While reading David Hasemyer’s excellent report in Inside Climate News yesterday, we were flummoxed by the remarks of MPSC Bureau Administrator Gary Kitts. Asked by Hasemyer about the MPSC’s notification to landowners of the Line 6B project, a notice that landowners insist was severely defective, Kitts
said the agency’s lawyers drafted the notice and followed language used in hundreds of other notices.
“It met the statutory requirements of the state for notification,” he said.
Why does Kitts sound like he works for Enbridge? To our ear, “It met the statutory requirements of the state for notification” rings quite similarly to “meets or exceeds all applicable standards and regulatory guidelines.”
And then there’s this:
Kitts said he couldn’t comment on the landowners’ complaints because he hadn’t read the notice. He declined InsideClimate News’ request that he review the two-page document. He said he was unaware of the court challenge and had no knowledge that landowners were outraged over Enbridge’s right-of-way demands.
“I am certainly not going to go back and reassess a notice based on what may or may not be going on in the courts,” Kitts said.
The fact that Kitts refused to read the letter when asked to do so is bizarre beyond belief. If you’d like to send him your thoughts on his performance, you can reach him at kittsg@michigan.gov
The major problem I had with the notification was how the letter started with something like “to keep the adjacent and neighboring landowners informed.” If I had been one of Enbridge’s landowners I would not have thought the letter applied to me – I would have thought it was addressing my neighbors!
Thanks! My letter has been sent. Dolly, My favorite part is where it said REPLACE, figuring they would replace the pipe that was there already…in the same place. Sure it would be a mess for a while, but I didn’t want another Marshall spill in my neighborhood…or anywhere!