Category:

An Open Letter to EUCI From "The Public"

10/18/2013

Dear EUCI,

I've come across another one of your conference agendas recently. After drying my tears of laughter, I shared it with my friends in "Mayberry." They are not impressed. In fact, you could call them downright miffed at your arrogant, condescending and inaccurate attempt to pretend you understand them, their communities, and their lifestyles. How dare you!?!

The cause of the current consternation is your 8th Annual Public Participation for Transmission Siting conference. While this conference has historically been an annual source of amusement to transmission opposition leadership, this time you've gone too far.

Perhaps all that crisp, green sponsorship gets in the way of your better judgement, but should you take a few moments to reflect on the veracity of your conference speakers, as well as the accuracy and effectiveness of their presented material, you might find something amiss.

Keynote speaker Jimmy Glotfelty's presentation is touted as:

Clean Line energy will discuss the public engagement challenges that are inherent when developing and building new large infrastructure projects. How do we overcome these challenges and work to ensure that our stakeholders feel they are informed and part of the process, each step of the way? He will discuss the lessons learned and some of the challenges faced in his career developing transmission projects across multiple states.

Jimmy Glotfelty? The same Jimmy Glotfelty with the orange shirts and bribe money? The same Jimmy Glotfelty who had to be told by the police to stop harassing high school students and offering them money to testify in favor of his project? That Jimmy Glotfelty?? We've heard of him.

First of all, we don't believe that Jimmy has successfully developed any transmission projects during his "career." We consider him a wanna be. Secondly, we wonder if Jimmy will be giving away orange t-shirts, hamburgers, gas money and rides to the conference to demonstrate how he "overcomes" challenges? Jimmy's deliberate, completely avoidable, behavior at a recent Illinois Commerce Commission Public Hearing was reprehensible and probably did more damage to Clean Line Energy's public and regulatory image than any number of truly unavoidable challenges ever could. We fear that if other transmission developers begin to adopt Jimmy's methods, transmission building is going to come to a screeching halt and the lights are going to go out. Jimmy should be considered transmission's public enemy #1.

Next, we'd like to discuss your burgeoning interest in social media. Just so you know, social media allows the public to express opinions that drive rejection or acceptance of an idea or proposal.

Case Studies: Understanding Ins-and-Outs of Utilizing Social Media for Public Engagement.
In a time where social media is one of the most common forms of communication, it is
important to understand when it is appropriate to utilize it to engage the public and stakeholders during the transmission siting process. It is crucial to understand when to use it as a main form of communication or as a supplementary form of communication - and who you can expect to reach, and how. This presentation will use and demonstrate
how social media is currently being used as an integral portion of a public outreach and
communications plan.
- Louisa Kinoshi, Associate, Clean Line Energy

Did you even bother to look at Clean Line Energy's Facebook real estate before agreeing to this presenter's version of social media mastery? Probably not, because Clean Line Energy no longer has any Facebook properties! Clean Line shut them down because real people kept getting in and posting their honest thoughts and opinions that Clean Line couldn't control. Clean Line also likely discovered that Facebook is just a little too transparent, exposing a lack of public support for its proposals. Keeping an army of sycophantic sock puppets active on numerous Facebook properties can be just so tedious. It seems to us that Clean Line itself has plenty to "understand" about social media, before it is qualified to teach others.

Let's address the elephant in the room now, shall we? It's the real reason for your educational conference and unhealthy fascination with us. It's what makes us rock stars. You are clueless about our formation, hierarchy, motivation and determination. Sun Tzu once said, “If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.” He'd be a great speaker for your conference, if he wasn't dead and all. Maybe you can buy his book? I hear it's a real page-turner.

So, you want to develop our relationship with attempts to be clever using outdated, supercilious names constructed from your industry's weird obsession with acronyms? I'm truly hurt, EUCI. As if labeling us as members of unacceptable groups would somehow help you develop a better understanding of us, one that will allow you to "handle" us all the way to permit denial?

Going BANANAs with NIMBYs – Best Practices in Dealing with Community Based Opposition Groups.
Increasingly, organizing public participation opportunities means having to handle
disruptive influences from community-based opposition groups - BANANAs (Build
Absolutely Nothing Anywhere near Anything/Anyone) and NIMBYs (Not In My Back Yard). This presentation will discuss experiences at Southern California Edison and
how the company has adapted to this new business environment. Southern California
Edison is currently experiencing one of the largest infrastructure capital investment
programs in company history. Driving this are multiple factors, including California’s
ambitious renewable energy goals and the need to replace aging infrastructure that
was constructed during the post-World War II boom. As a result, the opportunity for
community based opposition groups to develop has increased significantly. Recent
advances in technology have made it easier for community-based opposition groups to
organize and, more importantly, to strategize. With the opportunity cost of starting and
participating in such groups constantly decreasing, it is important for public participation practitioners to have a healthy understanding of how such groups are motivated and how to manage them effectively. The discussion will provide the audience with best practices on dealing with community based opposition groups as well as tips on how to prepare internal, technical subject matter experts to effectively handle emotionally charged situations. These best practices are based upon the experiences of Southern California Edison’s local public affairs department.

Do tell how assigning people to silly fruit acronym name groups, and then disparaging them, accomplishes effective public participation in transmission siting? Where we come from, that's just not polite, and won't win you any cooperation from the fruitbowl. It's actually sort of insulting. We don't really get it, but have been considering giving you all a fruity name of your own, and would like to know the rules of the game. We've already come up with MIMPSY (Money In My Pocket, Screw You) to describe you, but fear it might not be quite fruity enough?

As I'm sure you've heard, our favorite activity is holding bake sales. If you ever find yourself overrun with overripe bananas, I'd be happy to share my kick-ass recipe for banana bread with you. There's just so many things you can make from the clever and versatile banana! Maybe you could hold your own bake sale, instead of a training conference, to raise cash! Do let us know EUCI. We'd be happy to fly to Houston to buy your cupcakes!

I do wonder though, since this is an educational workshop, what experience your instructor has organizing or strategizing with community-based opposition groups? My guess would be none. Last time I looked, SCE got it's butt kicked in Chino Hills. The power companies are usually the ones on the outside of our groups, desperately trying to see inside. You all have NO IDEA how sophisticated our organization and strategy has become... and that's the way we like it. Expect the unexpected, transmission developers!

And if being called a fruit isn't insulting enough to "the public," you further besmirch us as "Mayberry" in your "Marketing to Mayberry" segment.

Marketing to Mayberry: Communicating with Rural America.
Communications and marketing outreach in small town America requires entirely
different tactics than those used with larger more metropolitan communities. Join this
conversation to learn some of the pitfalls to avoid and the strategies to deploy when
reaching out to small communities. Attendees will learn to prepare for the challenges of
engaging a rural setting, communicate in a conversational tone rather than corporate
tone, identify and engage credible spokespersons in rural communities and understand which communications and marketing tactics to utilize.

If this wasn't so blatantly insulting, it might be fun to sit through. What do you do, run the movie Promised Land and hand out Matt Damon masks? Or maybe you simply try to teach these jerks some honesty and humility? It's really not that difficult to communicate with "Mayberry." What is difficult is getting away with lies and bad behavior in small towns, right, Jimmy? Right, Clean Line?

You've simply outdone yourself this year, EUCI! Since your conferences are fully accredited for continuing education credits by the International Association for Continuing Education & Training, we'll assume there must be some educational standards your conference content is required to meet. We're concerned that you may be risking your certification and credibility by promoting professional failure as a "successful" best practice! It's because we worry about your reputation that we'd like to help you out, EUCI. We believe we could provide valuable assistance with this conference activity:

Mock Open House
Open houses are commonly used during the public outreach campaign through the
transmission siting process. They are used to communicate with the community, land
owners, stake holders and public officials and allow them to express their concerns
regarding the transmission lines. Effective, clear and concise communications are crucial
for the open house to run smoothly and successful. This mock open house will allow
key subject experts to run an open house and the attendees to participate in the “open
house,” showing effective forms of communication, how to answer questions and walk away with everyone being pleased with the outcome.

We graciously offer to provide a cast of crack "actors" to play the parts of the community, land owners, stake holders and public officials at your mock open house. We've been mocking these guys at their open houses for years, so we're quite experienced! We feel this will add just the right touch of hard-to-replicate realism to the exercise and will guarantee a tangible, useful, hands-on education for your conference participants. And, besides, nothing says fun like ignorant country bumpkins bearing torches and pitchforks! They're just so unpredictable!

In all seriousness, EUCI, we're not sure how you're going to educate transmission developers to succeed when your teachers have failed the subjects they are attempting to teach. You'd do much better with instructors from the community groups you are targeting for attendance. But then again, why would we give away our secrets? They're working so well to alter, delay, and cancel unneeded transmission projects. We have made you our bit*subservient groupie*ch. When we have our annual continuing education get-togethers, you're probably not going to be invited. Sorry.

Best Regards,

America's Transmission Opposition
Bigger, Badder, Scarier
and Smarter... oh, so much smarter than you give us credit for...

22 Comments

Tension Between States and PJM Causes Higher Electric Prices for Consumers

10/14/2013

0 Comments

What if states just checked out of their "voluntary" participation in the PJM cartel? Would this signal a reversion to 1920s-era state-regulated electricity lawlessness, or will it be historically viewed as the important first step toward a modern, sustainable, affordable, and independent energy future?

Maybe we'll find out soon, as the PJM cartel and its 800-pound incumbent gorillas continue to rankle states chafing at their continued captivity in the increasingly expensive electricity zoo.

Following on the heels of the U.S. District Court for Maryland's decision that Maryland's RFP program to stimulate the building of new generation in state violated the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution several weeks ago, on Friday the U.S. District Court for New Jersey also found that New Jersey's LCAPP program violated the Supremacy Clause. The second decision really is no surprise, if you read the first one.

The only bright spot is the court's rejection of the secondary argument that LCAPP also violated the Commerce Clause.

Despite the abovementioned evidence, the plaintiffs fail to overcome the most persuasive evidence that substantiates the reasons the State is seeking in-state development. A significant portion of the trial focused on locational deliverability areas (LDAs). (Stipulated Fact ¶ 30). As previously noted, New Jersey is located in such an area that is known as EMAAC. In addition, there are two other locational deliverability areas within New Jersey known as PSEG and PS North (T. 1529, 3-13). Generally, these LDAs have higher capacity prices than other PJM areas due to transmission costs. Even the Plaintiffs agree that a capacity price cannot be set for an entire region. (Pl.’s Ex. 26, at 34). As a result, there is separation in price which is authorized by PJM and the Commission. The record as a whole supports the proposition that the closer the generation facility is to the delivery area, transmission costs will subside. As Mr. Herling concluded when discussing the reliability crisis, reliability issues could only be resolved in one of two ways – transmission via the Susquehanna Connection or additional generation in or near the location where the reliability issue will occur. (Def.’s Ex. 563, at 33) (emphasis added). As such, it appears reasonable that the Board would incentivize construction in areas where reliability concerns are in flux. As such, the Board has the authority to incentivize construction within New Jersey. What is good for the goose is good for the gander. As such, the incentive for community benefits to generators in New Jersey appears reasonable. Since Plaintiffs have not briefed or argued the commerce clause in such a fashion, the Court finds that Plaintiff has not met its burden of proof.

This should come in handy in the future when PJM and big wind try to force eastern states to pay for new transmission lines in Kansas and Iowa by preempting any preference for in-state renewables to attain RPS goals. But that's an argument best left for another day...

If you've read both of these court decisions, you may have noticed that they manifestly document that, despite its protestations to the contrary, PJM does in fact and indeed control where and when generation gets built or retired. And this has always been the rub with PJM's failed markets and the reason they don't work.

PJM's markets are supposed to create incentives for generation to develop where electricity prices are high. PJM's markets don't work. This is because PJM will always force a transmission "solution" to artificially lower prices before the market can work. Why? Because PJM is a transmission building cartel, therefore the only tool PJM has is a hammer, and every problem looks like a nail. Because PJM builds new transmission before new generation has a chance to develop, PJM controls the development of generation.

And when PJM builds new transmission to lower prices in a particular area, everyone in PJM pays. However, when new generation gets built in Maryland or New Jersey, it's paid for by consumers in those states who use it. PJM's preference for transmission costs YOU money.

And if you think the states of Maryland and New Jersey are the only ones calling foul on the PJM cartel's deference to its incumbent utilities, check out this little back and forth between the Chairman of the Pennsylvania PUC and PJM's Board of Managers. The PA PUC is irritated at the way FirstEnergy continues to game PJM's markets with its plant closure game.

Chairman Powelson Letter to PJM
PJM's "shocking" Response to Chairman Powelson
Chairman Powelson Threatens to Go to FERC

Sounds scary, but FERC is what gives PJM its power to serve its incumbents first. Going back to the 1935 law that gave FERC its power, we might ask why FERC has seen fit to delegate that power to regional transmission organizations that are merely thinly disguised cartels of for-profit utility interests? When did the regulated become the regulator?

Not that any of this is going to matter much 10 years from now when distributed generation and consumer-owned, onsite energy production has made PJM, FERC and utility holding companies that control them about as useless as teats on a bull.

0 Comments

How Bad Transmission Projects Die

10/11/2013

2 Comments

This recent editorial in the Concord (NH) Monitor gives a look at the death throes of a rather tenacious merchant transmission project. Northern Pass has hung on long past the tipping point, where a prudent investor would have given up and written it off as a loss.

Just how much profit is expected from this project that its owners can continue to spend money hand over fist trying to influence necessary approvals?

As the editorial opines, "...it’s time to acknowledge the obvious: The wheels have fallen off the bus." Northern Pass is politically unpopular in New Hampshire, and there's nothing the company can do to change it, try though they may.

In recent weeks Democratic Gov. Maggie Hassan and state Senate Republican Leader Jeb Bradley have weighed in and signaled that, contrary to PSNH’s unrelenting public relations campaign and full-page newspaper ads, the Northern Pass is not a done deal.

Still, Northern Pass persists, like Rumplestiltskin having a tantrum. "Support Clean Energy" is just greenwashing of the real truth, which goes more like this: "Support Transmission Owner Profits." Of course, the latter just doesn't have the same ring to it, does it?

There has also been some clear evidence in the past week that nearly all the Northern Pass supporters are those with a direct financial interest, including those at the Department of Energy hearing in Concord wearing “Support Clean Energy – Support Northern Pass” T-shirts. One estimate of the audience at the Sept. 24 hearing in Plymouth was 650 opposed to Northern Pass, eight in support.

When it couldn't convince the people of New Hampshire to willingly drink its koolaid, Northern Pass resorted to intimidation and bullying, and when that didn't work, it was time to simply create an appearance of public support, hoping it would be enough to convince regulators.

Northern Pass offered only bogus informational sessions, with a police presence at the door and no unscripted questions or comments allowed. Citizens were ushered out the door if there was even a hint of skepticism on their lips, and the follow-up was always the same boilerplate letter to the editor from Northern Pass, thanking the locality for the chance to “clear up any misconceptions you may have had about the project.

Ultimately, these tactics don't work. The public wants Northern Pass to bury the line, or not build it at all. Of course, burying the line will eat up all Northern Pass's profits.

This is the lesson to be learned about imported renewables. They're not cost effective and, ultimately, merchant business plans that rely on importing renewables long distance via overhead transmission lines must fail. Localized, small-scale, sustainable renewables are more cost effective and widely supported by the public.

It's time to kill this project for good.

2 Comments

Kansas Landowners Fighting For Their Heritage Against Regulators and Texas Wind Speculators

10/6/2013

0 Comments

This is Thomas Stallbaumer. He and his ancestors have been stewards of this land in Nemeha County, Kansas, since 1854. He plans to eventually hand the care of this land over to his children, who plan to hand it to their children in turn. This picture was taken by his daughter, Kayla, as he gazed over land that has been virtually unchanged since his grandfather built a home here more than 150 years ago.

But now a company from Texas wants to build a high voltage transmission line less than a thousand feet from Stallbaumer's property. This is what he will be looking at in the future while relaxing on his swing, if Clean Line Energy Partners gets its way.

That's hardly a fair reward for a lifetime of hard work and dedication to the preservation of this land. The electricity to be carried by the proposed transmission towers is being touted as "clean" renewable energy for "eastern states." Next time you easterners flip the switch to waste some of your "clean" energy from Kansas wind farms, remember Thomas Stallbaumer, sitting on his swing and wondering why Kansas regulators and Clean Line Energy Partners don't know the difference between energy that is merely renewable, and energy that is sustainable.

"Sustainable energy is the sustainable provision of energy that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their needs."

Renewable energy, as defined by Clean Line Energy Partners, is energy that is produced by a renewable source, even if production and delivery of that energy causes permanent harm to humans, animals, and businesses, and removes sustainable farmland from production...forever. Clean Line Energy Partners' unsustainable energy practices force regulators to make a conscious choice of who must sacrifice so that others may benefit. Sustainable energy requires no sacrifice.

These cheerful people are the Kansas Corporation Commissioners who will be presiding over an evidentiary hearing this week, where Clean Line Energy Partners will be spinning a web of lies and justifications for its project, and asking these people to silence the objections of Thomas Stallbaumer, and other landowners just like him all across Kansas.

In 2011, the KCC approved the power of eminent domain for a project that had no customers, proclaiming it "needed." The Commission bought Clean Line's illogical contentions without performing even perfunctory examination of their validity. None of the Kansans who would eventually be expected to sacrifice for this project were notified or allowed to participate in that hearing.

This year, Clean Line was back with another application, this time for a route meandering across the state, from southwest to northeast. The only "notice" some affected landowners received occurred at a very late date, in some instances AFTER the deadline to file testimony that had already been set by the KCC. The "notice" also misinformed landowners of their legal rights to participate in a hearing that could result in the condemnation of their real property. Further inquiry at the KCC produced more misinformation, with landowners being told that they must hire an attorney to intervene in the case on their behalf.

And the legal errors continue. Last week, pro se intervenors were prohibited from filing testimony because the deadline for testimony had passed nearly two months prior, weeks before the legal deadline to intervene. Read the direct testimony of Thomas's son, Matthew, that was filed before the Order denying it. I dare you to forget Matthew's testimony after reading it and looking at the exhibits. Intervenors were also told that they would not be permitted to participate in cross-examination, submit exhibits or even call witnesses. Intervenors will be limited to making opening statements and filing post-hearing briefs. In essence, intervenors are now being limited to meaningless "participation" whereby they will not be allowed to submit any evidence that may contradict Clean Line, nor allowed to even question Clean Line's evidence. This is not due process. This is not justice.

The KCC is in a big hurry to make a decision on this case within an arbitrary 120-day deadline. They have been hurried along by aggressive Clean Line attorneys who have been doing their best to ban Kansans from the proceeding. What's the hurry on a project that has no customers and is not needed for reliability or market efficiency reasons? Why must this project be rushed through approvals in Kansas to such an extent that the citizens are stripped of their right to participate in a legal process that could take their property?

If the KCC and Clean Line thought a quick process would avoid scrutiny, they are mistaken. In fact, this travesty of justice has attracted nationwide attention, and will continue to do so this week as the case is heard.

Check back here for more landowner stories and updates on hearing progress.

0 Comments

"America's" Power Plan Greenwashes Transmission Profits - No Actual "Americans" Involved

10/1/2013

0 Comments

Big coal, big gas, big tobacco, big pharma, big wind, big green... what do they all have in common? A desire to control your thoughts and actions to increase their own financial gain.

Now big wind has joined with big green to push an agenda they have dubbed "America's Power Plan."

What's the surest way to tell you're the victim of propaganda? Use of the word "America" as a shroud to hide financial or political goals and make you think that everyone else is on board with it. It's deployment of the most classic propaganda devices in an attempt to control you. Just say no.

"America's" Power Plan has been developed by environmental groups and transmission developers to inform the public what landowners and consumers want in an attempt to influence energy policy. No actual landowners or consumers were consulted in the creation of this "plan." "America's" Power Plan doesn't represent the plan of "America." It's simply a vehicle for environmental group leadership to check a few renewable energy boxes and for transmission developers to make money. Lots of it.

This farce has been perpetrated by funding from the Energy Foundation, which is a shady front group whose own source of funds is unclear. What is clear, however, is how much this "foundation" meddles in both foreign and domestic policy in order to meet goals that may not be shared by "America." They've got plenty of money to give away to groups who agree to do their bidding, including the creators of "America's" Power Plan.

The greenwashers leading the pack here are the NRDC (Natural Resources Defense Council). Stop supporting this organization. It stopped listening to the public a long, long time ago and now merely exists inside its own little political echo chamber where its well-paid employees tell themselves that greenwashing greedy corporate initiatives that may not be in the best interest of "America" is "saving the planet." After all, their big salaries are paid for by the very energy interests whose initiatives they facilitate with their support and "green" promotion.

And here's NRDC's gushing praise of their own big lie. NRDC insists that their plan for siting "120 megawatt-miles" (that's enough to almost completely replace all existing transmission) of new transmission at a cost of "$6B per year until 2050" (that's $220 Billion dollars of electric ratepayer debt) will make ranchers and farmers see the light and welcome the destruction of their businesses by new transmission lines.

The siting plan, entitled "Finding a Home for Renewable Energy and Transmission" (aww, sounds like a huggable pound puppy who just wants your love, doesn't it?) pretends that landowners are on board with this "plan." However, no actual landowners or consumer groups were consulted in its development, despite the plan's claim that:

"Reform must reflect a new approach to siting — one that recognizes the effect wholesale power markets have on transmission planning, and one that meets the needs of landowners, wildlife and society as well as project sponsors and investors."

It seems that they managed to get everyone else to the table to approve this plan, except the landowners, which can only mean that the landowners are the ones getting the shaft here. Without buy in of affected landowners, "America's" Power Plan fails.

This is not a Landowner or Consumer Plan!

Co-authors and reviewers of this plan include representatives of environmental groups, the benighted Center for Rural Affairs (who has strayed far afield from its original focus on independent farmers, in favor of corporate financial interests), political and business interests, and transmission owners and developers, such as Jimmy Glotfelty from Clean Line Energy Partners. Ooops... sorry.... did I say a bad word?

Where are the landowners and consumers? They aren't part of this "America."

I could go on for pages about the stupid contentions, condescending clap trap, and sheer arrogance contained in the siting plan, but instead I'm just going to concentrate on the "plan" to have landowners clamoring to host new transmission infrastructure.

"Additionally, decision-makers must pay special
consideration to private land owners. Private landowners
play an invaluable though often overlooked role in
the siting and construction of both generation and
transmission infrastructure. Particularly in the Eastern
Interconnection, transmission projects are built almost
exclusively on private land. How landowners are treated
throughout this process can determine whether projects
are more rapidly approved and developed or delayed
and even halted."

Here are the plan's six new options for willingly giving up your property for transmission development. All six of them read like ways for transmission developers to simply swoop in and collect the gold after neighbors have been pitted against each other in a greedy battle to assemble rights-of-way, where the financial wants of the few trump the property rights of the many. If you find anything in here that you, as a landowner, think is viable, please let us know. The landowners who've looked at it so far think it's just more unworkable, heavy-handed land theft. Maybe if the authors had actually consulted some landowners affected by transmission projects when writing their "plan," they would have found that out before publishing this, instead of after.

• Special Purpose Development
Corporations (SPDCs) focus on providing
landowners with another option for
just compensation. The condemning
authority creates an SPDC, allowing
the landowner to choose between two
options. Landowners can either opt
to receive the traditional fair market
value for the parcel or they can elect to
receive shares in the SPDC. The value
of these shares is commensurate with
the fair market value of the parcel the
landowner has committed to the project.
The condemning authority then sells
the SPDC to a transmission developer
at auction. The sale increases the value
of the SPDC, and the landowners’
shares are transferrable on the open
market. Each shareholder is entitled to
project dividends. The result is that the
landowners’ compensation is tied directly
to market value, unlike traditional “just
compensation.” By giving landowners
a stake in the project’s success, things
can move more quickly and fairly. This
framework is applicable to utility-owned
transmission projects; a merchant
developer does not have a mechanism
for recovering equity dilution from
rates and may instead prefer to offer
landowners annual payments tied to
project royalties.

• Landowner Associations refer to groups
of landowners that come together with
a shared interest. These associations
have been particularly successful
for wind development, and are also
suitable for shorter transmission lines.
Each participating landowner is given
a proportional share of ownership in
the association based on the amount
of land they want to make available
for development. As an association,
landowners then approach developers
for projects. Members of the association
that physically host turbines or
transmission infrastructure are given
a premium, but all members of the
association receive a portion of profits.

• Tender Offer Taking enables developers
to test landowner interest in several
corridors by drawing proposed
boundaries for a given project, and
offering an above-market price for all
landowners within the boundary. The
developer then confidentially monitors
acceptance, and goes forward with the
project once a predetermined threshold
is met (applying eminent domain
authority to any remaining holdouts). If
the threshold is not met, the developer
shifts attention to a different corridor.
Tender offer taking is well-suited to large
projects that can be broken into discrete
segments.

• Good Neighbor Payments represent
ongoing payments to landowners that
are near enough to a new project that it
affects them even if it does not require
taking over their land. For example,
wind farm opposition sometimes comes
not from direct landowners but from
neighbors who are affected; thus wind
developers often pay neighbors annually
for noise impact. This concept could be
applied to transmission development
by providing annual payments to
aesthetically affected landowners and
neighbors. In the case of a landowner,
good neighbor payments would be in
addition to any easement negotiation
made. Developers could also pay bonus
payments to farmers who are affected by
infrastructure on the land they cultivate.

• Self-assessment enables landowners
to report the value of their land once
a plan to condemn is announced. The
landowner’s tax liability is then adjusted
to the reported value. The condemning
authority then decides whether to
take the land at the reported price
or look elsewhere. If the developer
chooses to look elsewhere, the
landowner is thereafter prohibited from
transferring his land for less than the
announced value. This solution allows
the landowner to assign a personal
value to the benefit or deterrent of
hosting new infrastructure. A variation
of self-assessment involves an opt-in
mechanism whereby a landowner can
choose to receive a property tax break in
exchange for agreeing to be subjected to
condemnation.

• Annual payments allow landowners
directly impacted by transmission
projects to receive compensation tied
to the amount of power transmitted on
the line. Under this scenario, payments
are distributed each year the project is
in service. Payments can be adjusted
yearly, to account for inflation, and
can be augmented in the event that
the agreed upon right of way is used
for an additional purpose. Annual
payments could provide the landowner
with a greater sense of ownership in
the project, decrease the incidence
of landowner holdouts and ensure
compensation commensurate with the
growing value of land. The Colorado-based
Rocky Mountain Farmers Union
has proposed a version of this concept
for both transmission and wind farm
development.

Anything in that list change your mind about having to operate your business around transmission lines and towers? Anything in there that makes the taking of private property by eminent domain for the private profit of transmission developers more palatable? Didn't think so.

Did you see anything in there about how consumers or regulators have agreed to pay even more for new transmission in order to compensate landowners to their satisfaction? Or about the cost effectiveness of land-based utility scale renewables when landowners are compensated satisfactorily? Nope, me neither.

FAIL, "America," FAIL!

I just can't resist pointing out the plan's recommendation that we "improve interagency, federal-state and interstate coordination." Right. This comes on the heels of the environmental groups unsuccessfully filing for injunctions to stop the Susquehanna Roseland transmission project from plowing through the Delaware Water Gap National Recreational Area. These environmental pietists are the worse abusers of federal and state process to hold up projects that they don't like. So, at this time, I must say... stuff it, you hypocrites!

The plan also says if cooperation fails, then it's time to threaten states with a process that no longer functions:

"FERC backstop siting authority can play an important
psychological role in encouraging states to coordinate
and lead in transmission planning, making it a useful
siting tool. The best value of backstop siting is not in
its exercise, but in the possibility of its exercise."

Wow... it wasn't too many years ago when these environmental hypocrites were lined up against FERC backstop siting threats. What a difference a little corporate money makes in environmental priorities.

"America's" Power Plan is just another expensive failure because landowner resistance to new transmission is growing and coalescing into a coordinated, knowledgeable movement that will not be denied. Time for a new plan.

0 Comments

Clean Line Energy Partners Continues to Deny Opposition

9/27/2013

0 Comments

Dear Jerry,

I understand that your show helps people who are denying their problems by allowing others to confront them.

I would like to propose that you invite Clean Line Energy Partners to be a guest on your show. This could be really big, maybe even bigger than your "I Married A Horse" episode.

Clean Line Energy Partners, owners of the Grain Belt Express, Rock Island Clean Line, Plains & Eastern Clean Line and other HVDC transmission projects totaling thousands of line miles, have stated that:

"Successful project development requires substantial and widespread participation from a diverse group of entities and stakeholders. Clean Line strives to establish and maintain close relationships with landowners, communities, local and state officials, customers and suppliers and deeply values stakeholder input and involvement."

However, when the rubber meets the road, Clean Line has recently resorted to having landowners physically dragged out of public meetings in their own communities. They have had legal tantrums insisting that affected landowners be banned from participating in permitting cases. They have been caught offering money and other consideration in exchange for supportive public testimony. In short, Clean Line has been behaving like an immature bully.

Sincerely,

Thousands of Landowners and Ratepayers All Over the U.S.A.

0 Comments

Kansas Officials Afford Affected Landowners Due Process - Grain Belt Express Has a Tantrum

9/27/2013

2 Comments

The wheels have started to come off Clean Line Energy Partners' Grain Belt Express project Crazy Train in Kansas. Ut-oh, Grain Belt Express! That's what happens when you try to rush your project through approvals without allowing public participation.

As you may recall, notice to affected parties was carried out in a rather haphazard fashion at the last minute, the Kansas Corporation Commission staff misinformed the public about their rights to participate in the legal process, and Clean Line was beating the KCC like a rented mule.

At a public meeting early this week, the Commissioners discussed the outstanding petitions to intervene from pro se individuals, a landowners' group, local government and an electric co-op.

The KCC voted to allow all of those wishing to intervene to do so but directed its staff to draft a letter explaining to the interveners that they would have to articulate a specific interest that is affected by the case and asking them to clarify what they want the KCC to do. If the interveners fail to do that, the KCC could elect not to allow them to speak at the relevant hearing in October.

It sort of reads like the KCC couldn't be bothered to make an actual decision at the meeting, but is expecting to do so as the case winds its way through pre-hearing conferences and evidentiary hearings. Although it may read like the Commissioners are affording a chance to be heard to these intervenors, it's actually a baited trap for the intervenors, who can be silenced or have their party status revoked at any time. Maybe that's because:

Normally, landowners are represented by an attorney who is familiar with KCC procedures, but this case is unusual in that some landowners are choosing to represent themselves, KCC spokesman Jesse Borjon said, adding the letter would provide landowners some guidance about how to pursue their part in the case.

KCC Chairman Mark Sievers said some of those who asked to intervene had used “boilerplate” language that didn’t clearly explain how their rights would be affected by the proposed siting.

Sievers also suggested the KCC adopt a procedural order to calm proceedings where members of the public were noisy, applauded and created a “circus atmosphere.” The order cited regulations requiring people presenting to the KCC to follow the same rules of decorum as attorneys in courtrooms, and said people who failed to do so could be denied the opportunity to speak.

A circus, you say? Oh, that's what all the PSCs say when faced with pro se individuals protecting their legal interests. Scary, isn't it? Don't worry, KCC, so far all pro se individuals participating in transmission line cases have behaved like ladies and gentlemen, not circus monkeys.

The KCC also had concerns about:

Sievers also said parties “trying their case in the press” had become a problem, but Commissioner Thomas Wright raised the point that rules against discussing a case in the media exist to prevent potential jurors from developing prejudices in cases they could be called on to decide. The commissioners determined talking to media therefore wasn’t likely to be misconduct in its cases.

And then a non-party began trying their case in the press for real. Check out the 2-page spread that appeared in the Russell County News. Page 1. Page 2.

Grain Belt Express has been routed through someone's oil field interests. Notice was not given to this business. This could cost GBE millions!

So, what does Grain Belt Express do? They have a big tantrum and demand that the KCC reconsider its decision to allow the parties to intervene. They accuse the KCC of not ordering what was discussed at the public meeting. Not too smart.

Clean Line Energy Partners' actions are getting pretty desperate, and their public and legal dialogue is increasingly shrill. That's what happens right before a badly conceived transmission project dies. Adios.

2 Comments

Let's Help Our Friends at Clean Line!

9/25/2013

6 Comments

If you're a regular reader of this blog, you know how much we like to help our friends at the power companies with the puzzling task of getting landowners and ratepayers to agree with their outrageous schemes to overbuild unneeded transmission at our expense and/or pull the wool over our eyes while jacking up rates.

That's why we'd like to offer some landowner-created and approved suggestions to Clean Line that are guaranteed to turn that frown upside down! After all, you're not a real transmission developer until StopPATH WV blog starts making fun of you! Wear it as a badge of honor, Clean Line!

Reader Nance has come up with an ingenious new way to use orange t-shirts in advertising:

Clean Line could even hand out little promotional chotchkes of tiny transmission towers dressed in orange Clean Line shirts to serve as reminders to politicians, business groups, colleges, and local governments that their support has already been purchased. Landowners will also want to take these home from open houses and public comment hearings, because water and granola bars (while very effective in setting a hairy-legged tree hugger image) are not very filling, when you spend all day working hard for a living.

And don't forget that all important indoctrination instant! It's all about shaping the thought processes of the next generation to accept this abuse of due process as routine, right?

Therefore, we'd like to add another word search puzzle to Clean Line's collection of ultra-exciting school activities!

Students and landowners alike will enjoy hours of fun learning all about Clean Line's projects and how they will shape their lives for many years to come!

Go ahead, Clean Line, use at will, we're giving you these great suggestions free of charge (unlike HDR, who is charging you an arm & a leg)! Why are we doing this? Because we love you! Honest!

6 Comments

Clean Line Offers "Whatever It Takes" to Get Bodies to Fill its Ugly Orange Shirts

9/19/2013

3 Comments

Been hearing rumors about what all those clappers were paid to wear the orange shirts?

Wonder no more...

Students at Roosevelt University in downtown Chicago were recruited by the "RISE" club.

The hearing will be Wednesday, September 18th, and buses will leave Roosevelt at 3:30pm for the 7pm hearing in Mendota, IL. Transportation, a free dinner, and a t-shirt will be provided!

And just in case that wasn't enough, students were asked to name their price to fill a t-shirt:

We want as many supporters to make it to the hearing as possible, so let us know what it will take for you to get to the hearing. Funding for gas, or other transit and travel needs can be provided.

Clean Line really ought to be embarrassed to have funded coerced testimony like this.

And the ICC should throw out any comment that was paid for by Clean Line.

This isn't how "the locals" play fair.

Updated: More Clean Line misinformation and vapid inducement to get clueless kids from Lake Forest College to fill its ugly, orange shirts:

"Do you want to help pass legislation for renewable energy in the Midwest? Then come to the only public meeting for The Clean Line Energy Project which, if passed, will connect enough wind power from Iowa to Illinois to power over 1.4 million American homes!
If you are interested in going to the only public hearing for this project, next Wednesday leaving @ 4pm, please comment on this! I will happily drive us, and it will be a super fun trip in the name of clean energy!!"

Urrrrp. I think I just barfed up a quart of perky.

3 Comments

"Clean" Line Fails in Mendota

9/19/2013

10 Comments

It was standing room only last night in Mendota at an Illinois Commerce Commission public forum on Clean Line Energy's Rock Island "Clean" Line project. The forum was held at the request of affected landowners and intended to provide a venue for the landowners to have an opportunity to comment on the proposal.

Instead, the arrogant Texas snake oil salesmen attempted to hijack the forum and disenfranchise the very folks the forum was intended to hear from. Does "Clean" Line think the ICC was fooled? Do they think they changed anyone's mind last night? Or, more likely, did they simply demonstrate their arrogance and lack of morals to the Commission and the community? One thing is certain, "Clean" Line made no friends, only enemies. Ut-oh, "Clean" Line!

Read about the forum in The LaSalle News Tribune (pictures and video, too!)

"Clean" Line's problems began well ahead of the forum, when its hired public relations "team" arrived and insisted on setting up a table in the lobby. Meanwhile, out in the parking lot, other "Clean" Line agents set up a gigantic sign next to their gas-guzzling SUV that was to serve as a check-in point where the company's imported supporters could get their "Clean" Line t-shirts, talking points and other party favors. Soon, numerous white vans arrived and disgorged the classic contingent of union guys and students, who were suited up in the ugly orange t-shirts and hustled to the front of the speaker sign-up line. "Clean" Line also attracted the usual gaggle of government and business interests who paraded before the hearing officer to state that they supported the project because they believed they could profit from it.

The ICC sign-up table was manned by two local volunteers. "Clean" Line personnel appointed themselves as monitors of this activity, certain that "the locals" would stack the deck (and they weren't particularly nice about it either). Citizens were told that sign-up would not begin until 6:30. However, someone apparently tipped off the hearing officer that the crowd was much larger than anticipated and that sign-ups should open earlier. And isn't it really coincidental that "Clean" Line managed to shove their union, government and business guys to the head of the sign-up line before it even opened. Why, it's almost like they knew that sign-up would open earlier than the citizens had been told, and maybe intended to stack the deck with their own imported speakers so that the real people the forum was intended for were shut out.

You've got to get up pretty early in the morning to fool "a bunch of farmers" though, and the citizens quickly rallied and got in line. Later, groups of students from the university arrived to be suited up in orange shirts and hustled into line, but it was much too late. The line stretched well outside the school. The students were disrespectful (and several appeared to be chemically altered) and the police were asked to intervene to keep students from harassing citizens.

And speaking of harassment, I've gotta give a "big man" award to "Clean" Line Executive Vice President Jimmy Glotfelty, who thought it was a good idea to get into a shouting match with the high school FFA members who were greeting folks at the door and handing out BlockRICL literature. Maybe Jimmy didn't realize that the kids didn't write that (although he was told) but since when is it okay to harass kids? Jimmy's arrogance was not appreciated by the adults watching this spectacle, and when an adult stepped in, Jimmy got even more irate until the police were summoned. It's notable that the citizen is the one who was big enough to disengage and walk away. While "Clean" Line showed their true colors last night, the citizens refused to be baited and behaved like the ladies and gentlemen they are. Bravo, BlockRICL!

Because so many citizens showed up to speak at the forum, the crowd soon overwhelmed the 500+ seat auditorium and people were standing in the aisles. When the auditorium couldn't hold any more, and most of RICL's orange shirts were relegated to the lobby, Clean Line implemented a plan to replace citizens in the auditorium with orange shirts from the lobby. A "Clean" Line rep. was observed complaining to one of the police officers that the fire marshall needed to be called to enforce the occupancy limits of the auditorium. Sure enough, folks were soon told that if they couldn't find a seat, they would have to leave. While unlucky landowners who failed at this game of musical chairs were filing out of the auditorium, "Clean" Line reps. were busy shoving their orange shirts INTO the auditorium and escorting them to any empty seats they could find, causing further human traffic jams. Nope, nothing underhanded about that little scheme.

The performance of "Clean" Line's Texas executives at the forum was quite revealing. Despite being given several minutes at the beginning of the forum to make his case, VP Jimmy Glotfelty scooted out of the auditorium as soon as he was done speaking, like his shoes were on fire. After he was done harassing people outside the auditorium, he deigned to sit among us, but his actions clearly demonstrated that he was totally bored and not listening to any of the citizen comments. He stretched out and feigned sleep, after he got bored playing with his iPhone. And the people are supposed to believe that this demonstrates an earnest effort to work with landowners to appease their concerns? Jimmy clearly couldn't be bothered with "the locals."

In a classic case of pointing the finger at someone else, "Clean Line" accused the opposition of line jumping by signing up people to speak who were not present. "Clean" Line was the only one who had the nerve to do that, and they got publicly slapped down by the hearing officer for it. A woman from Morris County development something-or-other appeared in a different speaking order than citizens had seen her sign up. That was confusing... until it was recognized that she had also signed up as another woman, who did not get up when her name was called. Instead, "Clean" Line pushed one of their imported speakers to the front of the auditorium to "speak for" the woman who didn't answer. The audience objected, and the hearing officer was told that the woman whose name was called had not even signed herself up. The hearing officer asked the woman (who it turns out was present) if she had signed herself up, and she had to admit that no, someone else had signed her up before she arrived. The hearing officer made him sit down. The man who attempted to line jump finally got another turn at the microphone, when his name finally appeared in the order in which he had arrived. And then... poetic justice intervened. Just as he was about to open his mouth and begin his spiel, the hearing officer looked at his watch and announced that it was now 10 p.m. and the hearing was over. Foiled again! Turns out that he was some vice president at Southwire, flown in from Atlanta just to speak in favor of the project (because it will make money for his company). And he failed. Just like "Clean" Line.

The only thing "Clean" Line accomplished last night was to ruin their own credibility with the ICC with their desperate attempts to silence affected landowners and stack the deck in their favor. Arrogance isn't the recommended posture for out-of-state snake oil salesman.

10 Comments

<<Previous

Forward>>

An Open Letter to EUCI From "The Public"

Tension Between States and PJM Causes Higher Electric Prices for Consumers

How Bad Transmission Projects Die

Kansas Landowners Fighting For Their Heritage Against Regulators and Texas Wind Speculators

"America's" Power Plan Greenwashes Transmission Profits - No Actual "Americans" Involved

Clean Line Energy Partners Continues to Deny Opposition

Kansas Officials Afford Affected Landowners Due Process - Grain Belt Express Has a Tantrum

Let's Help Our Friends at Clean Line!

Clean Line Offers "Whatever It Takes" to Get Bodies to Fill its Ugly Orange Shirts

"Clean" Line Fails in Mendota

About the Author

About
StopPATH Blog

Need help opposing unneeded transmission?
Email me

Archives

Categories

About the Author

AboutStopPATH Blog

Archives

Categories

About
StopPATH Blog