The "Right-to-Take Action" must be Settled BEFORE CPCN May be Granted
Guest blog by Pat Conway, Ontario, Wisconsin
The main purpose for the Wisconsin Public Service Commission's approval process of the CPCN (Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity) is to determine the NEED for ATC's Badger Coulee Line. At the PSC's hearing (docket 05-CE-142), it must be proven that the NEED for the high tension power line is so great that it justifies granting ATC the authority to condemn private property and take the land it needs under "eminent domain".
The fifth Amendment to the US Constitution states: "No person shall be denied life, liberty or property without due process of the law..." And Wisconsin Statute 32.06(5) "Right-to-take Action, provides that a private property owner may challenge a taking for any reason other than just compensation". In the Wisconsin Supreme Court decision of July 13, 2013 it states: The challenge to ATC's condemnation..."is not a meaningless exercise swallowed up in the compensation process," but a property owner's assertion to protect his or her rights."
Common sense tells us that any property owner who has been notified that his or her land is under consideration for ATC's Badger-Coulee line, has the right to begin a "right-to-take" action immediately, before the PSC hearing, in order to protect his or her property rights BEFORE the ROUTE for the line IS CHOSEN. For instance, an Amish man has a right to challenge the condemnation of his land because his farm house is also a church. Or an organic farmer has the right to challenge the right to condemn any portion of his farm because ATC's taking would endanger his or her organic certification and that would threaten their livelihood.
Therefore, any property owner who is threatened by the possibility of the PSC granting ATC condemnation rights, should become an "intervener" in PSC Docket 05-CE-142 and request that the PSC postpone their consideration of ATC's application until after any challenges to ATC's possible taking of their private property, under a "right -to-take action", is settled in the courts. That is the only way a private property owner can assert the protection of his or her private property rights. To grant the authority to condemn before giving the property owner his or her "day in court" is to put the cart before the horse. Not allowing a property owner his or her right to prevent condemnation of their private property through a "right-to-take action" would be to deny them "due process under the law", which would be a violation of the fifth amendment of our Constitution.
The fifth Amendment to the US Constitution states: "No person shall be denied life, liberty or property without due process of the law..." And Wisconsin Statute 32.06(5) "Right-to-take Action, provides that a private property owner may challenge a taking for any reason other than just compensation". In the Wisconsin Supreme Court decision of July 13, 2013 it states: The challenge to ATC's condemnation..."is not a meaningless exercise swallowed up in the compensation process," but a property owner's assertion to protect his or her rights."
Common sense tells us that any property owner who has been notified that his or her land is under consideration for ATC's Badger-Coulee line, has the right to begin a "right-to-take" action immediately, before the PSC hearing, in order to protect his or her property rights BEFORE the ROUTE for the line IS CHOSEN. For instance, an Amish man has a right to challenge the condemnation of his land because his farm house is also a church. Or an organic farmer has the right to challenge the right to condemn any portion of his farm because ATC's taking would endanger his or her organic certification and that would threaten their livelihood.
Therefore, any property owner who is threatened by the possibility of the PSC granting ATC condemnation rights, should become an "intervener" in PSC Docket 05-CE-142 and request that the PSC postpone their consideration of ATC's application until after any challenges to ATC's possible taking of their private property, under a "right -to-take action", is settled in the courts. That is the only way a private property owner can assert the protection of his or her private property rights. To grant the authority to condemn before giving the property owner his or her "day in court" is to put the cart before the horse. Not allowing a property owner his or her right to prevent condemnation of their private property through a "right-to-take action" would be to deny them "due process under the law", which would be a violation of the fifth amendment of our Constitution.
RSS Feed