I was completely floored to hear how rude, insulting and arrogant Mr. Chuck Penn of Dominion was on the Kojo Nnamdi radio show yesterday.  Shame on you, Chuck!  You sure didn't paint your company in a good light.  In fact, you only served to create new enemies.  I'm one.

Now, I met Mr. Penn several years ago and he was quite the friendly personality.  But, then again, he was getting what he wanted at the time (and so was I).  Either he's been drinking too much Arrogant Bastard ale of late, or he's really been a nasty person all along.

The story presented on the show concerns a transmission project Dominion wants to build in Prince William County, Va.  The transmission line is "necessary" to serve a proposed new data center owned by an Amazon subsidiary.  And Dominion wants to run it through private property.  Of course, the affected landowners objected.  Their local elected county officials responded by backing the landowners.  Dominion's "preferred route" was blocked by the creation of a conservation easement along the route.  The Virginia State Corporation Commission then selected the next route option that plows through the nearby Carver Road community.  Carver Road is an historic African-American community.  Dominion (and Mr. Penn on the radio) played this up as a rich, white community dumping unwanted infrastructure on a less affluent African-American community.  This is the stuff movies are made of, right?  Except the Carver Road community has joined forces with the community on the original route to oppose the transmission line on any route.  The original group is fighting just as hard to have the route moved out of Carver Road as they did to have it moved out of their own neighborhood.  This is the epitome of a community working together to benefit everyone, despite Mr. Penn's best efforts to portray it as racial.  I'm guessing that Mr. Penn doesn't speak for Carver Road... after all, he works for Dominion.  Mr. Penn thinks the county should release the easement so Dominion can build its project along the original route.

How about this?  How about Dominion doesn't build its project at all?

Opponents said that the data center isn't even a sure thing, and even if it was, this project is nothing more than a gigantic service line, necessary only to serve the data center. 

There is a route that goes along the highway and comprises some buried sections of line.  The Virginia SCC says they did not select that route because it was "too expensive."  Penn said that route would cost $100M more than tearing up one of the affected neighborhoods with an overhead line.  And then Dominion and the SCC sit around and talk about how all ratepayers in the region will pay for the transmission line so they need to build it as cheaply as possible.

The opposition pointed out that 97% of the transmission line benefit will be for Amazon and asked why Amazon isn't paying 97% of the cost?  If you or I built a house up on a remote mountain and then wanted electric service, we'd have to pay to run our service line from the nearest distribution line.  This project is nothing more than that on a grand scale.  Why should Amazon have no cost responsibility for its own service line?  Because of economic development, jobs, taxes, and all the wonderful things it could possibly bring to Prince William County?  Who did the cost benefit analysis on that to prove that the benefits of the data center are greater than the cost to the ratepayers?

And then we get down to the fundamental question... why must a handful of landowners sacrifice their economic and environmental well-being to host a transmission line for a data center that economically benefits the entire region?  If the project can be built on a more expensive route that nobody objects to, and Amazon covers the cost of its service line, where's the harm to the ratepayers of using the more expensive route?  The true cost of a transmission project is one that finds a route that doesn't harm anyone.  If that includes burial, so be it.

The idea that certain segments of society (either black or white) must sacrifice for the whole is outdated and unacceptable any longer.  This isn't the 1930's when that was necessary to electrify the country.  "But for" the data center, this project isn't necessary.

I find Dominion's attempt to play communities against each other completely disgusting. Instead, the communities should be fighting their common enemy, Dominion.  The communities are to be commended for refusing to fall for Chuck's ruse.  United they stand, divided they fall.

And Chuck should quit being so ugly to people.  I'm sure his momma taught him better than that. 

Third time's the charm for Iowans battling the Rock Island Clean Line merchant transmission project.  The Preservation of Rural Iowa Alliance has been working with legislators for the past three years to put meaningful legislation in place that would release them from the threat of eminent domain taking of their property by an overhead merchant transmission project.

PRIA recently announced:

The legislation prevents the use of eminent domain for overhead merchant transmission lines in the state of Iowa.  If Clean Line wants to construct its private purpose transmission line across the state, it's going to have to purchase easements in a free market, where the true cost of hosting a ginormous transmission line for the use of other states will be realized.

Third time was not the charm for RICL though.  The company has tried multiple times to get the Iowa Utilities Board to grant it public utility status and eminent domain authority ahead of any actual application for the project.  The IUB stood firm, however, and refused to allow a birfucation of its transmission application process that would coerce landowners to grant easements before the project application was even filed.  RICL tried to do this because filing requirements in Iowa require the company to produce a packet of information at the time of filing for each property it may take via eminent domain.  RICL complained that was too expensive, and too difficult, and wanted eminent domain authority to wield against landowners so that they would grant easements before application, saving RICL the trouble of creating the information packet for the majority of the properties.

Iowans refused to make it that easy for RICL.  They did something amazing instead... they stood together and refused to negotiate easements with RICL.  To stand together against a company waving their checkbook around is something that doesn't happen every time.  Iowans demonstrated the power of community by sticking together.  And they demonstrated backbone by continuing their fight, both at the IUB and in the legislature.  RICL was never about providing electricity to Iowa.  It was a one-way highway to ship electricity out of state for private profit.  That's not something that should be granted eminent domain authority.

And this is precisely the argument heard by the Illinois Supreme Court this week.  Why RICL continued trying to reverse the appeals court's decision to vacate their permit granted by the Illinois Commerce Commission, even after they were shut out of Iowa where their project was planned to begin, is anyone's guess.  Pretty pointless, but so is everything Clean Line does anymore.

A while ago, I compared Clean Line's permitting debacle to a game of whack-a-mole.  Every time the company wacked a mole and received a permit, more moles popped up as impediments to its projects.  And everyone knows how a game of whack-a-mole speeds up at the end, where it's impossible to whack all the moles that pop up, and then you lose.  Clean Line's whack-a-mole game is running double time.  Clean Line was shut out of Iowa before Illinois even heard its appeal.  What now, Clean Line?  What now?  RICL needs to be re-routed to another state, or abandoned altogether.  The project is dead.  Please just admit that.

Congratulations to PRIA and the Iowans who came together and fought so hard to protect their communities from out-of-state profiteers!  They are an example to emulate in other transmission battles.

Have you ever noticed that the majority of Clean Line's media is full of glittering generalities, false bravado, and made-up facts?  Does it look like the reporters responsible for those stories failed to balance their coverage with an opposing view, or to ask any relevant questions of Clean Line?  Is it almost as if they simply re-wrote a Clean Line press release without vetting any of the information in it, doing any independent research, or simply engaging their brains?

Now we've created a handy-dandy tool for reporters on assignment to write about Clean Line, in the form of a fun and stimulating word game.

Pertinent Issues That Deserve Attention is chock full of helpful ideas.  Think of it as your own personal Clean Line press kit.

Get yours here!

Ameren's transmission spin-off (ATXI) has been trying to build a 345-kV transmission line on new right of way in Missouri for several years.  The project was ordered by Midcontinent Independent System Operator (MISO), the federally regulated regional transmission organization for the area.

Strong opposition from affected landowners developed, organized as Neighbors United.  The issue was hashed out at the Missouri Public Service Commission, with the PSC ultimately issuing a conditional approval for the project.  Missouri has a unique state statute that requires the consent of county commissions in affected areas to allow the transmission line to cross county roadways before a permit can be issued by the PSC.  The PSC's conditional approval required ATXI to acquire county consent before beginning construction.  When ATXI approached the counties for consent, they were rejected.  Neighbors United put intense pressure on their county commissions, and the commissions stuck with the wishes of their constituents.

But there was ATXI, ordered to construct the project by MISO, and they could not simply give up.  So ATXI filed lawsuits against each county commission attempting to force consent though the court.  Meanwhile, Neighbors United legally challenged the PSC's grant of a permit before receiving county consent, and won.  The Court of Appeals ruled that county consent was a prerequisite to PSC approval and must come before a permit was issued.  The Court vacated ATXI's conditional permit.  Victory to Neighbors United!

However, ATXI was still faced with MISO's order to construct.  A compromise has been proposed.  ATXI held a press conference yesterday to announce a re-route of the Mark Twain transmission line that would "largely use existing rights-of way."  The new proposal is to wreck and rebuild existing circuits owned by others on taller steel monopoles that also carry the new Mark Twain line.  A whole new group of landowners will be affected by the rebuild, with something like 12 miles of new greenfield line still being needed to connect to proposed substations.  The new proposal was supported by state legislators who participated in the press conference.

ATXI says it will now seek county assets for the re-routed line, and then present the new route to the PSC.  If the counties assent to the new route, then ATXI will drop its lawsuits against the counties, and the original route is off the table.  However, if the counties hold firm and refuse to grant assent for the new route, ATXI will pursue the lawsuits and the original route.  The county commissions are now faced with some really hard choices: 

1.  Grant assent for the new route and preserve their authority.
2.  Refuse assent and risk losing their authority through the courts, or future legislative action, and possibly ending up with the originally proposed greenfield route.

Can compromise be achieved in Missouri?  The counties and Neighbors United aren't saying anything just yet.  Newly affected landowners are the wild card.  How might they think about the proposal?  ATXI says it will hold new open house meetings next month to get their feedback.

How much more compromise might the landowners be able to get out of ATXI that may reduce the remaining greenfield segments?  Of course, compromise is a two-way street, and compromise is often the only workable outcome in pitched transmission battles.  Without MISO cancelling the Mark Twain project, ATXI  has no option but to keep trying to construct it.  Can the PSC force MISO to re-think the project, or has that ship sailed when the PSC approved the need for the project the first time it issued a conditional permit?

Interesting battle to follow.  One thing's for sure... building new greenfield transmission is harder than ever.  It's pretty near impossible to simply run over landowner opposition anymore.  If transmission really needs to be built, compromise and workable plans must be first on the table, not a secondary last resort.  Working with affected communities and landowners to craft the first proposal, instead of approaching them with a fait accompli, is what works.  But transmission owners continue to choose the wrong approach every single time.  It remains to be seen what newly affected landowners in Missouri think about the re-route, and whether they can organize and raise money for a long, expensive defense against rebuilding an existing line.

New Jersey BPU Administrative Law Judge Gail Cookson called a public hearing on FirstEnergy affiliate Jersey Central Power & Light's plan to build a new transmission line in Monmouth County "democracy in action" on Wednesday night.

More than 3,000 people showed up for the hearing at a local community college over the course of the evening, all of them opposed.  The comments were heart felt and heart wrenching.  The people told their stories to the judge.  The people rocked this hearing!

Everyone was wearing a sticker.  The stickers said, "My name is..." followed by that particular person's distance to JCP&L's proposed transmission line.

That's how these people may be seen by FirstEnergy and regulators... just a number, a statistic, a casualty of a project the company insists must be built.  Putting faces and personal stories on these numbers made it real.  Brilliant!

But let's go back to those numbers... two digits?  People will be living less than 100 feet from power line poles if this project is built?  How could that happen if a transmission line is properly sited on sufficient right-of-way?  JCP&L's proposed project is 230kV.  A quick google search shows that "typical" right-of-way width for 230kV transmission lines is 100-160 feet.  Utility American Electric Power gets a little more specific in its "Encroachments on Transmission Rights of Way" document.  AEP says typical rights of way for 230kV lines are 120-150 feet in urban areas, and 150 feet in rural areas.  AEP also cautions:

Transmission lines are usually sited in the center of the right of way, with equal distance on either side from the pole holding conductors, to ensure proper clearance for the line.  Therefore, a 120 ft. right of way would create a buffer zone of 60 feet on either side of the transmission pole.

Now let's look at JCP&L's proposal.  The company proposes:

JCP&L believes it can site its project on a 60 ft. right of way, half the size used by other utilities for a project of that voltage.  And JCP&L won't even center its project in the narrow right of way.  It allows 45 feet clearance between the centerline of the poles and the commuter trains passing along nearly directly underneath 230,000 volts of electricity on one side, and a mere 15 feet clearance between the centerline of the pole and the backyards of thousands of people on the other.  The pole itself is at least 8 feet wide, so the distance from the edge of the pole to a person's backyard may actually be around 10 feet.  Here's what that looks like:

Lots of those residential properties have sheds, pools, and other backyard structures located near the property line that would ordinarily be within a typical sized right of way.  The properties also have vegetative buffers abutting the commuter train right of way.  Here's how JCP&L plans to deal with all that stuff within feet of its new monopoles.

JCP&L proposed a "vegetation right of way" over the residential properties, and if landowners don't voluntarily agree to this violation of their backyard sanctity, JCP&L proposed using eminent domain to obtain a legal right to encroach upon the residential properties.

Watch a video featuring views of the actual rail right of way here.  Does it look like there's room to install a transmission line on that right of way?  It doesn't to me.

JCP&L's plan is insane!  This isn't your typical "not in my backyard" reaction to a transmission line. 

And consider that the "violation" this project is supposed to fix is rather minor -- to provide a third back up in case existing lines fail.  There has to be a better way!

What were you thinking, JCP&L?  It's only a 10-mile line... it won't gather much opposition... and these folks already live next to a set of train tracks.  They won't notice or care?

They do care, very much.  Opposition has been huge and fierce.  FirstEnergy's usual playbook tactic of creating the appearance of support for a transmission project to "balance out" opposition before regulators has massively failed.  At Wednesday night's public hearing, not one person giving comment supported this project.  JCP&L said,

How is it that JCP&L controls all public support for its project?  If JCP&L controls support, than it's not truly independent support, it's paid advocacy -- people acting as puppets to spew JCP&L talking points.  And this lack of grassroots support came after JCP&L spent buckets of money on door-to-door petition gatherers.

And misleading mass mailers with postage-paid return cards

And yet not one person was inspired enough to show up at the public hearing to voice support for this project.  JCP&L told them not to come.

I'm having a hard time believing that.  Did JCP&L waste all this time and money trying to buy advocacy only to submit a sanitized list of names of "supporters" to the BPU at a later date?  Or did the BPU finally call JCP&L out on all this nonsense and suggest that it not "elect" to have its supporters speak at the public hearing for fear that it may cause a riot?

So, public hearing safely in the can.  JCP&L lost big time in the court of public opinion.  Was democracy in action enough to sway the judge to recommend modifications to, or outright denial of, JCP&L's project?  Time will tell.  Formal evidentiary hearings before the judge begin next week.

You can follow along to find out the ultimate disposition of this horrific utility plan by liking Residents Against Giant Electric (RAGE) on facebook here and here.  And you just might find yourself wanting to join in this community's RAGE against FirstEnergy.

Just released by Neighbors United:

We the members of Neighbors United Against Ameren’s Powerline would like to thank everyone who supported us in our effort to prevent ATXI from building a project that had no input from the people it would affect the most – Us the citizens of Adair, Knox, Marion, Shelby and Schuyler counties. We would like to thank the county commissioners who continued to listen to their constituents concerns about the project and decided that what was in the best interest of the citizens was to affirmatively say NO!, to the project. They listened to the citizens and not the pressure from big business or the Missouri Public Service Commission (PSC). We would also like to thank our attorneys Jennifer Hernandez, and Arturo “Art” Hernandez for their hard work and dedication in litigating the case through the PSC and the Appellate Court.

Yesterday, March 28, 2017, the Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District issued its decision in the Mark Twain Transmission Line Project. In a unanimous decision, the Court of Appeals vacated the Report and Order issued by the PSC. The court ruled that a Certificate of Convenience and Necessity (CCN), which grants the utility the authority to build the transmission project, can only be issued after a utility has received permission from a county to build a power line. This decision negates the CCN that was granted by the PSC last year. That CCN had approved the line on the condition that ATXI obtain the permission to hang the lines over county roads from each of the 5 affected counties. The CCN granted overstepped the PSC’s authority, because the hearing should never have been heard unless and until the PSC received the county assents given to the utility.

This is a tremendous victory for our members and our local government. For almost three years local citizens of these 5 counties have struggled to have their voices and concerns heard. Too often big corporations, like ATXI come into our communities and talk about knowing what is in the best interests, and then bring big money to try to drown out the local citizenry. They rely on statements like “in the best interest of the state”, “lower costs”, future opportunities, etc. They forget that people, like those members of Neighbors United, who work the land, live in the community, raise families, pay taxes and vote, need to have a voice in the process as well. When the local citizens try to give their input, companies like ATXI turn around and demonize the hard working people who only want to protect their livelihood and property.

Yesterday every one of the citizens of the 5 counties involved in opposing the Mark Twain Transmission Line Project, were vindicated. Not only were the citizens of the counties directly affected finally justified, but all of the citizens of Missouri were on the right side of the law. Yesterday, the courts guaranteed that the voice of the individual citizens in this great state should be and can be heard. The courts vindicated what we, the members of Neighbors United Against Ameren’s Power Line have been saying since 2014 – big business must cooperate with local government and individuals for the good of everyone. The process of approving CCN’s and utility applications by the PSC must be accompanied by input of local government and citizens.

The input of our elected county officials is just as important as the engineers, the input of state and federal agencies, the big money, the profits, and convenience of conglomerates such as ATXI. For the past 3 years, we have fought to have our voices heard. Yesterday, the court gave a voice to the farmers, ranchers and local citizens of Neighbors United as well to all the citizens of Missouri. They ensured that local governments are not overlooked or ignored. They guaranteed local governments a place in the decision making processes that affect their constituents the most.

Yesterday, NJ Congressman Frank Pallone sent a letter to the NJ Board of Public Utilities requesting that the regulator open an audit of JCP&L to ensure that the company is not using ratepayer funds to underwrite its lobbying campaign.

Ut-oh, JCP&L!  Yes, your stated rate is not transparent.  You receive a set amount of money from the ratepayers to run your utility, and how you spend that money is pretty much up to you.  But, the thing is, the amount of money you waste on advocacy campaigns is money you don't spend repairing and modernizing your decrepit distribution system, and that causes outages.  While utility customers can directly benefit from repairs and upgrades to the system, nobody is directly benefiting from phone calls, postcards, and door-to-door petitions trying to drum up support for the Monmouth County Reliability Project in advance of tonight's public hearing.

Many people may be scratching their heads over the concept that not only must they pay their own expenses to oppose this awful project, but they're also on the hook for the cost of JCP&L buying support for its project.  You pay to fight them, and you pay for them to fight you.  Something's indeed wrong with this picture.

JCP&L's response to Congressman Pallone's letter:

Reviewed by whom?  The fox inside the hen house?  Whose procedures?  JCP&L's?  I'm not sure when I've heard a more weaselly statement.

And speaking of weasels and other predatory animals, I gotta say that you've outdone yourself with the bullshit this time, FirstEnergy!  But let's be real here, all your efforts to create advocacy for your project will fail because nobody will go out of their way to support a transmission project unless they're being paid to do so.  As if some random person will drive across the county, stand in a long line, and then sit for hours in a crowded auditorium waiting for a chance to speak in support of a transmission line  they've only recently heard of from a door-to-door day laborer... FOR FREE?  Surely you jest!  Whatever meager appearance of support you manage to milk out of your recent advocacy buy cannot stand up to the honest, forthright and committed opposition to your project.  In fact, perhaps the only thing you've accomplished is to tick off even more people who ordinarily wouldn't have paid any attention to your project.  You know how it goes...

I see FirstEnergy's media event yesterday got photo bombed by protestors.  What?  No helicopter rides?  Is that because its proposed route would only increase scrutiny?  Jamming a 230kV transmission line into a very narrow commuter railroad right-of-way is insane!  Who thought that was a viable idea?  The visual of that boggles the mind!  Erecting "sleek" monopoles just 15-feet from residential property lines doesn't provide adequate right-of-way, which is probably why JCP&L wants to condemn and take an additional "vegetation" right-of-way on residential properties.  Is that just smoke and mirrors to avoid actually paying for sufficient property for your right-of-way?  Ridiculous!  JCP&L isn't fooling anyone.

So, tonight's the big night!  The second BPU public hearing on the MCRP begins at 5:30.  Opposition will be huge and fierce.  The people will tell their stories.  Fake advocacy cannot withstand the storm.  RAGE on, folks!

News release from Block GBE-Missouri:

The small savings offered to municipalities cannot overcome the tremendous burden to Missouri landowners that would come with the Grain Belt Express, says Block Grain Belt Express-Missouri, in the wake of last week’s evidentiary hearing before the Missouri Public Service Commission.

“A majority of the Commissioners denied the project in 2015 because the burden on affected agricultural businesses and landowners was so great,” said spokesperson Jennifer Gatrel. “Nothing has changed.”

Claimed savings for municipalities were concocted with irrelevant and speculative studies which supposedly showed the savings from the Grain Belt line. The actual savings were much less than claimed when examined at the hearing.

Missouri Landowners Alliance (MLA) provided unquestioned expert testimony from agricultural experts and business owners demonstrating the huge financial burden GBE would place on citizens across northern Missouri. MLA expert Don Lowenstein testified that local tax benefits claimed by GBE could not be accurately predicted beyond the first year and that actual tax benefits to localities are likely to be much less than promised by GBE and its witness. Expert appraiser Kurt Kielisch provided testimony demonstrating property value decline and other impacts to agricultural and rural residential property that would be caused by GBE. A Ralls County Commissioner also provided testimony refuting GBE’s claims of local benefit, and declaring his staunch opposition to the project.

The Missouri Public Service Commission Staff, who acts as an advisory party in the public interest, continues to maintain their position that GBE must receive approval to cross county roads from the commission of each county where the line is proposed before the PSC can approve GBE’s application. Today, the Western District of the Missouri Court of Appeals issued a decision on county consent related to the recent Ameren transmission case, finding that that the PSC cannot issue a permit until after all the consents of the county commissions are obtained. The Court vacated the PSC’s decision in the Ameren case, where a conditional permit was issued before county consents were obtained. Grain Belt Express does not have county consent.

“At the hearing, I learned that GBE hugely discounted its service in its offer to Missouri municipalities in order to gain a toehold in the state, and that the normal price of GBE’s transmission service is five times the number offered to the municipalities. There are currently no takers for service to Missouri at the regular price. If GBE cannot find customers willing to absorb the loss created by the offer to the municipalities and make the project profitable, is there any guarantee that GBE will even build the station in Missouri proposed to serve municipalities?” asked group President Russ Piscotta after watching the hearings.

“We are nearly four years into this fight,” stated Jennifer Gatrel. Property rights are the backbone of farming and ranching. We keep on winning because we can't afford to lose. Somehow, someway we will always find a way to protect what we hold dear. It has been the most amazing journey of my life seeing so many diverse people come together from across the country to fight a common wrong."

Background: Grain Belt Express is a $2.7B, 700-mile high-voltage direct current transmission line purposed to move electricity from Western Kansas to Indiana and eastern markets. The speculative venture seeks profit for its investors from electricity market price differentials.

The week-long hearing on Grain Belt Express' third application to the Missouri Public Service Commission has been completed.  It was easy to watch the festivities on the PSC's live video feed.  If you missed it, you can watch archived video here.

Many are wondering what happened when Slick Willie visited Mayberry.

That's right, I said "Slick Willie."  Get your mind out of the gutter!  "Slick Willie" is defined as

And the self-awareness award goes to Clean Line's David Berry, for accurately describing his company as "sounding a little slick willie" when responding to questioning by the PSC Commissioners.

Slick Willie came to Mayberry this week, and the results weren't flattering.  Slick Willie doesn't play well in Mayberry.  Using Mayberrians as puppets to spew Slick Willie talking points was a miserable failure.  Mayberry just doesn't do Slick Willie.  But before we get to that, let's take a look at the Clean Line line up.

Company president Michael Skelly came across as arrogant.  He didn't seem to know much about anything, deferring all the hard questions to underlings testifying in his wake.  It must be really hard to work at a company where your fearless leader is so clueless about your business.  Skelly began every answer with the word "so."  There's been a lot written about this linguistic fad.

As used by Skelly at the hearing, it seemed to mean, "your question is unworthy of me, let me explain your question to you."  Or maybe it was more the avoiding a straight answer variety?  At any rate, Skelly needs to remove that word from his vocabulary immediately.  It makes him sound like an arrogant jerk.

When asked, "Did you personally fly in here to meet with utilities?" Skelly chose to argue with the questioner about the structure of the question, instead of answering it.  I didn't think it was a hard or deceptive question.  Skelly tried to pretend "personally" meant flying in on a personal jet (which he claims not to have....yet).  But Skelly couldn't remember how he got to Missouri.  He suggested maybe he took the train.  That was ridiculous.  A simple "yes" would have caused much less attention to the subject.  Trying to be slick willie when asked a direct question by a Mayberrian is a very bad plan.  And we'll get to that later, too.

And finally, on the subject of Skelly... who does your hair, man?  Did you pay a lot of money to a stylist who told you that looks good?  Save it for glitterati gatherings in Houston.  Mayberrians only use styling products to make hair stand up when arranging kewpie doll coifs on their babies prior to a professional photo shoot.  One Mayberrian commented, "His hair is ridiculous.  He's a grown man!"

Mark Lawlor.  Poor Mark, he's just not physically cut out to be a slick willie witness.  Mark has a tendency to grow a giant red dot between his eyes when trying to slick willie his way out of a direct question.  He also develops big red blotches all over his face.  And he scratches himself.  And drinks way too much water.  And sniffles into the microphone incessantly, while playing with a pen prop.  I kept waiting for him to stab himself in the eye with it and end his misery, but Mark persevered.  Although, appearing nearly doubled over on the stand while hugging himself didn't give me much confidence that he was going to make it to the end.

David Berry.  Slick willie.  One Mayberrian wonders if they keep him locked up in the basement of Zilkha Towers, hunched over his abacus, only let out to testify at regulatory hearings.  That's one unique dude!  But somehow he managed to be more personable than all the rest combined.  Too bad no one else in the hearing room was on the same astral plane as David Berry.

And now let's take a look at how Clean Line used Mayberrians to bolster their case at the hearings.

Wayne Wilcox.  Mr. Wilcox wrote all his testimony himself, and he was very generous with his elaboration of his opinions.  He stated that opposition to Grain Belt Express was taking away his rights.  Mr. Wilcox's opinions are factual, while the opposition's opinions are falsehoods.  I'm not going to elaborate anymore.  Mr. Wilcox's brief stint on the witness stand is in the archive.  I urge you to watch it.  Pop some corn to eat while you watch.  I did.  It didn't even look like he was wearing Clean Line's expert twitness shock collar.  What a pity!

Randolph County Assessor Richard Tregnago.  Nice tie!  When presented with a document that responded to one of the data requests addressed to him, Tregnago acted like he'd never seen the document before.  I think maybe he admitted that Clean Line supplied it.  He admitted that it is impossible for anyone to determine the amount of taxes GBE will pay after the first year.

MJMEUC witness John Grotzinger.  Oh, where to begin?  He denied that GBE had inserted a line into his testimony.  When faced with evidence that they did, he had to admit it.  Mr. Grotzinger wrote an email in late 2015 where his opinion of GBE wasn't exactly flattering.  I think maybe he thought that GBE was trying to buy its way into Missouri.  Mr. Grotzinger couldn't define the term "utilization rate."  Mr. Grotzinger admitted that GBE at normal pricing was more expensive than buying wind over the SPP transmission system.  An attempt to rehabilitate him was made on redirect, where he was given a more recent (higher) figure for SPP transmission rates by his attorney, and asked to plug that number into calculation of his exhibit tables.  After many long minutes of Mr. Grotzinger punching numbers into a calculator, and coming up with the number "7", the attorney did the math himself and asked Mr. Grotzinger if the attorney's math was correct.  Pathetic.  Since when do attorneys submit testimony?  It sort of looked to me like Mr. Grotzinger's testimony was done by someone else, maybe slick willie?  I dunno, but you should watch his testimony yourself to see what you think.

And, finally, the superstar award goes to MLA attorney Paul Agathan.  Clearly the best attorney in the room throughout the week.  Mr. Agathan had obviously researched each witness and their testimony.  He asked pertinent questions, and in numerous instances witnesses had to "walk back" or explain prior statements that were not proven factual.  And he did it all in a courteous, methodical fashion.  He never resorted to slick willie tactics or a disrespectful tone.  It takes my breath away to realize how much work Mr. Agathan did to prepare for this hearing, although he was the only attorney in the room not walking out with a fat pay check.  Anyone less than honest should fear Mr. Agathan.  He's a true Mayberry hero and deserves the thanks and gratitude of every Mayberrian!

So (heh), initial briefs are due in a couple weeks.  Reply briefs a couple weeks later.  Then we wait for the decision.  That gives you plenty of time to watch the archived videos for yourself.

Well done, Mayberry, well done!