Pateros to Twisp Transmission Line Project
We are pleased to announce that Division III of the Court of Appeals of the State of Washington ruled in favor of Public Utility District No. 1 of Okanogan County (the District) on Tuesday, May 7, 2013. The Court’s decision confirms that the District does in fact have the authority to condemn State school trust lands. With the ruling, the District is one step closer in obtaining easements necessary to construct a 27 mile transmission line from Pateros to Twisp. The appeal was filed by State of Washington Commissioner of Public Lands, Peter Goldmark, on behalf of the Department of Natural Resources (DNR), and by Conservation Northwest (CNW).
At this point in time, DNR and CNW have three options. First, they could file for reconsideration with the Court of Appeals, Division III by May 27th. Secondly, they could petition for discretionary review by the State Supreme Court, which must be done by June 6th. Or third, they could accept the decision of the Court of Appeals.
The project, which was started back in 1996, would construct a second transmission line into the Methow Valley. The second line would alleviate current issues with capacity and reliability. After 10 years of environmental review, the District issued the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) in March of 2006. A coalition of local citizens and environmental groups challenged the validity of the EIS. In November of 2006, Okanogan County Superior Court upheld the validity of the EIS. That decision was appealed to the Washington State Court of Appeals. In 2008, the Appellate Court upheld Okanogan County Superior Court’s ruling. A petition for review was then filed with the Washington State Supreme Court. The Court declined to accept review.
During 2009, the District started the process of acquiring right-of-way and various permits for construction of the project. The District was successful in negotiating easements from approximately 85 percent of the property owners along the route of the project. Eventually the District filed eminent domain proceedings against the remaining property owners, including the DNR. DNR challenged that action and claimed that the District did not have the legal authority to condemn the State lands. In 2010, Okanogan County Superior Court ruled in favor of the District and issued an order of Public Use and Necessity. A court date was set in 2011 to determine the value of the property; however, that hearing was “stayed” pending the determination of the appeal filed by DNR and CNW regarding the Superior Court’s decision to allow the condemnation. The appeal was further delayed pending a ruling on whether or not the Washington State Attorney General’s Office was required to file the appeal on behalf of DNR. The Attorney General had concluded that the law on the matter was clear and that an appeal was not justified. Early in 2012, the Washington State Supreme Court ruled that DNR could pursue an appeal with private outside legal counsel. Tuesday’s ruling supports and confirms the 2010 rulings of Okanogan County Superior Court.
The District is anxious to put this legal challenge behind us and begin the construction of a much needed project; however, the District must wait and see which of the above three options is selected by DNR and Conservation Northwest.
########