Skip to main content
Keep Idaho Beautiful Informed Kootenai Join us on Facebook (opens in a new tab)
No Huetter Bypass: Help keep Idaho beautiful by supporting the local and state efforts that shift bureaucrats' actions back to serving the community and the people they serve.

No Huetter Bypass · Communications

Email to ITD: Raw Data Request and Escalation Letter Signers

by 3 min read

Summary

The No Huetter Bypass Group replies to ITD District 1, asking for the raw Level 2 data in a usable format rather than simplified "smiley" faces, sharing the escalation letter sent to members, and listing the first 22 signers.

Why it matters: The group asked ITD for the raw screening data in a usable format, not only simplified summaries, and sent its escalation letter with 22 signers.

From: Brian Rogers
To: Carrie Ann Hewitt (Idaho Transportation Department), Brett Haney, Ronald McGhie
Date: September 2, 2025
Subject: Re: Rathdrum Prairie Area Transportation Plan Data

This replies to ITD’s email of August 29, 2025. The attached letter is the Escalation of Level 2 Alternatives for the Rathdrum Prairie PEL Study and Concerns.

Hey Carrie Ann,

I hope you are doing well and had a great Labor Day weekend! Personally, I am looking forward to a drop in the temperature 🙂

The NHB group doesn’t see a problem with a simplified version of the data which supports the areas of need and shows the current issues. We do believe there are issues with showing over simplified decisions or concepts like the “smiley” faces with no data displayed.

That said, we are more interested in making sure that the raw data, in text, CSV, or some other usable format (not a PDF), is made available for review. The public should also have all the details needed to understand any and all decisions happening between parties involved in decisions making and analysis. We continue to be highly concerned with what was shown at the last meeting.

We have reached out to our members and provided them with the attached letter to you (see attached) (Infographic). We wanted them to understand where the group currently stands on the Rathdrum Prairie PEL study. We are also concerned, after reading this memo submitted to you by HDR, why section 3 is completely missing from any of the 13 Level 2 Alternatives. Showing a bike path 10’ wide does not address any of these issues along with the Transit problems (see Purpose and Need Memo from HDR).

You will find in the letter the Federal definition for a ‘Planning Product’ along with references to other State’s PEL Handbooks. Further, there will be a reference to a PEL flow diagram provided by the FHWA. The NHB group doesn’t appreciate statements to stop us for addressing more than a “broad brush” concept due to NEPA. The documents are very clear about how the PEL data and analysis can transfer directly into NEPA and more than a broad brush is required.

Here are the current signatures we have received. I am traveling this week and will follow up with additional signatures later this week or early next.

Also, I would like to setup time with you folks to discuss the letter and an action plans around it since the last letter did not appear to be taken into account.

Current Signers

[22 signer names are omitted to protect the privacy of residents.]

Thanks,

Brian Rogers

“Intelligence removes complexity.” - Me