20 in Ashton and therefore will work very well in Island Park.  The 5-lane design is like adding a passing lane in each direction. 
​
When you go to the ITD meetings, do not be tricked by the Delhi Technique.  By very aware that you are only discussing the option that ITD wants you to discuss.  If ITD only puts forth the four lane, high speed, limited access option, tell them that you will support the “NO-BUILD” option rather than destroy the environment and the Island Park community.  You have farmore power than you realize now that Island Park is finding “common ground” in issues that affect the community.  A new and very effective coalition is forming!

Submitted by Ken Watts

​The Idaho Transportation Department (IDT) has scheduled the next public meetings on the US-20 Ashton to SH-87 project for August 21 in Ashton and August 22 in Island Park, from 5 to 7 PM.  “The purpose of these meetings is to share the latest information on the US-20 Ashton to SH-87 preliminary environmental study and gather public comment on alternatives.”  ITD has already down selected to a 4 lane, high speed, limited access FREEWAY option. They are trying to eliminate the alternating passing lanes (APL) community solution and the complete bypass solutions and go to the NEPA process with only one alternative.  This violates the spirit of the NEPA process.  ITD may say that there are alternatives but they are just different colors of lipstick on the same 4 lane FREEWAY pig!  ITD is forcing the community to support the “no-build” option rather than destroy the Island Park Caldera environmentally, historically, socially, and culturally.

The alternating passing lanes/super 2 option is viable even though ITD has tried to discredit it.  Consider that portions US-97 in the Bend, Oregon area are APL designs and they function very well.  US-97 has far more average daily traffic than US-20 in the Island Park Caldera.  In an 18 mile section of US-97, near Madras, the average daily traffic was approximately 16,000 vehicles in 2023.  ITD predicts that the average daily traffic on US-20 in 2050 (27 years from 2023) will be 9850 vehicles.  This is only 62% of the current traffic on US-97!  In a 2024 safety study, the Oregon Department of Transportation concluded that the level service on the two lane portions of US-97 near Madras was “C” (Level of service is rated from A to F with A being the best service.) and that there was no need to upgrade these sections at this time. This is in sharp contrast to ITD’s conclusion that in 2050 US-20 from Ashton to SH-87 would have a level of service of D, E, or F for the various highway sections even with the addition of many new passing lanes.  To be clear, US-20, in 2050, will have 62% of the 2023 traffic on US-97 but will have a far worse level of service.  How is this possible?  Both highways are APL designs, in seasonal recreational areas, with large fluctuations of traffic from January to July.

The devil is in the details.  A section of highway can have a poor level of service based on its design.  If the lanes are narrow, the shoulder is narrow, there are many access points, there are obstacles next to the road, etc. the computer programs used by designers will predict a poor level of service.  However, if the APL highway is designed properly, as in Oregon, it will have a good level of service and cost much less than a 4 lane FREEWAY.  During the public meetings, ask ITD about US-97 and US-20 and the level of service.  How can a highway section, with a passing lane, have a poor level of service?  It’s half a 4 lane.

One more point; the National Highway Administration Green Book states that an acceptable average annual daily traffic volume for a two lane road with passing lanes is 12,000.  Far above the 9850 that ITD predicts in 2050. 

Submitted by Ken Watts

In Charles L. Marohn, Jr’s book, Confessions Of A Recovering Engineer, Mr. Marohn makes the case that traffic congestion reduces fatalities and severe accidents.  His conclusions are based on his observations during the COVID-19 pandemic.  The following quotes are from his book. 

“January 21 (2020) was the first confirmed coronavirus case in the United States.  By early April, vehicle miles traveled in the United States had dropped by 46% from pre-COVID levels……  There were fewer people driving, but those who were traveling on country’s roads, streets, and stroads (street/road) were dying at higher rates.  In fact, the rate of crashes and deaths exploded, especially during months with the least amount of traffic.  During the first three quarters of 2020, the traffic fatality rate jumped to 1.25  per 100 million vehicle miles traveled, up from 1.06 during the same period in 2019.  In the second quarter, during the initial pandemic lockdowns and stay-at-home orders, the fatality rate hit 1.42, a terrible rate of carnage…..  The National Highway Transportation Safety Administration (NHTSA) has issued a series of emergency reports highlighting a rise in what they call ‘risky behavior’…….  It is as if the safety officials at the NHTSA believe that many Americans, in a bout of pandemic fatalism, decided to start drinking alcohol and doing drugs before going speeding in their cars without wearing a seatbelt……  This response is appalling --- almost a willful ignorance of what is actually happening, which is not difficult to discern.  Traffic congestion has a calming effect on traffic.  Sharing the road with many other vehicles forces a driver to slow down, either because they have to be prepared to react to more things going on, or because another vehicle is physically restraining them from full movement.  Slowing down vehicles saves lives.

 With the virus-induced drop in traffic volume, what is being revealed is the incredible level of over engineering and unsafe design that occurs throughout our entire transportation system.  Remove the traffic congestion that routinely thwarts high speeds and drivers naturally feel empowered to utilize the full capabilities that have been engineered for them.  Speeds go up, and so does the rate of fatalities.”

A few years ago the Island Park Preservation Coalition analyzed 5 years of accident data for US-20 in the Island Park area.  The results were very surprising.  July, the highest traffic volume month and the greatest traffic congestion month, was NOT the highest accident month.  Remarkably, September was the highest accident month.  This is entirely consistent with Mr. Marohn’s conclusions.  Traffic congestion saves lives and will reduce serious accidents.  If the primary goal for the redesign of US-20 in the Island Park area is safety, the Idaho Transportation Department may want to consider a lower level of service for the design and accept some congestion to save lives.

Guest commentary and report

Last week I was alerted to a public meeting notice concerning a major decision relevant to Island Park, that was published in the Standard Journal, a newspaper 50+ miles away.  The SJ is published in Madison County and is NOT distributed in Island Park.

Fremont County has one newspaper and it is The Island Park News.

Many have been watching for anything official.  Many have heard the rumors for months.  Many check the county map server two and three times a week watching for ownership changes relevant to the rumors. 

This buried public notice concerns Burtenshaw land on the west side of US 20, approximately 70 acres.  Rumor has it that Burtenshaw's have sold to The Marriott who in turn plan to build another large hotel and even a convention center there?  Many conjecture that the sale must be contingent on successful annexation and rezoning, as ownership is still in the Burtenshaw name and it is they who are requesting annexation and zoning changes.  Both rumored buyers and would-be sellers are aware that these lands have conservation values in addition to how they are currently zoned.  The entirety of lands on Henry's Lake Flat have critical land overlays relevant to wildlife, wetlands, open space, and continuity of conservation in this critical linkage that is identified as part of the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem.

Burtenshaw Land and Cattle Company properties on The Flat have been for sale for some time.  Many were hoping that The Nature Conservancy would buy these properties and have heard that TNC was interested but developers offered more.  On the east side of US 20, 430 acres have been sold to Imperial Investment LLC, based out of Dillon, Montana, agent Kevin Buttons.  Imperial Investments is a large hotel and land development company serving the hospitality industry and pursues luxury development projects with offices nationwide.  Whether true or rumor, it is also being speculated that development of the 430 will feature high end homes with airplane hangers instead of garages, complete with a private small jet airport to service these homeowners. This private jet flight path will put these aircraft flying over The Flat, The Nature Conservancy, and surrounding private and forest lands.  Both of  these ‘rumors’, if true, will result in significant impacts and land use changes.

In addition to concerns the private land sales present, we have the State of Idaho looking at development plans of their own.  The Idaho State Department of Lands is looking to expand it’s investment portfolio through new leasing opportunities on public land.  Once again, I encourage your own exploration of the county map server.  There is a lot of IDL land on The Flat.  Many have been working hard for the last two years trying to get IDL to address the growing negative effects and impacts of glamping operations in Island Park.  IDL is remaining committed to these leases and is looking to make them permanent.  We record requested the financial information on these leases.  Last year IDL made approx. $57 thousand dollars from the 3 commercial glamping operations in Island Park. The 3 commercial glamping operations made nearly $700 hundred thousand dollars.  These are monies that were taken directly from the Island Park economy.  In conversations, IDL has stated that if they are not allowed to pursue the greatest financial return off of the public lands that they manage, they might just have to sell them off.

IDL has provided no responsive inspections or oversight of glamping operations. State agency personnel did a quick tour of the 3 sites late last summer, they never got out of a car.  We went and conducted  comprehensive site tours of our own and provided pictorial evidence of the damage.  This evidence shows deep scarring and ever enlarging negative footprints on the land, open fire pits, large shipping style storage containers that are set on-site and remain year round, water containment tanks, propane tanks, lumber and above ground wood platforms, buried power lines, at one site a complete underground septic system has been installed that includes underground sewage lines and buried human waste containment tanks, new roads are being made, sagebrush destroyed, and trees are being felled to increase site capacity.  Here is a link to the share file that was created providing evidence of the damage to our public corpus lands.  

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1R8KjozIQRP8ZSzafTKR2LkQZ6elaqYeV?usp=sharing

IDL has not issued any punitive actions for the multiple leasing violations, to our knowledge.  A meeting that we have been waiting for months for still has not happened, we still wait for a response.  We have been told that the glamping operations are still planning to be in business here in 2024.  If you pursue IDL meeting notes, i.e. expanding the state land investment portfolio through new leasing opportunities, those ‘opportunities’ include glamping, cabins, short term rentals and commercial building leases/partnerships.  Looks like the state of Idaho intends to become a developer too, using our public lands to do it.  (See graphic)

If you attended the last public viewing opportunity hosted by ITD and state agency plans for a future 4 lane on US 20, you saw the virtual tour video mock-ups and the large developments they drew in along the highway…. finally now it’s all coming together…is this huge development direction that ITD is really looking to build a highway for?  Record requested meeting notes indicate they are having conversations about big future development coming to Island Park.  Question:  Have they ALL been talking and planning together all along? 

Fremont County is not going to stand up to protect our own county codes and comprehensive planning vision either.  Our own county has approved serious examples of spot zoning and property-specific-favorable zoning and county code changes and has approved applications for developments that are being allowed where conservation values and protective overlays exist.  One application at a time, Tom Cluff is working with developers at the county level to get private development plans approved through our county commissions.  Over the last 5 years Fremont County has lost over 16% of our agricultural and rural landscape to development.

On a personal note, I attempted to appear before the P&Z Commission to address these concerns.  Tom Cluff denied me an opportunity to do so.  He would not allow me on the agenda unless I told him what I wanted to say beforehand.  In fact, at the end of our back and forth, he told me that my request was  ‘monumentally stupid’. (He used the term ‘stupid’ twice).  Further he stated, “that if I remained committed to the absurd idea of appearing before the P&Z without first giving him all of my information, he had no interest in hearing from me and I was not to approach him, his office, or any of his office personnel.” I fully intended to hide nothing from the P&Z. I was not bringing any application that required his review. I wanted to unburden all of these concerns and leave them with Fremont County P&Z, who IS TASKED with protecting the integrity of our county guiding policies, and also with determining compliance with our county codes and comprehensive planning.  I intended to plead for our county commissions to investigate how we could weigh all of this with those plans.   

Tom Cluff’s conduct stands in violation of multiple Fremont County Personnel Policies and it is my contention that his conduct is highly unprofessional, rude and insulting, and stands as combative and non-compliant behavior.  (Pg.8-12)
https://www.co.fremont.id.us/DocumentCenter/View/1392/2021-01--Updated-Personnel-Policy

It should also concern you, and you should be aware of two important facts. Fremont County currently has not fulfilled the code requirement of ‘no less than 7 and no more than 11’ P&Z commissioners.  Currently, we have 6.  The county website has not been updated to reflect that Commissioner Lawson no longer serves.  In addition, Tom Cluff has been acting as the hearing officer for Fremont County without the authority to do so since 2018.  A fact he has verified himself.  Any approval giving him this authority must be voted on by a full P&Z Commission on a yearly basis.  County Officials have been made aware of these facts and yet still operate thusly.  All decisions made by either the non-code compliant P&Z commission or the hearing officer/administrator that is acting without authority, leave open the opportunity of Fremont County being vulnerable to challenges and lawsuit.  Concerned and qualified members of the public who have been trying to correct our P&Z issues are being ignored, denied access, have had their own applications to serve on P&Z rejected, and the P&Z office has RECRUITED as a department, preferred commissioners to fill positions.

I was also told recently in a public meeting that I should proceed forward trying to help this county by doing what I do best, putting my concerns to the press and the court of public opinion. I was told citizen advisory roles are not welcome, that people don’t want to attend meetings or care to be informed, that we elect public officials to do all that thinking and work for us, and that the problem with citizen advisory committees are that some of them ‘grow’ to think that they ‘have teeth’.  This county should not dissuade or prevent any citizen from the Constitutionally guaranteed roll of public participation in our government.  Fremont County should not fear any conversation that The Public that elects and funds them wants to have … whether it comes with teeth or not.  

In conclusion,  it sure looks like a huge combined force is bearing down upon, and/or failing to answer the pleas and concerns of the quiet little community of Island Park.

We have not been invited to know or participate, and it appears are also unwelcome in these important conversations that WILL IMPACT US ALL.  We deserve a role in those conversations.  All of these ‘plans’ are dependent on annexation, zoning changes, local, county and regional plans, and are counting on the continuing vacuum that has so far been unresponsive and challenging to the environmental concerns that are screaming in the silence of absent voices.  

The character and open space of the iconic Henry's Lake Flat and preservation protections we all assumed would stay in place forever are quietly being subverted.  At every level, private, county-county wide, and state, developers are partnering and making plans that will forever change this beautiful place.  In the dead of winter they make their most important moves hoping most of us won’t be here during winter season and that only few of us remain who are able to watch, see, and sound any alarm in time to make a difference.

This is an all hands on deck call…everyone who loves Island Park and hopes to preserve and protect it…I hope you are listening?  Please leave the sidelines, walk on the field and plant your feet, you are needed in the game.

Thank you for considering this information.
Leanne Yancey

February 10, 2024
 
Lisa Applebee P.E.
Idaho Division, Federal Highway Administration
3050 Lake Harbor Ln Suite 126
Boise, Idaho 83703
 
Subject: US Highway 20 – Ashton to SH87
 
The Island Park Preservation Coalition does not believe that the Idaho Department of Transportation complied with either the spirit or intent of the Planning and Environmental linkages process on the US 20 Ashton to SH 87 highway project. This letter is intended to document the shortcomings and request that you do not approve the PEL product developed by ITD.

“Planning and Environmental Linkages, or PEL, is a collaborative and integrated approach to transportation decision-making that considers environmental, community, and economic goals early in the transportation planning process.” The Idaho Department of Transportation’s PEL process for the US 20 Ashton to SH 87 highway project has many shortcomings. The PEL process must consider the following topics according to the Federal Highway Administration:
“Visual
Agricultural and Forest Resources Air Quality
Biological Resources Cultural Resources Geology and Soils
Hazards and Hazardous Materials Hydrology and Water Quality
Land use and Transportation Planning Noise
Social and Economics”
 
Many of these topics have not been seriously considered by the Idaho Department of Transportation. ITD has not included the independent technical experts needed in the alternative screening process in order to honestly consider these topics. The alternatives screening group was made up predominantly of engineers from ITD and Horrocks Engineers.
 
There were only a handful of elected representatives involved in the screening process and only in the second phase. No private citizens or non-government organizations have ever been involved or invited into the screening process. The local NGOs and private citizens would have added a great deal of technical value to the process. ITD would say they held public meetings to get local input from citizens and NGOs. The format for the few public meetings that ITD has offered, have been walk-through information stations.  Paper comment forms were provided to the public. Presentations and question and answer sessions were not provided. This is far different from being involved in a constructive meeting and constructive screening process. Non-involvement results in failure to gather critical local knowledge and opinions on alternatives that were considered and what viable alternatives may or may not make it through the screening considerations. Neither ITD nor Horrocks Engineers represented the public’s interest in the screening process and they do not represent the impact population or effected stakeholders. This is very evident when you consider the alternatives that ITD and Horrocks decided to advance. With 20+ engineers in the screening group, the few elected representatives were always out voted and the most expansive and expensive engineering choices advanced. This was totally a biased process. It should also be pointed out that Horrocks Engineers has a profound conflict of interest because they profit from selecting the more complex highway designs. In this case, a four lane, high speed, limited access FREEWAY, in an extremely sensitive environmental area has been advanced in the screening process while viable and preferred alternatives the public has tried to offer, were being rejected.
 
Very significant requirements have been neglected in the process. ITD did not include any substantial analysis or documentation for the critical, required issues (Visual, Agricultural, Forest Resources, Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Geology and Soils, Hazards, Hazardous Materials, Hydrology, Water Quality, Land use, Noise, Social, and Economics issues) in any of their public meetings or online. ITD said they did a “high level analysis” of these issues but have provided little public documentation to support this claim.
 
US Highway 20 has historical national significance as the “longest main street in America”. The history of US 20, originally wagon tracks that connected the hamlets of Pine Haven, Pond’s Lodge, Macks Inn, Island Park Village, and the original homesteads and Army Post of the Henry’s Lake area, known as ‘settlers islands’ all became what is now known as Island Park and the city’s main street. As the current US 20 travels through Targhee Pass it has become an asphalt highway that was first the trail Chief Joseph and The Nez Perce escaped into Yellowstone on as they fled the advance of Howard’s Army.
 
These are serious issues for local business people and the residents of the larger Island Park community whose financial future and valued historic past are being risked.

FHWA states: “To be viable in NEPA, a PEL study must involve interested State, Local, Tribal, and Federal agencies as well as the public, document relevant decisions in a form that is identifiable and available for review during the NEPA scoping process and can be appended to or referenced in the NEPA document, and be accepted by the NEPA lead agencies. ITD has clearly violated the spirit and intent of the PEL process. These violations have clearly compromised the process. Undoubtedly, the flawed process has resulted in not moving the best and publicly supported alternatives forward.
 
This contention is most evident in the almost total dismissal of the passing lanes alternative that was advanced by the Island Park Community. Not only was this alternative not seriously considered, it was supported by prior state analysis that existed, but was hidden from the public and not offered as an initial alternative. The community solution, as it was suggested and then proven as scientifically supported is based almost entirely on the JUB Engineers solution that was funded by ITD in 2019, at a cost of $3.25M. It should be noted that the entire screening process was compromised when ITD Chief Operating Officer, Dan McElhenney stated to the ITD board, that “ideally this should be a four lane highway”. This statement was made in January 2020, months before the US 20 PEL began. This is an obvious pre-decisional statement and in subsequent ITD board meeting notes one can see District 6’s further pre-decisions positioning the PEL and preferred multiple lane outcome, which definitively compromises the entire PEL and NEPA process.
 
The Island Park Community solution provides an acceptable solution to any perceived issues with “travel time and delays, congestion, safety – specifically, with the goal of reducing the number and severity of crashes, and outdated design standards”, for over 20 years. This statement is based on the $ 3.25M JUB Engineers study conducted for ITD in 2019. The community solution (additional passing lanes, rumble strips, tree cut back, stop lights, lower speeds, widening shoulders, wider stripes, improved signage, improved paint highway painted turning lanes, solar lights in wildlife areas, and more message boards warning of hazards) can be implemented at a fraction of the cost ($700,000,000) of a four lane freeway.
 
The community solution is much better from an environmental perspective as well. Forests and rangeland do not have to be destroyed. There is much less risk of contaminating ground water and polluting the Snake River Aquifer. The Fremont County Wetland map identifies much of the 33 miles along US 20 in Island Park as a wetland. There will also be less risk to wildlife when considering the community solution has reduced highway widths, slower speeds, stop lights and fewer ancillary roads.  A massive open pit aggregate mine  will not be needed in the Island Park Caldera in order to advance a US 20 4 lane freeway design. And yet this elegant solution was not even seriously considered!
 
ITD predicts that traffic volume on US 20 Ashton to SH 87 will increase linearly by about 4% per year in the future. There is no doubt that Yellowstone National Park will implement a reservation system in the near future making the 4% prediction totally erroneous. The NPS is currently trying to determine a future where Yellowstone National Park and it’s own limited infrastructure can best accommodate tourism impacts.
 
The future planned improvements to Yale-Kilgore Road will have a positive impact on overall and local traffic volume on US 20. If speed limits are selected to improve traffic flow and safety, and traffic lights are installed to improve intersection safety, truck traffic will likely be reduced as the trucks desiring the quickest route will likely use I-15. It should be remembered that when I-15 was suggested, a prominent purpose and need cited at the time, was to provide a truck route for eastern Idaho. I-15 should be considered the primary truck route, not US 20 as US 20 is the primary resident connector for the local communities north from Idaho Falls to the Montana state line. It should be noted that there is heavier traffic on US 20 north of Ashton to Montana about 5% of the total hours of an entire year. The other 95% of the time, this segment of US 20 has much lower traffic.
 
The best investment of valuable and finite highway infrastructure dollars should be paramount to both oversight and management agencies and their contractors. A four lane freeway would be a costly (~$700,000,000) and a substantial over-build 95% of the year.
 
The Island Park Preservation Coalition requests that you REJECT the results of the US 20 Ashton to SH -87 PEL process. The process has been flawed from the beginning as pointed out in this letter. To move forward with this flawed PEL process would jeopardize the follow on NEPA process and certainly result in long delays and considerable additional costs and possibly litigation.
 
Ken Watts, Chairman
Island Park Preservation Coalition
P.O. Box 361
Island Park, ID 83429

Submitted by Ken Watts

This article is a compilation of what Teri Ehresman, Jan Neisch, and I heard from ITD regarding the US Highway 20 project, Ashton to SH 87.  We had difficulty hearing everything that was said because of the sound quality.  Jan Neisch called ITD to get some clarification. 

The following is what I thought I heard from ITD: The December meeting is canceled.  The next meeting will be a screening meeting in June 2024.  Comments from the public were that IP would be destroyed.  Will move forward with a phased approach – small segments, not the whole 30 miles.  Complete all over time up to 2050.  Will address problem areas first, Elk Creek, Mack’s Inn, IP Village areas. For Elk Creek, add two south bound lanes and keep north bound lanes.  No discussion of stop lights. Will seek “local” (adjacent) input from the public on each phase.  Not public meetings.  Commissioner’s want public meetings but ITD seemed reluctant. Solutions in problem areas will be 4 lane solutions, not stop lights.  Intermediate remedy (phased approach) is 5 years + out on NEPA.  Re-planning entire project.  Have designs ready when funding is available.  Continue to engage more people/public.  Discussion of interchange at Ashton Hills Estates area. 4 options. Construction 2024 likely. No public meeting, just locals.  Avoiding public meetings.  Court case on wetlands is delaying projects.  Big issue with large number of wetlands in the Caldera.

The following is from Teri Ehresman: What they told the commissioners was they cancelled the December public meeting. The next meeting will be in June. They have decided on a phased approach over time to meet the 2050 goal. They mentioned starting the NEPA process on some of the big issues like Elk Creek intersection, Mack’s Inn and Island Park Village. They mentioned Elk Creek intersection leaving the 2 lanes as is for the businesses and look at building two southbound lanes at that intersection. That was the example they used. They want to start NEPA and get the projects on the state schedule so when NEPA is complete they have $$ to start the projects. They said they have had lots of interest and feedback on the project. Seems to me they are trying to rush to NEPA.

The following is a summary from Jan Neisch’s:  ITD’s Drew Meppen and Greg Bowman came to coordinate with the commissioners on four of their projects.  Specifically they wanted feedback on whether to make the stripping and lane changes on Ashton Hill this spring or wait until 2025.  Instead, the commissioners asked that they reach out with information yet another time to the homeowners on the Hill and gather the Sheriff’s and his deputies’ input. ITD is now discussing how best to do so, perhaps via flyers and/or a zoom meeting. They might even first decide which of the four alternatives to pursue and present that for comments.  These extra meetings, however, will not delay spring changes – just decide for sure which changes will be made.  Concerning the Ashton to 87 corridor plan for 2050, they are extending their decision timeline until June in order to finish assessing all the public comments and give them time to plan how they can phase the project to lessen the impact of the changes that are coming. They want one plan to cover current safety issues and projected traffic growth expected by 2050, believing clarity in the beginning will save time later.  Next step? After they finish their plans in June, the total project will start the NEPA (National Environment Policy Act) process that can take 5-7 years. This means that no changes will happen until at least 2029.  But, what about immediate traffic safety issues?  They have to wait. Meanwhile, ITD will be inserting the projects in their internal timelines so that as soon as NEPA is concluded the work can proceed. Until then be extra safe at Elk Creek, Mack’s Inn, and Island Park Village intersections.
 
The three of us heard different things but this summary should be useful to you.

Submitted by Ken Watts

The Fremont County Republican Central Committee held its November meeting on Thursday, November 9th.  The key topic on the agenda was the republican presidential caucus in Idaho. Sharon Smith provided training on the caucus process.  The caucus will be held on March 2, 2024 at 12 noon Mountain time.  The caucus will be held in St. Anthony.  All 13 Fremont County precincts will be combined because of the smaller number of voters in our county.  An Idaho picture ID must be provided or a passport to vote.  Student IDs will not be accepted.  Ms. Smith said to expect about 10% of the registered republican voters to attend.  This is dismally low.  There will be just one vote.  The candidates can provide a 5 minute video for the voters to view.  They have to pay $50,000 to air the video and this can be reduced to $25,000 if the candidate is in the state on March 2, 2024.   The Idaho delegates will be apportioned by the percentage of the vote if no candidate receives 50%, plus, of the vote.

The elephant in the room for the people of Island Park was that there will be no mail in ballots or absentee ballots.  You MUST attend the caucus in St. Anthony to vote for your presidential preference.  I asked if I can assign a proxy to vote for me.  The initial answer was NO!  I objected to this.  Many people in Island Park and across the state spend the winter in southern climates.  They will not be in Idaho.  In addition, the “shoulder season” begins in Island Park about the first of March and many businesses close and people leave for much needed vacations.  Ms. Smith stated that she will take this issue to the State Republican Central Committee but she also stated that the issue had been discussed previously.  I expect NO action on this issue.  Very disappointing! 

How did we get to the point where we will not have a presidential primary election in Idaho, but rather a caucus that will leave 90% of the voters out?  Well, fingers are pointing many directions and assigning blame.  Some members of the Republican Party wanted to move the presidential primary for May to March to make Idaho more relevant.  There argued that the candidate is already picked by May and therefore the candidates pay no attention to Idaho.  Idaho only has 32 delegates to the Republican convention.  The Idaho Legislature argued that it would be expensive to hold a separate presidential primary election in March.  A date for the election was not set by the 2023 legislature and they adjourned with no action.  There were attempts to hold a special session of the legislature to address the issue but they failed.  Cost of the special session may have been the issue.  You can decide who to blame.  It seems like there is plenty of blame to go around.

Who is the big loser?  The registered republican voters who have no opportunity to attend the caucus in St. Anthony are the big losers.  Few are likely to drive the 60 miles to St. Anthony from Island Park, even if you are in the State.  I believe there is still time to implement a mail in ballot process so that  registered republican voters are not disenfranchised.

Submitted by Ken Watts

(Credit to the Mountain States Policy Center)
 
Who should decide how public land is developed in Idaho – local elected officials or unelected bureaucrats in Washington D.C.?  A new congressional bill introduced by Idaho Senator Jim Risch would place that decision back in the hands of Idaho policymakers, giving residents a means of blocking out-of-state interests.

New York investment company, LS Energy is concerned about the habitat of native species but not the homes and history of Idaho communities. Seeking to invest in wind energy projects, LS Energy created Magic Valley Energy to manage the currently proposed Lava Ridge Wind Project. LS Energy says it would benefit the local community, but the local community disagrees.

LS Energy considered many locations but wanted to avoid damaging undisturbed habitats to protect native species in other regions. LS Energy decided that due to fire damage and existing habitat disruption in the Magic Valley, the site 20 miles north of Twin Falls would be a good location for a 400-tower wind farm over 197,474 acres of federally, state, and privately owned land. One of the largest in the country. These 400 wind towers would truly tower over the landscape, with heights rivaling the size of the Seattle Space Needle. The project is expected to power 300,000 homes and provide significant tax revenues. However, most of this power is expected to be exported to other states.

The proposal was submitted to the Bureau of Land Management in 2020, and the local citizens are strongly opposed. At the close of the public comment in April 2023 11,000 submissions were registered by the BLM, and Magic Valley residents are united against the project citing disregard for local historical sites, economic concerns, environmental impacts, and the low aesthetic appeal of looking at over 197,000 acres of windmills.

But these voices of local impacted citizens could go unnoticed because the final decision rests with the Bureau of Land Management federal employees. Unelected officials, not accountable to the voice of local Idaho residents, will decide what version (if any) of the Lava Ridge Wind Project is approved. Current Biden Administration preferences for renewable energy projects is likely to favor wind and solar plans, like Lava Ridge, over the voices of impacted communities and citizens.

As out-of-state investors and federal land managers push for cumbersome energy projects and ignore the objections of residents, proposed legislation by Idaho Senator Jim Risch would stop this disregard. U.S. Sens. Jim Risch and Mike Crapo and Reps. Mike Simpson and Russ Fulcher supported, “Don’t Develop Obstructive Infrastructure on our Terrain Act.”

The proposed ‘Don’t Do It’ legislation if enacted gives a voice and the means for states to block unwanted energy projects. Favoring local communities and state voices over federal initiatives is a win for citizens. The Don’t Do It bill would empower state legislatures with the ability to deny proposed energy projects on public lands. Idaho’s Governor Brad Little voiced on X, “Idahoans have been loud and clear on Lava Ridge: Don’t DO IT! States need to be at the table driving new energy resources, and this legislation will make the federal government more responsive to states’ voices in future energy development.”

Instead of leaving the final approval of energy projects up to bureaucrats and out-of-state investors, states should be empowered with the ability to decide how they want their communities to look and how they will meet their own energy goals. Local citizens need a way for their voices to not only be submitted for comment but to be considered by elected officials that have to answer to them, not by bureaucrats in their offices in DC, waiting for the next administration change to dictate a priority shift. The Don’t Do It legislation would give local communities a say in what happens in their habitat, a step forward for good government.

(Do you see the parallels with the US 20 Ashton to SH 87 highway project in Fremont County?)

Submitted by Ken Watts

(This is a reprint of an article from 5-12-22.)

On Thursday night, May 5th, the Fremont County Republican Central Committee hosted a meet and greet the candidates forum at the Island Park EMS building.  The candidates met with the public before and after the forum.  The forum included candidates for the Idaho District 31 senate and representative seats and candidates for the Fremont County Commissioners (opposed) seat.  About 100 members of the public attended the forum.

The opposed candidates provided opening and closing remarks and answered questions from the public.  The questions were selected from the input by the Central Committee based on the most relevance to Island Park issues.  The following questions were asked of the Senate candidates: 1. “How do you feel about changing the way property is taxed? What do you envision as a solution?” 2. “Changes from the Idaho Transportation Department at the local DMV have taken away some services provided locally in the past.  Would you be willing to try restore some local services while in office?”  3. “State passed a law on Short Term Rentals forcing them in communities.  How about tweeking (sic) the law to limit only 10 people per residence.”

The following questions were asked of the State Representative candidates: 1. “Our current & former Administrations have allowed collaboration with NGO’s to engage with our state agencies to drive projects wanted by outside interests on local citizens.  What do you intend to do to bring federal& state agencies into check and allow the people a voice for what happens in their own communities?” 2. “If Island Park opposes four lanes for US 20 Ashton to SH 87, will you support their position and oppose four lanes?” 3. “Would you be willing to work to repeal HB216 on transient rentals and return regulation to the cities and counties?”  The Senate and Representative candidates expressed their willingness to address the issues presented to them via the questions.

The following questions were asked of the Fremont County Commissioner candidates: 1. “What, in your opinion, is the most pressing problem in Fremont County?  What are your ideas for solving the problem?” 2. “Will you direct the P&Z Commission to hold public meetings in Island Park regarding the transient rental ordinance prior to holding a public hearing.  The public should have the opportunity to provide their input.” (All three candidates answered, yes.) 3. “Would you support having an advisory vote on four lanes for US 20.  The question would be; do you oppose or support?” (All three candidates answered; yes.)

Thanks to the Fremont County Republican Central Committee for hosting this event.  It was a great opportunity to get to know the candidates better.

(It should be noted that the Fremont County Commissioners have not supported an advisory vote on US 20 nor have they sent a letter of opposition to the freeway.  Promises were made to the voters but they have not been kept.  Our State legislators have not openly opposed the freeway.)

This scheme is nothing more than an illegal way to deprive Americans from using both private and public land, and using their money to enrich the corporate world.

As part of this administration's agenda to implement the international 30x30 plan, that is, placing 30% of land into conservation by 2030, it only makes sense to weaponize federal agencies.  In this particular case it is the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS). 

One perfect place to execute this plan is in Montana, called the Missouri Headwaters Conservation Area.  While this map shows the boundary map clearly within the Montana border, it isn't clear what that red boundary line extending into Idaho means, but it does capture Centennial Valley.

First some background, but one almost needs some sort of economic background to get the gist of what is being done. 

Globalists began looking at the environment as having "Natural Assets", meaning the environment could be used as justification for economic gain. a "key to sustainable development".  Natural assets are defined as assets of the natural environment that consist of wild or produced biological assets, land, water, ecosystems, subsoil, and air.  Basically anything in the environment.  These assets are sometimes called "ecosystem services". 

Using climate change hysteria, globalists plotted the latest snow job called Nature Based Solutions (NBS).  Since climate change allegedly destroys everything, NBS "are actions to protect, sustainably manage, or restore natural ecosystems", or natural assets, especially if those solutions address societal challenges such as water security and disaster risk reduction, while providing biodiversity benefits.

Alas, since natural solutions receive little financing for preventing greenhouse gas emissions, globalists designed a new financial market that uses the environment for economic gain.  The White House is on board with its National Strategy plan.  Initial funding for this atrocity came out of the 2021 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act which was really intended to fundamentally transform America towards the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG). 

On page 112, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) was allocated $1 billion for a "pre-disaster mitigation program" which of course will be used for nature based solutions, promising "monetary...benefits...economic growth, green jobs, increased property values and better public health", all hornswoggle.  In this April, 2022 Executive Order 14072, Section 4, the administration announced its plan for nature based solutions, which was followed in November, 2022 by the White House Nature Based Solutions Resource Guide.  Of course this idea didn't come from the people, it came out of the United Nations (UN) COP 27 as a way to fight "climate change" and increase resilience to life.  Ah yes, this president's brilliance will lead to protection for all.  And the World Economic Forum (WEF) is drooling over how much money corporations can suck from us with this sham they created.

Heck, the White House has already put into place a "roadmap" to assist moneygrubbing schmuck globalists by "Unlocking funding for domestic and international projects, and encouraging Federal agencies to do more to prioritize nature-based solutions in funding decisions."  For those who are morbidly curious, a full review of potential funding avenues can be found here.  No matter which way you look at it, the cost will be borne by us serfs to the elite.

The really tough part in understanding this is how profits are made.  One thing for sure, it does involve restoration, protection, and conservation of nature.  But money will be made now that new economic markets have been created.

Natural Asset Companies (NAC) were created for this specific purpose, "to develop an asset class that converts the value of nature and the ecoservices designed to sustain it into financial capital."  An NAC allows "investors to financially back services that directly benefit the planet".  Intrinsic Exchange Groups (IEG) are a type of company "whose equity captures the value of natural assets and the ecosystem services they produce."  IEG basically determines how much value will be assigned to nature. 

Wall Street is on board but Whitney Webb hit the nail on the head, "The ultimate goal of NACs is not sustainability or conservation – it is the financialization of nature, i.e. turning nature into a commodity that can be used to keep the current, corrupt Wall Street economy booming under the guise of protecting the environment and preventing its further degradation", her words validated by this author.  It is nothing more than another form of Environment, Social Governance (ESG).

This author does a fine job in explaining with one example how to make money from this scam when it comes to water.  Buy property, create a mitigation bank (buy cheap land and restore it to some ecological state that's deemed to be functional), and investors come in.  As he explains it, it is like building houses only you are building wetlands.  It is no wonder the corporate saturated WEF supports NBS.  The World Bank might have given NBS a more appropriate name in this video, "green infrastructure".

Enough of the economic lesson, back to Montana.  The American Stewards for Liberty wrote an article about this land grab by the feds, indicating that central Idaho will be involved in it.  While the article describes the agenda to connect protected lands together in Montana, Idaho is in the crosshairs for the same expansion, that area being within the red box in the map.  Private land will also be usurped in this scam whether voluntary or not and property owners will be forced to comply with restricted and controlled land use.  Private property rights will go down the drain.  The article also talks about NACs and describes hybrid areas as part of the plan.

At the end of the article there is an excellent link that explains how this whole scheme is only about monetizing nature, and notes the same bewilderment, "no investment professional can explain how investors will make money", but rest assured, these scallywag globalists are figuring it out.

Both the USFWS and Bureau of Land Management have conservation areas.  However, according to the Department of Interior "national conservation areas are designated by Congress" (page CRS-8) and only by the Bureau of Land Management, not the USFWS.  Is the USFWS using a slight of hand by leaving out "national" or mixing national in with other wording?  Or is this really just another White House violation of the law?

Public scoping on this action ends November 27, 2023.  The American Stewards article has recommendations for action at the end.  Although the deadline for amendments has passed, H.R. 4821, sponsored by Rep. Mike Simpson, has little chance of passing.  Regardless, Idahoans should contact congressional representatives (especially Simpson) and state representatives, ask them what Idaho can do for protection against this 30x30 agenda, the proposed conservation area, and ban NAC activity.  Perhaps everyone should consider putting together a bill for state reps to sponsor.

Definitely send an email to the USFWS at [email protected] and let them know it appears they are proceeding without congressional approval, and if anything, this action requires an Environmental Impact Statement.

There is so much more to be written on this as it does extend into every aspect of our lives.  This isn't being done for the environment, it is about taking away land use through conservation easements and ruling over how people live.

You did not bear the shame.
You fought back.
You gave the great,
Forever tireless
Sign of change,
Sacrificing your glowing life
For freedom,
Justice, and honor.