Category:

Can Grain Belt Express Cure Coronavirus?

7/2/2020

OF COURSE NOT!

Leave it to the Missouri Times to publish a bogus editorial claiming that GBE could be solely responsible for Missouri "avoiding a catastrophic recession."

Hold your nose (and maybe a barf bag) while reading this pack of prevarications. It's GBE spokespuppet Lee Barker, back again to try to convince Missouri how great GBE is going to be. C'mon, Lee, who are you trying to convince? GBE has been bumping around Missouri for at least a decade now. There are no minds left to change. Glossing over the repugnance of the project only serves to set more opposition to the project. Is the purpose of this diatribe an attempt to make the guilty feel better about themselves? I really don't think the guilty care. They know they did wrong, but they did it anyhow because they wanted to please an out-of-state corporation who wants to make a whole bunch of money off the backs of Missouri citizens.

Where to start?

The developer of this clean energy infrastructure project has begun sending letters to landowners about the financial compensation they’re entitled to. Soon, rural Missourians will start to receive some of the more than $20 million that this project will pay to landowners over its life.
However, contributing landowners aren’t the only Missourians who stand to benefit from the Grain Belt Express Transmission Line.

Yeah, we know... and landowners simply don't care. The "letters" are going right into the trash. Nobody is going to receive anything because they're not signing easement agreements. Tell me, Lee, how do you know how much GBE is going to pay landowners? Did Invenergy share that information with you? That would be untoward, don't you think? Invenergy hasn't negotiated anything with anyone yet, but yet Lee knows how much this is going to cost the company. $20M divided between 700 landowners -- but Invenergy stands to make billions BILLIONS on this project over its lifetime. Does this seem fair to you? I also noticed that Invenergy is trying to get landowners to select to receive their "compensation" over decades, instead of when their land is taken using eminent domain. Why would anyone do that? There's a whole lot to digest in an Invenergy "letter" and it's best to discuss it with your attorney and tax advisor before taking any action (other than using it for animal bedding).

Lee seems confused about the difference between compensation and benefit. He uses both words. They mean entirely different things. Compensation is something, typically money, awarded to someone as a recompense for loss, injury, or suffering. Compensation is an attempt to make a victim whole. Benefit, on the other hand means an advantage or profit gained from something. The landowners are gaining nothing in this deal. Eminent domain merely requires "just compensation", it doesn't require "benefit." There is no benefit for "contributing landowners." Contributing? Yes, these landowners are contributing a portion of their wealth, peace of mind, and sense of place to a for-profit corporation in Chicago, and they're being forced to do it against their will. I wonder how much of Lee's 401(K) he "contributed" to Invenergy's profits? I'm going out on a limb here to guess none. Lee doesn't contribute anything, but he thinks others should.

Local energy suppliers will have the opportunity to use the more affordable electricity and pass the savings onto their customers. This will lower utility bills by more than $12 million every single year.

Oh, please. The savings aren't guaranteed and there is no requirement that any municipal utility "pass the savings" onto customers. Your city utility could use the entire savings to host a ritzy shindig celebrating Michael Polsky and you'd get nothing. Or maybe the woke mob can commission a statute to their new leader? Tell me about the savings after they happen. What guarantee is there that Invenergy won't pull out of the MJMEUC contract entirely? Better check that contract again...

The Grain Belt Express will also put a serious dent in the staggering unemployment rate by hiring 1,500 Missourians to work on the transmission line. While most infrastructure projects demand massive tax breaks in return for this level of job creation, the Grain Belt Express hasn’t asked for a single state incentive. In fact, it will inject more than $7 million into local communities through taxes.

1,500 jobs are going to pull Missouri out of a sure recession? Doubtful, even if 1,500 Missourians were offered jobs building the transmission line, which they won't. So far, landowners have seen a handful of land agents from out of state. The highly specialized labor required to build a project like GBE is also going to be imported. Jobs for Missouri aren't a part of GBE.

Of course GBE has asked for a state incentive! It's asked for the solemn power to take private property for its own use in order to make a profit. Much bigger than a minor tax break... and speaking of taxes... really.... $7M? That's chump change! How much will Missouri communities have to spend fixing roadways destroyed during construction?

Economic stimulation on this scale is quite rare, but it should come as no surprise. Under new ownership by U.S.-based Invenergy, the Grain Belt Express has become much more than a means of transferring clean, renewable energy across the state. It also includes a plan to bring broadband internet to communities in need.
Today, over 40 percent of counties in Missouri are without improved health care, education, business, communication, and entertainment because they lack broadband. Grain Belt Express aims to bridge the so-called “digital divide.”

Well, maybe the local communities can use their $7M windfall (spread among 8 counties, mind you) to actually make GBE's broadband accessible? Putting a wire on a pole doesn't create broadband by magic. You make Missouri sound like a straight-up slum, Lee! These poor communities don't have health care, education, businesses, communication or entertainment and only Invenergy can come to their rescue? Pure hogwash!

Hey, maybe you could use your "letter" to wash your hogs, or other fattened pigs wandering around your communities spreading manure?

2 Comments

A Transmission Horror Story

6/30/2020

0 Comments

Not exactly the right time of year, but gather 'round, boys and girls. This is the tale of the State Transmission Infrastructure Authorities Monster.

Who? If you're not a resident of one of seven unfortunate western states where the monster lives or has lived, this may be no more than a cautionary tale for you. However, if you live in one of the seven states that comprise the monster's stalking grounds, the horror is real.

Between 2006 and 2008, the monster was born as an idea to encourage the building of electric transmission within a state in order to increase export of energy produced in the state. It was just a pumped up economic development authority for energy. The idea was to give these state transmission authorities the ability to issue revenue bonds, allow corporations to avoid tax liability, and most importantly to utilize eminent domain to take private property from citizens and give it to corporations in the name of "economic development." These authorities like to pretend they are "catalysts" or "incubators" to bringing incredible riches to their state. In reality, they are steamrollers... flattening a path through the state in order to create profits for out-of-state corporate interests.

Despite a whole bunch of initial hype, this monster turned out to be kinda lazy. It hasn't accomplished much in more than a decade. In fact, the monster has been killed in several states (Kansas and South Dakota) after the people saw how lazy and ineffective their monster really was. Other states quickly defunded their monsters in an attempt to starve them out of existence. For the most part, that worked. The vast majority of the surviving monsters are weak do-nothings that barely survive on scraps tossed to them by out-of-state energy companies still toying with the idea of needing a good monster in the future to ram though a highly-profitable transmission idea.

And then there's New Mexico's monster. The Renewable Energy Transmission Authority, or RETA, is fat and happy on the cash out-of-state energy companies are feeding it. And, in exchange for a 3 squares a day, RETA is shambling around the countryside, gobbling up private property under threat of eminent domain, and stockpiling it for future ownership of the out-of-state energy companies that feed RETA.

RETA was established by the New Mexico legislature in 2007 to plan, develop, finance and acquire energy transmission and storage projects for the purposes of economic development. New Mexico figured it has excellent wind and solar energy resources, but not enough transmission to export it out of state. New Mexico is currently planning to permit just one out-of-state developer to build many more megawatts of wind energy than New Mexicans need.

The 3,000 MW potential for Pattern Energy would produce enough electricity to power 1,095,000 homes in New Mexico, according to Public Service Company of New Mexico. New Mexico has 948,000 housing units, according to the U.S. Census Bureau.

This energy isn't for New Mexicans. It's not about making energy "cleaner" in New Mexico. It's about harvesting cheap energy in New Mexico and making a huge profit selling it to other states (like California) that will pay a premium for imported "clean" energy instead of junking up their own state with the necessary turbines, solar panels, and transmission lines to make it themselves.

At what point will New Mexico wake up and realize it's nothing but a cheap date for out-of-state energy companies? The real money isn't staying in New Mexico, it's being shipped out of state right along with the energy. Only a few New Mexicans will see income from being California's energy doormat. The majority will find their properties irreparably damaged and turned into industrial energy plants while they feast on a few crumbs and "fair market value" attempts to make them whole in the wake of eminent domain takings. You'd think New Mexico would be at least as smart as some eastern states who are using economic development to produce energy for their own use. Produce energy in state, use energy in state, and all the economic development dollars stay in state for the benefit of its people. History should have already taught the lesson of what eventually happens to states that throw wide the doors for exploitation by out-of-state energy companies. The out-of-state companies get the gold, and the people of the state get the shaft.

Let's take a look at RETA's most recent financial audit, which is the best look you're going to get at RETA's finances.

Where did RETA get its money in 2019?

The Authority did not receive a State appropriation for the 2019 fiscal year. However, SunZia and Pattern Energy provided developer contributions totaling $550,000 to facilitate ongoing operations.
...........

In 2019, the significant revenue sources were developer contributions from Pattern Energy LLC, of $525,000 and Sun Zia Transmission, LLC, of $25,000.

All of RETA's money came from private developers in 2019. ALL OF IT. How is it that a quasi-state agency, using the power of the state, can be 100% funded by private corporations who can profit from the agency's actions? Isn't that a huge conflict of interest? If RETA doesn't do what its funders want, perhaps it won't receive additional funding. This is nothing more than a for-profit corporation masquerading as a "state agency" in order to take from the citizens of the state.

And to make matters worse, Pattern has signed an agreement with RETA to "lease" the property RETA obtains using the eminent domain power of the state. Pattern also will make RETA the "owner" of its Western Spirit transmission project. RETA doesn't pay state taxes... it is the state. See where this is going? RETA, on behalf of the State of New Mexico, is so eager to have Pattern "developing the economy" of New Mexico that it doesn't have to pay taxes. Pattern can take private property for its own for-profit use and doesn't have to pay taxes. How does New Mexico benefit from this again? The state is granting the right to take private property to an out-of-state company for its own profit. Doesn't exactly scream "move here for prosperity," does it? Economic development? Or corporate lackey?

RETA likes to pretend it was created mainly to issue revenue bonds.

The Authority’s Purpose and Highlights The Authority was created in 2007 based on the Laws of 2007, Chapter 62. The purpose of the New Mexico Renewable Energy Transmission Authority Act (the “Act”) is to create a governmental instrumentality to finance or plan electricity transmission and storage facilities within the State of New Mexico. The financing or acquisition of an eligible project would be accomplished through the issuance of renewable energy transmission revenue bonds or other debt instruments.

However, in the 13 years of its existence, it looks like RETA has not issued any bonds.

The Act created the Renewable Energy Transmission Bonding Fund, which shall consist of revenues received by the Authority from operating or leasing eligible facilities, fees and service charges collected and, if the Authority has provided financing or eligible facilities, money from payments of principal and interest on loans. Money in the Renewable Energy Transmission Bonding Fund is pledged for the payment of principal and interest on all bonds issued pursuant to the Act. Bonds issued pursuant to the Act shall be payable solely from the Renewable Energy Transmission Bonding Fund or, with the approval of the bondholders, such other special funds as may be provided by law. These bonds do not create an obligation or indebtedness of the state within the meaning of any constitutional provision. No bond has been issued thus this fund has no activity.

RETA is not financing transmission. It's also not "planning" it. RETA is simply responding to the out-of-state energy corporations who pay its bills. Its main purpose seems to be to acquire private property using eminent domain in order to create transmission rights-of-way that out-of-state energy corporations use to make a huge profit. RETA is nothing more than a corporate sugar daddy for Clean Line, Pattern, and Sun Zia. If you're a corporation that thinks it can make a lot of money exporting renewable energy from New Mexico, RETA is your sugar daddy monster!

Is it democracy when state government is funded by "donations" from corporations with a pecuniary interest in the actions of the state government? This isn't even hard to figure out... it's a straight up conflict of interest! And when you toss the taking of private property through eminent domain into the mix, it's a horror show!

Haven't we all been down the eminent domain for economic development road before? What happened, New Mexico? Were you out sick that day?

RETA's window dressing says it's all about protecting landowners, claiming on its website "We're here to help."

But when you get inside, it's a house of horrors. RETA is all about helping developers, not landowners. RETA needs a cash infusion from the legislature. Think about that... it needs state funding. Where does state funding come from? It comes from taxpayers. The state government has no source of revenue except taxpayers. RETA wants the citizens of New Mexico to pay its bills while it takes their private property and gives it to an out-of-state for-profit corporation.

Any touted cash payments to landowners are from wind farms, not the transmission lines RETA "develops." Not all landowners benefit equally from the construction of new transmission lines. Some landowners get royalty payments for hosting energy generators, but others get one time "make whole" payments for exporting the electricity across their property. The royalties wouldn't happen without the landowners exporting the energy, but yet these landowners are expected to participate basically for free. No wonder RETA needs to use eminent domain to set up its scheme whereby the few profit at the expense of the many.

When is the legislature of New Mexico going to wake up to the stink coming from its own monster? When is New Mexico going to stop acting like a cheap date for out-of-state energy corporations?

More about New Mexico coming soon: How Pattern changed Clean Line's rate scheme for Western Spirit in order to build a private-use generation tie line....

0 Comments

Out-of-State Corporate Money "Wins" in Missouri

6/24/2020

0 Comments

Just when you think you've seen everything 2020 has to offer...

An ousted "journalist" pens an article about "winners" of the 2020 Missouri Legislative Session. It's all about corporate lobbyists "winning" in their interference between the Missouri people and their elected representatives. Corporate money may be "free speech," but it cannot yet cast a vote. Seems like elected officials swayed by the smell of corporate money need to take a lesson at the next election.

The team lobbying for Grain Belt Express – Led by Nexus Nexus with Rodney Boyd, Kate Casas, and Brian Grace, along with Aaron Baker and Hannah Beers with Clout, the group put together a team early on in session that looked like there was little chance to succeed. It was rocky at the end, but they fought off what is almost certain to be the largest challenge to the project.

And who paid these "winners" for their time and effort? Invenergy, a corporation based in Chicago. So, what an out-of-state corporation wants to happen in Missouri is more important than what the people of Missouri want to have happen? Missouri got bought by a Chicago corporation. The legislators who did their bidding need to be replaced by legislators who want to work for the people they represent (Missourians! Not Chicago corporations!)

There was "little chance to succeed," but after a nice, long Coronacation, things mysteriously changed. I wonder how much that cost? I guess we'll find out when the campaign finance reports get published.

So, if Invenergy was the "winner," who's the loser? The people of Missouri.

The largest challenge to the project? Scottie, you ain't seen nothing yet!

0 Comments

Not In Microsoft Bill's Yard

6/17/2020

5 Comments

NIMBY!

Super-rich Microsoft tycoon Bill Gates is funding a new initiative to brain wash the American people into believing they need a "national" transmission system.

Don't fall for it!

Of course, none of these new transmission lines would be in Bill's yard, they would be in yours! He thinks you need a nationwide, high-voltage direct current (HVDC) network optimized for the nation's best wind and solar resources.

Thanks to generous support from Breakthrough Energy, an organization founded by Bill Gates that is working to expand clean energy investment and innovation, the Macro Grid Initiative will undertake wide-ranging educational efforts in support of transmission expansion to connect areas with low-cost renewable resources to centers of high electric demand. This can be accomplished by connecting grid regions like MISO, PJM and SPP.

Take a look at this propaganda group's maps of "America’s centers of high renewable resources". What's missing? Offshore wind. Offshore wind doesn't exist in this group's scenario. Why not? Because offshore wind doesn't require a "national transmission system." In fact, it requires very little new terrestrial transmission at all. Now guess who's paying for this little brainwashing expedition, and who might benefit if they can succeed in making America dumber, and completely upend the way we plan and build transmission and generation in this country.

And how do they plan to do that?

The Macro Grid Initiative seeks to build public and policymaker support for a new policy and regulatory environment that recognizes the substantial nationwide benefits of new regional and interregional transmission. Priority areas include:

An expanded nationwide and eastern grid with a focus on the regions of MISO, PJM and SPP.

The next round of regional and interregional transmission planning.

A fully planned and integrated nationwide transmission system.

A new Federal Energy Regulatory Commission transmission planning rule.

Achieving the Macro Grid vision will require new policies at the federal, regional and state levels that recognize the substantial nationwide benefits of an interregionally connected transmission network.

New policies at the state and federal level? Like usurping state jurisdiction to site and permit new transmission and planning the grid on a national level so that uncooperative states are run over in the process and affected landowners are left with nowhere to turn? How else would they:

...reduce barriers to development...

...overcome the barriers to siting long-line transmission facilities...

...upgrade our nation's aging and creaky transmission network...

...connect all this clean energy to our homes...

...expand regional and interregional transmission...

... build a strong national power grid...

Barriers? They mean you. They mean hundreds of thousands of landowners whose private property will be condemned using eminent domain in order to place an unwanted transmission line on private property and generate a huge profit to the owner of the new transmission line. Affected landowners will get nothing, not even one electron from the transmission line. HVDC is an unbroken line from beginning to end and requires outrageously expensive substations to convert it from DC to AC in order to connect with our existing transmission system. It's an electric highway on your property that you cannot use. Landowner payments are merely compensation for the market value of the land taken. They are an attempt to make landowners whole, not to realize any sort of profit.

Creaking? I've honestly never heard a transmission line creak. It whines, it hums, it crackles. It doesn't creak. Replacing existing lines to upgrade conductors and equipment happens when needed because our system must remain reliable at all times. This is so much crap. Bill's NIMBY initiative is about building NEW lines, not upgrading existing ones.

Instead of connecting centralized electric generation to our homes, people are increasingly installing their own electric generation on their homes. Corporations are installing on-site renewables on their stores, offices, and factories. We don't need to "connect" anything, just generate our own clean energy!

And this one. It deserves to be quoted in its entirety.

Michael Skelly, Founder, Clean Line Energy Partners; Senior Advisor, Lazard:
"Building out our grid brings jobs, efficient markets, and cheaper and cleaner power. No individual or company can do this alone. But together with a broad public and policy maker consensus I have no doubt it can and will be done. I'm excited to see ACORE and ACEG's Macro Grid Initiative take on this important effort."

YOU FAILED, Michael Skelly! You proposed building the same kind of "national" grid a decade ago, and you failed miserably after wasting $200M of investor's money. (Bill Gates beware!) A national grid isn't feasible. It's not what the people want.

Why not? Because they want to build renewable generation for clean energy in their own homes, neighborhoods, states and regions. They don't want to create a hole in their own economy where they stop creating local energy and economic development and begin to send their energy dollars to other regions. For example, let's look at New Jersey.

Yesterday, NJ Governor Phil Murphy announced plans to build a new port in Salem County to support the development of offshore wind farms off the Jersey Shore. Officials say the New Jersey Wind Port will create 1,500 permanent jobs, generate $500 million in annual economic activity, and help the state reach its goal of gradually relying more on so-called clean energy.

Does Governor Murphy want to pay for an outrageously expensive "national grid" so he can import energy from other regions and cancel his port project? My suspicions point to "no."

Likewise other eastern states, who plan to jumpstart their own economies by creating a robust offshore wind industry.

Nobody wants an exorbitantly expensive "national grid." And if you need an example of how such an initiative will fail, maybe you can ask Michael Skelly?

Take your propaganda and shove it, ACORE. Quit pretending you represent consumer interests, ACEG. Everyone knows where you get your funding, and it's not from consumers.

And while we're at it, next time your crappy Microsoft PC gets infested with viruses and quits working, toss it in the dumpster and buy a MAC. It might cost more upfront, but you won't have to buy a new computer every couple years. Unlike his proposed "national grid" your boycott of Microsoft products will end up in Microsoft Bill's Yard.

5 Comments

Invenergy Decides Not to Compete With Itself in Missouri

6/14/2020

0 Comments

Invenergy has pulled the plug on a wind farm in southwest Missouri that it has been planning for the past three years.

“Invenergy has decided to change course in Barry County,” said Meredith Jeffrey, manager of renewable development for Invenergy, in a statement to The Times.

That's it. Oh, there's also some speculation about interference with air traffic and wildlife, but when has Invenergy ever cancelled its money-making plans because they caused community impacts?

Now that Invenergy is going hammer and tongs on its Grain Belt Express transmission line to ship wind energy from "better places farther west with fewer people that are better suited", it has bagged its plan to build wind in Missouri. After all, why compete with itself and let Missourians partake of wind energy produced in their own state? Isn't it better for Missouri communities to pay Invenergy a bunch of money to create wind energy elsewhere and import it to Missouri? That idea has worked so well for goods manufactured in China, hasn't it? Things are so cheap! But a lot of local jobs dried up and the imports can't be depended upon.

Sorry, City of Monett, you're going to have to buy service on the Grain Belt Express if you want wind energy. You can't have locally produced power.

As an electric service provider, the City of Monett is interested in renewable energy and expanding our resource mix that already includes wind, gas and coal resources. The city may have an interest in procuring a local source of wind energy, but we have to balance that with concerns for the operation and future expansion of our airport and electric generator’s potential impact on our airport tenants and users.

Well, isn't that hypocritical... the city and county officials want wind energy, but they don't exactly want it in their own backyard.

“The thing about this area is we’ve got the wind, but the demographics and geography just are not conducive for wind towers,” Schad said. “We’ve got too many small concentrations of homes and two airports. It’s not so good when you look at the details.”

Well, guess what? None of the communities on the GBE route are conducive for transmission lines. They've got too many concentrations of homes and airports. But nobody seems to care about that when eminent domain has been granted. And speaking of eminent domain, here's a whopper....

As power producers and not as a utility, the company’s activities did not fall under oversight by the Missouri Public Service Commission.

When Invenergy is a "power producer" it's not a utility. But when it wants to build transmission to make its power production available at a different location, it is magically a utility with eminent domain authority.

I'm not fooled. A HVDC transmission line with no available connections except at an end point converter station acts more like a generator than a transmission line. It injects large amounts of power to the grid at a fixed location. It's not an open-access highway that will provide fixed-rate service for all customers who request it. It will only provide service for customers who offer to pay the most. That's not a public utility.

It remains to be seen if Invenergy will pack up its bindle and leave Missouri altogether when it finds out that Missourians want nothing to do with its GBE project either. Landowners have been resisting this company for more than a decade. They're not likely to cave in now.

0 Comments

GBE's Monopoles Bite The Dust

6/2/2020

2 Comments

Invenergy says it is sending out this letter to its landowner victims. I'm guessing it's supposed to endear them to you? Instead, I think it demonstrates how little Invenergy knows about issues that matter to landowners. I wonder what kind of an ignoramus wrote that thing... and designed the new "landowners" page on their website? Sort of looks like someone who has never done this sort of thing before and doesn't want to learn. It's like some socially inept twit going door to door trying to sell you rubber baby buggy bumpers.

First off, Invenergy wants you to know that it bought the rotten GBE hot potato from Clean Line Energy Partners. Well, good for you! W.C. Fields would be proud! Does anyone really care to find out about Invenergy, or want to read more about Invenergy tooting its own horn about how great it is? Probably not. Landowners most likely don't care about the pedigree of an out-of-state company who wants to take their land using eminent domain. It's about the eminent domain, not how great Invenergy thinks it is. Nobody is likely to be impressed. I do like how Invenergy tries to toss Clean Line under the bus though, gushing about how it has no affiliation with Clean Line, as if all the problems with the project were the fault of Clean Line? How badly do you have to behave to have people consider you worse than Clean Line Energy Partners? If you thought Clean Line was bad, maybe you should hold onto you hat! It looks like it's fixing to get much worse. Silly Michael Skelly may look like a hero when this faceless company is done with you.

Invenergy offers this reassuring nugget:

Please note that Grain Belt is seeking an easement – which is typical in linear infrastructure like electric lines and pipelines – and that you will retain full ownership of the land in the easement area.

Hey, great! You get to continue to own a strip of land that you've lost all control of. The only thing the owner gets is liability and tax burden... and of course a perpetual tenant they can't evict. Was this supposed to make the landowners feel good? It actually adds insult to injury. I'm thinking nobody wants to be Invenergy's landlord in perpetuity. Invenergy wants to take use of your land, but not the responsibility of ownership.

GBE/Contract Land Staff say they will be phoning you in the future to negotiate over land you don't want to sell. How many people answer the phone when their caller ID tells them it's some random cell phone caller from another area code? My new phone has a great feature button named "call block." If I don't like the looks of a caller, I simply press that button and they're gone for good. And even if I do mistakenly pick up the phone, there's no guarantee that I will be able to hear the caller clearly, phone service out in the boonies being what it is and all. So, watch your phones, folks! You'll soon have a new friend calling!

And then there's the blabber about how much Invenergy is going to help your community.... while taking from you personally. Why, you "could" have expanded broadband! Sure, you "could."

And speaking of could... GBE has been promising landowners for the past 10 years that the transmission tower structures "could" be monopoles. But, hey, guess what?

The structures will be lattice steel designs. All of them. Not a monopole to be had. Spare no expense for your comfort! Lattice structures are the cheapest ones to build. You didn't really believe all that Who Shot John about the monopoles, did you? Most landowners did not, so it's not really a disappointment. Landowners expected every promise made by Grain Belt Express to be broken. It's just one more.

I do feel bad for the Missouri PSC and the media though... they bought that 9 acres of land disturbed thing hook, line and sinker.

40x40=1,600 sq. ft. per tower. If for 200+ miles in Missouri need at least 4 towers per mile than 800 towers x 1,600 sq. ft. = 1,280,000 sq. ft divided by 43,560 sq. ft. per acre = 29.38 acres.

Is the PSC going to issue a revised press release on this? How about some breaking news stories? That number was always a fiction... as if only the base of the towers is disturbed for a transmission right of way stretching more than 725 miles across four states?*

Be sure not to miss the "example" easement map on the website. Because you mere farmers probably don't know how to look at a plat of your land without coaching from some land sharks from Texas and their know-it-all bosses in Chicago. This "example" shows a transmission right of way crossing the shortest side of a rectangular parcel in parallel to the parcel's border. Gosh, I sure hope Invenergy's straight line from Kansas to Indiana won't cross any parcels diagonally through the middle. Because that would make the example the exception, not the rule. Talk about using fiction to paint yourself in the best light possible... This is a ridiculous addition to the website. Whoever thought this up is a dolt. Especially because the "example" parcel shows some drainage being crossed. Hint: Don't use those kind of aerial photos... pretend the farmland drains by hidden magic!

Don't fear though, landowners, Invenergy will "minimize" its interference with your drain tile and repair any damage it does to an even better condition! Make sure any easement agreement you see guarantees that Invenergy will improve your drain tile. I'll believe it when I see it!

And don't fear having permanent roads laid down on your land. That only happens when there is no existing access to the right of way via public roads. It will be extremely RARE! Because every good farm field has public roads running through it already.

So, what's in it for you? Significant annual revenue for your county! You sacrifice your land and everyone in your county benefits from it. Oh, Invenergy, you sweet talker!

And how might you get paid? You'll get an amazing 20% of the value of your easement when you give it up. You can get the rest "prior to construction" (isn't the signing date prior to construction?) or you can be really silly and elect to get a fixed rate payment annually for the life of the easement. I wonder if you have to play a one-armed bandit to make this choice?

And if you have any questions not covered in Invenergy's generic letter or ridiculous website, who you gonna call? No, not Ghostbusters, although I would like to see a few land agents and well-fed corporate executives sucked up in the Ghost Trap. You're supposed to call Invenergy's land agent for advice. Worst advice, ever. Ask a lawyer... one not being paid by Invenergy. Invenergy land agents are representing Invenergy's interests here. They're not representing yours.

Remember, according to GBE's Code of Conduct, Invenergy must obtain your unequivocal permission before entering your land for any reason.

*As if anyone believes this lie anymore. Get ready, folks, it's the next one to go.

2 Comments

Missouri: Eminent Domain and Sneaky Legislators

5/19/2020

0 Comments

The Missouri Legislature's likeness to a murderous Roman senate took on new significance as the session expired on Friday. It also served to unmask a bunch of legislators with hidden agendas. Uncle Sigmund would be so proud!

Do the legislators who abandoned their constituents to carry the water of a Chicago-based company really think they can slip back into their sheep costume so quickly and nobody will notice? Not at all. The unmasking was effective and complete.

We all know that the senate "Conservative Caucus Republicans" rose up against the eminent domain bill for inexplicable reasons. Why? Nobody knows (but be sure to check campaign contributions and lobbyist reports later this summer). They stabbed it with their steely knives and they killed it dead.

But yet they still want their constituents to believe they are against eminent domain. Instead of explaining their actions, they choose to try to get back into character as a supporter of "property rights." Perhaps this will stick in your throat a bit, like it sticks in mine. Senator O'Laughlin seems quite proud that she prevented the use of eminent domain for the "Hyperloop." Because the hyperloop is experimental, highly expensive, uses private money, and is for benefit of people who want it, not everyone.

So let me get this straight... the hyperloop should not be granted eminent domain authority because it is experimental, highly expensive, uses private money, and is an elective project for benefit of voluntary customers.

What is Grain Belt Express? It's a first of its kind (experimental) interregional HVDC merchant transmission project. It's going to cost more than $2B to build, and will use money from private investors who will earn a healthy return on their investment. Its customers would be voluntary and rates would be negotiated in a free market.

Same thing. Exactly the same thing. GBE is an unnecessary, private-use highway that will be a huge money-maker for its owner.

Why should eminent domain be allowed for GBE when it is prohibited for the hyperloop? Hypocrites feel free to explain...

And now for the unmasking... while some Senators liked to pretend they were for private property rights and landowner interests, they flipped the heck out when they found out they had passed legislation requiring Invenergy to pay a 50% "heritage" premium on strips of land taken by eminent domain for the overhead transmission project. Slipped into a senate transportation bill, the legislation allowed county governments to make "heritage" designations of farms. Any so designated farm required an extra 50% premium on fair market value if it was taken by eminent domain. Consider this... GBE isn't taking entire properties, it's only taking a 200-ft. wide linear strip of land. It wants to pay for the "value" of just that strip of land, and not for the value lost on the entire farm. What GBE pays to take an easement is chump change. Why shouldn't it have to pay 50% more to compensate the owner for the compromised heritage value of the entire property? It actually sounds reasonable.

But the senate flipped out and called the bill back, squashing that idea. They called it "sneaky." Honestly, I think it's a lot sneakier to pretend you're for private property rights when you're actually working for an out-of-state company that wants to help itself to private property for the least cost. These legislators actually disrespect landowners so much that they can't make GBE pay a small premium to confiscate their property. They will let NOTHING get in the way of GBE taking your property cheaply so that it can build an extraneous transmission line for its own enormous profit.

When push came to shove, Missouri legislators chose Invenergy, instead of landowners, citizens, voters. Remember that in the voting booth.

So, what's next? Plenty of hurdles left on the field. Time to circle the wagons.

0 Comments

The Grain Belt Express StabGab

5/13/2020

2 Comments

The Missouri Corn Growers Association's e-StalkTalk newsletter informs:

This week marks the final week of the Missouri legislative session for 2020. With a six-week hiatus in the middle of their normal work period due to COVID-19, both chambers returned to Jefferson City expecting to pass the budget, maybe some high-priority pieces of legislation, and little else. However, that is not the case. The state budget was passed on time and now sits on Gov. Mike Parson’s desk. Leadership and committee chairs have attempted to pull together many omnibus pieces of legislation with “noncontroversial” provisions to get through the process before the final gavel drops on Friday, May 15 at 6 p.m.

Two items of interest to Missouri Corn include a measure to rein in eminent domain and a separate provision to require higher blends of biodiesel to be included in diesel fuel sold in the state. Rep. Mike Haffner (R-Pleasant Hill) worked diligently with Rep. Don Rone (R-Portageville) to attach the biodiesel legislation on the House floor to Senate Bill 618, which is now in conference committee. SB 618 also contains the provisions related to eminent domain, which Missouri Corn also supports.

Sen. Justin Brown (R-Rolla) and Rep. Jim Hansen (R-Frankford) are the champions for the eminent domain legislation.

There was a debate on this provision on the Senate floor last week when Sen. Brown attempted to amend it on a bill. Much to MCGA’s frustration, several Republican and Democrat senators stood up to block the provision. This important legislation is also still attached to Senate Bill 662; however, this bill has not yet been assigned a conference committee. In addition to supporting these pieces, MCGA staff is working hard to safeguard against detrimental provisions during a time when tracking legislation and interacting with elected officials is challenging to say the least.

Say what? Several Republican senators stood up to block the legislation? Who are these senators? Word is that they are the "Conservative Caucus Republicans." According to this article:

The caucus includes Sens. Eigel, Hoskins, Cindy O’Laughlin, Andrew Koenig, Bob Onder, and Eric Burlison.

Why would these Republicans be blocking legislation opposed by big Democratic campaign supporter Michael Polsky of Invenergy? If the legislation is blocked, Polsky will be able to increase his profits from the Grain Belt Express by acquiring private property cheaply using eminent domain. I wonder if he will use his increased profits to fund future Democratic campaigns? Maybe even future opponents of the Conservative Caucus?

What Polsky does with his riches isn't any secret. Just Google Michael Polsky + Hillary Clinton to find out about Polsky's huge 2016 fundraiser for her at his home in Chicago. $2700 per person.

Hillary Clinton spoke Tuesday about meeting with "a big group of clean renewable energy businesses," without noting that these companies' leaders gave financial support to her campaign and received taxpayer subsidies through the stimulus program.
"I met yesterday in Chicago with a big group of clean renewable energy businesses and they're just ready to go," Clinton said on the campaign trail in Iowa. "But they need some help from the government.
The meeting was in fact a $2,700-a-head fundraiser at the home of Tonya and Michael Polsky, the CEO and president of Invenergy, and hosted by four others whose companies received "help from the government" in the form of $2.2 billion in taxpayer-funded cash grants to boost wind, solar and hydroelectric-based projects.

And why is Polsky such a huge Democratic supporter?

Polsky, who also threw a fundraiser attended by President Obama ahead of the GOP midterm victory in 2014, received over $662 million in funding to boost wind and solar projects by the firm — with various partnerships throughout the country receiving the funds.

Outside of Polsky, Clinton fundraiser hosts Gabriel Alonzo, Mike Garland and Jim Spencer received nearly $1.6 billion combined for projects to push forward renewable and wind-based energy production.

Overall, Clinton has been a backer of alternative energy, with an emphasis on solar, during the seven months of her campaign. In July, Clinton pledged to put the U.S. down a path to creating enough renewable energy to power every U.S. home by 2027. The former secretary of state also vowed to have installed over 500 million solar panels across the country by the end of her first term in office.

Clinton called Tuesday for extending the tax credits that make these projects "worthy of investment," arguing that many jobs will be created as a result.

Meanwhile, debate continues at the legislature.

Also Tuesday, a joint committee of representatives and senators decided that eminent domain restrictions that would prevent the Grain Belt Express energy transmission project from becoming a reality will remain in an omnibus utilities bill.

The Grain Belt Express, an energy transmission project that would extend from Kansas to Indiana, would run across Missouri through eight counties, according to the project’s website. As planned, it would deliver 500-megawatts of wind-generated power to Missouri’s electric grid — with some going to Columbia.

Senate Bill 618 would hinder the project because of a provision that restricts the use of eminent domain, which refers to the government’s ability to acquire private land when it is needed for public use as long as compensation is provided.

The bill says, “no entity shall have the power of eminent domain under the provisions of this section for the purpose of constructing above-ground merchant lines.”

Lawmakers said that the House was not willing to compromise or consider removing the eminent domain restrictions.

During the conference committee, Sen. Jamilah Nasheed, D-St. Louis, asked if there was a reason the eminent domain issue was included as part of the overarching utilities bill. She said that she and others “may like the underlying bill” but wanted to do something different on the eminent domain question.

Rep. Jim Hansen, R-Frankfort, referenced the Missouri Supreme Court’s 2020 decision in favor of the Grain Belt Express project but emphasized that the court had not ruled on the issue of eminent domain. The Supreme Court “did not rule on whether or not they had the right to eminent domain,” Hansen said of the individuals pushing the Grain Belt Express project. “I think it’s our job to make eminent domain laws dealing with a project that this state has never seen before by a private company.”
He added: “Pass it. Let’s go to the Supreme Court.”

It's no mystery why the Democratic senator wants to "do something different on the eminent domain question." It frees up some Invenergy profits to fund future Democratic campaigns in Missouri. But why are conservative Republicans opposing it?

Rep. Hansen is spot on! The Supreme Court did not ponder whether eminent domain was constitutional for GBE because there is no law yet and therefore the issue was not properly before them. So, what's the harm? Pass it, and let the Supreme Court do its job on constitutionality. It's not the legislature's place to rule on this issue. Each branch of the government has a distinct job. It is the legislature's job to pass legislation wanted and needed by their constituents. To hold up or outright oppose enormously popular legislation would make a Roman senate proud.

Et Tu, Brute'?

The legislative session may end on Friday, but the landowners will long remember the harassment and eminent domain suits to come because some senators decided to work for the interests of Chicago-based Invenergy in 2020.

If you don't want to see it end this way, contact the Senators standing in the way of this legislation and let them know how you feel. Do it right now!

2 Comments

What's the Highest and Best Use of Your Property?

5/8/2020

0 Comments

One day, you may find yourself harangued by a utility land agent, eager to purchase an easement through your property.

The agent may start out offering you the lowest value in the company's prepared, secret value range for easements on your property. This number is derived from "market value" studies of similar properties in your area. The utility conducts these studies for its own information. Try asking to see the relevant market value study used to value your property and watch the agent dance.

The market value study attempts to make a comparison between your property and others that have sold in the recent past. But instead of using all data available, certain data is rejected. Everyone knows that this "Garbage In, Garbage Out" magic math method is used to skew the results.

Once a company has completed its market study, your property is compared to the typical property and adjustments are made, either positive or negative, based on your property's own unique attributes. If you've ever seen a property appraisal, it's the same basic concept.

The utility is comparing your agriculturally zoned property to another zoned the same way. However, zoning could change to allow other possible future uses, couldn't it?

In some instances, a farmer's wealth is tied up in his land. Instead of a fat 401(K) account stuffed with employer match, the farmer may rely on development or sale of his property to finance his retirement. Building an overhead electric transmission line, or a buried gas or oil pipeline changes future possibilities for the property. What once was a prime chunk of land for building new homes is now not suitable for that purpose. How is the landowner compensated for foregone future use of his property when a land agent makes an offer?

He's not. Consideration of factors like this, known as a property's “highest and best reasonably available use” under Pennsylvania law, only come into play when the value of your property is determined by a court during an eminent domain suit. You may end up being more suitably compensated if you refuse all the land agent's offers.

Check out this case from Pennsylvania that was recently decided by the 3rd Circuit. While the court found that the pre-taking valuation was too high, it was a matter of multi-family housing vs. single-family housing. It wasn't a choice between agricultural and residential or commercial. What was really interesting is the court's affirmation of the post-taking valuation which found that the easement materially affected the property's value for future development. It found that the utility's authority to "approve" future land use in the easement gave the utility the ability to arbitrarily deny any future land use proposed by the property owner, and this affected the property's future value for development.

How might a transmission line easement across your property affect your future plans and take money out of your pocket? Just one more reason to slam the door in the land agent's face.

0 Comments

Grain Belt Express Burdens Landowners

5/6/2020

0 Comments

Grain Belt Express is a merchant transmission project. Merchant transmission is different from traditional transmission projects built by utilities and approved by regulators on a cost-plus, rate-of-return basis. Utilities have captive customer bases, and new transmission necessary to serve their customers is paid for by the customers. This is not a voluntary or elective action. The customers are "captive" and must pay for the transmission as part of their service. On the other hand, merchant transmission does not have a captive customer base. Its customers are voluntary, and the rates they pay are freely negotiated between the customer and the merchant transmission owner. The idea is that merchant transmission cannot impose its costs onto any person who does not voluntarily participate in its project.

Merchant transmission should not be granted eminent domain authority. Eminent domain authority allows the involuntary condemnation of private property. It allows the authority to impose involuntary costs on landowners who choose not to participate in the transmission project. The landowner's property value is not freely negotiated between buyer and seller when the transmission company has eminent domain authority. The price is capped at whatever the transmission company wants to pay. If the owner doesn't accept the offer, the property is taken through eminent domain and the price paid is set by a court (or mediation).

Merchant transmission uses eminent domain to keep its land acquisition costs low, although it is not charging its customers on a cost-plus basis. The benefits of acquiring land cheaply aren't flowing to the customers, they're flowing into the pockets of the merchant transmission owner.

Just in case you need to see this concept in action, take a look at the minutes of a February 5, 2020 meeting of the City of Columbia, Missouri Water and Light Advisory Board.

Property rights could drive up the cost of Grain Belt Express. But what does Columbia care? Its negotiated rate cost through MPUA is fixed by a contract signed years ago. Property rights will not increase Columbia's cost of electricity. Respecting private property rights will only increase Invenergy's cost to build the project. If Invenergy's costs to build the project go up, and its rates charged to Columbia stay the same, private property rights come out of Invenergy's profits, not Columbia's pockets.

Invenergy is the only one who benefits from eminent domain.

Eminent domain should NEVER be authorized for merchant transmission. It does not benefit the customers or landowners. It only benefits the for-profit transmission owner, Invenergy.

0 Comments

<<Previous

Forward>>

Can Grain Belt Express Cure Coronavirus?

A Transmission Horror Story

Out-of-State Corporate Money "Wins" in Missouri

Not In Microsoft Bill's Yard

Invenergy Decides Not to Compete With Itself in Missouri

GBE's Monopoles Bite The Dust

Missouri: Eminent Domain and Sneaky Legislators

The Grain Belt Express StabGab

What's the Highest and Best Use of Your Property?

Grain Belt Express Burdens Landowners

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