Re: EPA Dialogue Summary: Introduction/Goals (July 10)

[Myron Lee <mlee@dot.state.ut.us>]

You know . . . I really didn't want to get deeply involved here. I just =
wanted to suggest that the EPA's PI processes of the past have been viewed =
by the general public as a useless forum because by the time they are =
involved, decisions have already been made, it will cost too much to =
change things at that point if a constituent has a valid idea and that the =
only reason EPA (or any other government body) holds a public hearing is =
so they can say that they followed the letter of the law.=20

I would suggest that the public be invited to participate in decision =
making early and continuously in any EPA process. : Don't just target the =
activists with a "legal notice" two weeks in advance of the meeting, but =
actually go to the meetings of local chambers of commerce, lions' clubs, =
church groups, civic groups, etc. and tell them what you have and how =
their comments could make a difference.

I have seen a great deal of success in programs where governmental =
entities went to the board of realtor meetings, made a presentation and =
asked for comment. Then they repeated the process with other civic groups. =
. . all instead of inviting the "public" to attend some innocuous, boring =
and inconvenient EPA public hearing.

That's all I wanted to say. Go to the people instead of asking the people =
to come to you. . . and then help them understand how their participation =
actually helped.

Thanks for the opportunity to comment.

Myron