StopPATH WV
  • News
  • StopPATH WV Blog
  • FAQ
  • Events
  • Fundraisers
  • Make a Donation
  • Landowner Resources
  • About PATH
  • Get Involved
  • Commercials
  • Links
  • About Us
  • Contact

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!
Picture
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.
Picture
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.
Picture
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

 
Picture
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.

Picture
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

Show Me Your Front Group, Invenergy!

4/30/2020

6 Comments

 
The Missouri Legislature is back in session, and that means Invenergy's expensive front group is also back in session.  In fact, a key person managed to catch a clip of one of their ads yesterday.  The advertisement asked people to "contact your senators" about Grain Belt Express. Yes, please do, otherwise they're going to get their information from Invenergy's bloated front group.

What's a front group?  A front group is an organization that purports to represent one agenda while in reality it serves some other party or interest whose sponsorship is hidden or rarely mentioned. The front group is perhaps the most easily recognized use of the third party technique.  The third party technique has been defined by one public relations (PR) executive as, "putting your words in someone else's mouth."

Invenergy calls its front group "ShowMe Connection," and purports it to be a "Community Organization" on Facebook with more than 1,500 "likes." 

Let's dive in folks! 

Picture
Back in December of 2019, someone registered the domain name "showmeconnection.org" through an agent. 
Our Mission
We support access to broader vital services across the state through the promotion of innovative projects resulting in positive economic, environmental, and community impact.

Right... but don't waste your time folks... there's really nothing there except links to the front group's facebook and twitter accounts.  And that's where things get interesting and the strings multiply...

Let's look at Twitter first...

ShowMe Connection has only 4 followers.
Picture
Let's find out who they are.

MPUA is obvious and needs no explanation.  It's the overstuffed municipal utility organization hungry for a free lunch at everyone else's expense.

Craig Gordon is SVP of Government Affairs for Invenergy.  "Government Affairs" is corporate speak for lobbying.
Picture
What a coincidence that he's one of only 4 followers of a Missouri "community organization," right?

Courtney Ryan works for LS2Group.  LS2Group is a public relations company located in Iowa that does work for transmission companies, like Clean Line Energy Partners, and that work has included other attempts at front groups.

That "Jazz" guy?  Who cares.  Apparently he uses his Twitter account to monitor stuff for work... like front groups?

This Twitter account has been used to post garbage-y things related to Grain Belt Express.  It pretty much looks like nobody is paying attention except the bozos behind the front group. 

Now let's take a look at the front group's Facebook page.  Again, garbage-y GBE stuff that nobody seems to be following.  Despite its claim to have 1,500 "likes," the posts only have less than 5 "likes" and many of those come from people involved in the front group.  Here's an example:
Picture
Worked with landowners?  How is drawing a line on a map "working with landowners?"  Best path?  The landowners don't agree.  The 39 communities aren't in the "best path," although this bogus post sort of tries to make the reader think that the supporting communities are composed of landowners who think it's the best path.  Garbage.  Misinformation.  Lies.  That's what front groups do.

Now let's start adding string....  According to the "Page Transparency" box, this Facebook page is owned by "James Brian Gwinner." 
Picture
Who is this guy?  He's a partner at LS2Group.   He's also an active Missouri lobbyist.  Facebook requires this transparency for pages that run ads about social issues, elections, or politics.  And sure enough, this front group is running advertisements on facebook.  So far, it's spent up to $500 on "social issues, elections or politics" ads.
Picture

Wasting taxpayer dollars working to stop the project?  These heroic legislators (nee "politicians") are doing the work guided by their constituents, the people who vote for them.  They're not doing the work of out-of-state for-profit corporations with bloated lobbying and public relations budgets.  Missourians truly do deserve better than Invenergy and its stupid front group games that treat them like stupid sheep.

Facebook pages that advertise in this category are required to disclose who paid for the advertisement.
Picture
Oh look, ShowMe Connection has an address.  It's a UPS Store.  Nope, nothing shady here, folks....

Does ShowMe Connection really exist?  Let's ask the Missouri Secretary of State, Jay Ashcroft.

ShowMe Connection was registered as a domestic non-profit corporation on December 31, 2019.  Non-profit?  I'm pretty sure if you dug below all the astroturf, you'd find that Invenergy is funding this "corporation" and they're all about the profit.

ShowMe Connection's Articles of Incorporation filed with the Secretary of State show still more names associated with this front group.  There's an Iowa lawyer (because what does an Iowa PR group know about registering a Missouri corporation?) and then it needed a Missouri lawyer to be its registered agent.  These guys are just figureheads.  They don't matter.  But, they do manage to shield the real people running this front group, don't they?

The Front group was formed for the following purpose(s):
Focus on What Matters, Inc. (the "Corporation") is a nonpartisan organization having as its primary purposes the following: (i) the education of our local communities on public policy, including economic policy, relating to local communities and governments; (ii) the education of the general public on economics and public policy; and (iii) generally advancing and preserving the rights and responsibilities of citizens to appreciate the benefits of and ensure the continued existence of competition, economic freedom, and free markets. Notwithstanding the foregoing, however, the corporation is organized exclusively for charitable, religious, educational, and scientific purposes, including, for such purposes, the making of distributions to organizations that qualify as exempt organizations under section 50l(c)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (or corresponding section of any future federal tax code).
Focus on What Matters, Inc.?  Was that the original name of this front group?  Or is it some fake DBA name?  I'm guessing it was a name that changed to make the front group sound "more Missouri" by using the state's popular "show me" in its name.  Focus on What Matters, Inc. (FOWM) doesn't seem to actually exist anywhere (except in the minds of the LS2Group, who thought it up in the first place as a sparkly front group name).  Furthermore, ShowMe Connection amended its Articles just a couple months later to remove the reference to FOWM.  Looks like these hired gun lawyers filed the wrong corporation name.  Auspicious!  Obviously not the sharpest knives in the drawer...

ShowMe Connection says its purpose is "charitable, religious, educational, and scientific ."  Which purpose is served by asking Missourians to contact their Senators to support Invenergy's for-profit transmission project?  Not charitable.  Not religious.  Not educational.  Not scientific.  Political!  It's a political purpose.  It's lobbying on behalf of Invenergy.  Seems like maybe these two sharp knives pretty much lied to the Missouri Secretary of State about their corporation's purpose.  The evidence of this is attached to all this front group's strings.

And isn't it interesting that ShowMe Connection supports free markets?  There's no "free market" being carried out by the taking of private property via eminent domain instead of allowing the landowner to negotiate with the company in a free market that recognizes the true value of his land.  Invenergy can cut off any negotiations that go above what it wants to pay by threatening to begin the eminent domain process.  Either the landowner agrees to Invenergy's price, or else!  There's no free market going on where Invenergy needs to meet the landowner's price in a freely negotiated purchase.  And this, right here, is why for-profit merchant transmission projects that sell their service in a free market should not be able to circumvent that same free market to take private property at a low price.

Let's sum all this up... There's some entity calling itself "ShowMe Connection" advertising in Missouri to encourage voters to contact their Senators.  This entity is a front group for Grain Belt Express project owner Invenergy and is run by Invenergy's public relations company in Iowa, with the help of some local folks.  It's not a "community organization."  It's a corporate front group.

However, you should contact your Senators, folks!  In fact, why not contact all the Missouri Senators, if you have time?  Let them know you support legislation to prohibit eminent domain for Grain Belt Express and want to preserve private property rights!  If you don't, the only voices these Senators may hear could come from Invenergy and its front group puppets.  Don't let some Chicago corporation run your state government!  Now is the time to act!
6 Comments

Is Invenergy Changing the Grain Belt Express Plan?

4/26/2020

1 Comment

 
Why would a company spend a whole bunch of money (and we're talking millions here) engineering a route for a transmission project when it doesn't yet have construction and routing approval from all states along its path?  Seems like the cart has overtaken the horse at Grain Belt Express since Invenergy bought the struggling project.

Invenergy says that it's not changing the project's route.  But when you dig a little below the surface, there are changes that have been made.  Why?  Why are these changes necessary in order to execute the same project Clean Line had envisioned? 

Let's take a look at the most recent regulatory filing Invenergy made in a state along its original route.  In order to complete the sale from Clean Line to Invenergy, the following was required:
Picture
Supposedly the transaction closed and Invenergy became the owner of GBE at the end of January, 2020.  That means that all these things must have occurred.  The Kansas and Missouri permits transferred successfully to the new owner.  The Indiana permit transferred successfully to Invenergy by Order of the Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission on January 2, 2020.  But what about Illinois?  In its Indiana application, the company stated, "Grain Belt Express intends to seek regulatory approvals for the Project in Illinois after Missouri, Kansas and Indiana processes have concluded."  Those three processes concluded with the Indiana Order on January 2.  In an April 16, 2020 status report to the IURC, Invenergy stated, "As is discussed in more detail below, as of January 2, 2020, all of the conditions precedent required to close the Transaction under the MIPA were met, and Invenergy closed the Transaction on January 28, 2020."  Invenergy closed the sale even though it had not received Illinois approval (or even applied for it).  Invenergy stated on April 16, "Grain Belt is currently evaluating its options to continue pursuit of its Illinois CPCN."  But it wasn't supposed to close the sale until it had "permits necessary or materially desirable for the project from the ICC."  I guess that means that a permit from Illinois is not necessary or materially desirable for the project, no matter how much Invenergy ruminates on its "options" in Illinois.  Sounds like a bunch of smoke and mirrors to me because none of this adds up.  Invenergy closed on its deal with Clean Line despite the fact that it had no permit in Illinois.  And take a look at how that stipulation is worded... Kansas and Missouri are required, but the Illinois and Indiana approvals use weasel words like "necessary" and "materially desirable."  Maybe GBE doesn't plan to build its power line through Illinois or Indiana at all?  Or maybe it plans to build it in phases, with the Illinois and Indiana portions not "necessary" at this time?  Maybe GBE wants to connect somewhere else?  Remember, GBE lost its MISO interconnection position a couple years ago, along with its option to purchase a site for its Missouri converter station.  One thing's for certain... without Illinois, GBE is a puzzle with one huge section missing.  It can't connect to Indiana without going through Illinois, and it doesn't seem to be in any hurry to do that.

What else changed?  In its original Indiana permit issued in 2013, GBE was required to transfer functional control of its transmission line to MISO or PJM.  However, in its most recent permit from Indiana, Invenergy has asked for and been granted permission to also transfer functional control of its project to SPP.  Invenergy said this was necessary so it would have, "the flexibility to transfer this control to SPP, should SPP prove to be a better fit for Grain Belt's facilities and plans than PJM or MISO."  A better fit for GBE's plans?  What plans would those be?  Clean Line didn't need the option to transfer control of its project to SPP, but Invenergy does.  Why?  Why would it be "better" to have a transmission line delivering the bulk of its energy to Indiana controlled by the RTO serving generators a thousand miles away?

Invenergy was also granted a change to the information it must file in annual reports in Indiana.  Clean Line was required to "File annually with the Commission information about any affiliates that own or control electric generation resources in the MISO or PJM regions."  Clean Line didn't own any generation.  But now Invenergy wants to "streamline" its reporting by eliminating this requirement pertaining to affiliates, and replace it with a static list of its affiliates in PJM and MISO (but not SPP, keep that in mind).  Here's Invenergy's list of affiliated generation in PJM and MISO.

Picture
Could Invenergy sell transmission service to its own generation and give them preference over other generation owners?  Could Invenergy simply decide not to sell service to others at all and use GBE as its own exclusive highway to serve its own generation in PJM, MISO, or SPP?  Sure, why not?  The only trouble with that would be that such a transmission line would not be for a "public purpose" and would have trouble using eminent domain to acquire property.  I guess Invenergy needs to hurry up and secure all the private property it needs under its current eminent domain authority before it makes even more changes to its plans.

Invenergy's intentions for the Grain Belt Express project are about as clear as mud, and the words coming out of one side of its mouth don't agree with the words coming out of the other side.  Or, as Judge Judy says...
1 Comment

Puzzle Time:  What's Missing From This GBE Report?

4/16/2020

0 Comments

 
Yesterday, Invenergy filed its "annual status report" with the MO PSC.  If you've been following along, there's really nothing new here.  There's more fun to be had figuring out what's missing from this puzzle than there is in reading what is included.  Does this "report" actually give the PSC an accurate and up-to-date picture of the status of Grain Belt Express?  Or is it missing crucial  pieces?  How would any reader know what the status of GBE is from reading this report?

Here's a list of the amazing things Invenergy accomplished since last year:
  • a rebranding of the Project and a new Project website;
  • outreach to numerous state and local officials and other stakeholders to introduce Invenergy as the new Project owner and to provide a status update;
  • issuing easement payments to landowners with active easements along the Project route;
  • establishing field offices to support development efforts;
  • building out the Invenergy Project team, including adding in-house development and project management personnel dedicated to the Project; and
  • implementing a contractor selection process for Project development services to commence in 2020, including engineering, environmental permitting, and land services.
Let me sum that up for you:

"Rebranding"... as if any of the landowners or local governments give 2 cow patties who owns this unneeded project.  This marketing play is completely worthless when applied to a transmission project in rural America.  Keep that crap in Chicago, where it matters.

Invenergy did not provide any real information or answer any questions during its "rebranding" tour.  The only thing its "outreach" did was tick people off all over again.

Issuing payments to the few landowners who were gullible enough to sign easement agreements with Clean Line Energy Partners is REQUIRED by the agreements.  Quit trying to pretend like its some sort of voluntary, magnanimous act.

Establishing field offices.  Now opposition groups have a physical target for future protests.  Thanks a bunch, Invenergy!  Maybe someone will stop by with a basket of banana muffins?  Wow!  Deja Vu!

And hiring people.  Like anyone cares.

What's missing from the State Regulatory Approvals and Appeals section?

Let's see... Kansas, check.  Missouri, check.  Indiana, check.  Hey, wait a minute, how do you get to Indiana from Missouri?  You don't.  Illinois is in between.  What's Invenergy doing in Illinois?   Doesn't say.  We'll interpret that as NOTHING, Invenergy is doing NOTHING in Illinois.  Ya know, you just can't get power from Kansas to Indiana without Illinois, Invenergy.  What's your intention?  It is relevant to your "status."  Do tell...
Picture
And FERC... what's going on at FERC?  Again, nothing.  Although Invenergy was quite diligent about seeking approval for its purchase of GBE from states along the route that had issued permits, it doesn't even seem to think it should send FERC a notice that the project has changed ownership.  Is the change in ownership relevant to FERC's negotiated rate authority?  Only FERC could make that determination.  Must fall under the category of begging forgiveness instead of asking permission.  Pretty risky proposition for a project that relies on negotiated rate authority to acquire customers.  It's almost like Invenergy doesn't care about negotiated rates anymore...

Blah, blah, blah... Invenergy has hired some contractors to actually do the work on its project.  Sounds like Contract Land Staff and Burns & McDonnell, but for some reason the reader is supposed to guess the contractors from the clues given in the report.  Gotta keep those brains sharp during corona ennui!  I'm still puzzling over the clue for the converter station contractor... Siemens or ABB?  Who wants to guess?

And about that land agent contractor... Invenergy says its contractor will  "...hire and train qualified land agents who will interface with property owners and negotiate easement agreements."  Qualified land agents?  There's a huge difference between a professional land agent and a licensed real estate agent.  It's two completely different careers, with two completely different skill sets.  Invenergy's contractor is hiring anyone with a valid Missouri real estate license and "training" them to be land agents.  It would do better to send its professional land agents to get licensed to sell real estate in Missouri.  That could result in less mistakes being made... but who cares about the well-being of Missouri landowners?

Obviously not Invenergy, whose section about COVID-19 is laughably self-serving.  It was only AFTER intervention by the Governor, local government officials, legislators, attorneys, and landowners that Invenergy agreed to pull its virus-denying "land agent" out of the field and stop her endangerment of others by knocking on their doors unannounced.  Good riddance! 

And speaking of that land agent...
Land agents were also deployed in Missouri to discuss survey access with landowners for certain parcels identified as priorities by Project environmental and engineering teams, with surveys expected to be conducted later in the year.
So if she showed up at your place, your parcel has been identified as a priority for environmental and engineering surveys.  It would be a real shame if you refused to sign their paperwork and the surveys couldn't be completed this year.

And I have a bit of a bone to pick with Invenergy's language.  This statement.  It nearly made me vomit.
To demonstrate its commitment to invest in Grain Belt and in communities and landowners along the route, in Q3 2019 Invenergy made easement payments on all easement agreements that had been signed by the Project’s previous owner, Clean Line, and were still active when Invenergy signed the MIPA.
Invest in landowners?  INVEST?  What the heck are you thinking, Invenergy?  Do you think you OWN landowners once they sign your easement agreements?  And what's wrong with your thinking process that equates just compensation for property taken against a landowner's will with some sort of beneficent gift, Invenergy?  You're completely whacked!  And offensive.  You're obscenely offensive to landowners.  Go invest in someone else who appreciates you.  Missouri does not.

But what about the customers?  Grain Belt Express is nothing but an idea without customers.  You'd think that having enough customers to support a revenue stream for the transmission line would be relevant on a status report, right?  If GBE doesn't have enough customers to pay for the transmission line, it cannot build the transmission line.  GBE's current customer list doesn't even pay their fair share of their own burden, never mind result in profit, and could never support the building of the project.  If GBE had any other customer interest, you'd think they'd at least mention the subject.  Instead, zip, zero, zilch.  Invenergy doesn't even mention customers.
Picture
Is Missouri really going to allow Invenergy to continue its efforts to take land from good, taxpaying citizens for a project that doesn't have enough permits to be built in its entirety and doesn't have any customers to financially support it?  Grain Belt Express is an unfinished puzzle with a whole bunch of pieces missing.  It's nothing but a half-baked idea that cannot stand up without the missing pieces.  But it sure sounds like Invenergy plans to start harassing landowners for easements as soon as they can get back out in the field.  GBE may be a pipedream, but its harassment of Missourians is about to get real.

What kind of a company spends a whole bunch of money building parts of a project without having enough pieces to complete it?  This is like building an interstate highway from Kansas to Indiana without a connection in Illinois. 

Invenergy can waste its money any way it wants, but threatening Missourians with eminent domain at this point just seems abusive to me.

I could have written the GBE status report using just 5 letters.  FUBAR.  Done.
0 Comments

More Missouri Municipality Misinformation

4/4/2020

0 Comments

 
The Missouri Public Utility Alliance (MPUA) and the Kirkwood electric department don't know how government works.

MPUA's spokesman recently opined regarding a recent Missouri Supreme Court rejection of an appeal of the MO PSC's decision to issue a permit to Grain Belt Express.
This decision sends a strong signal to the state legislature that the project has the constitutional basis to proceed with a wind energy transmission line through Missouri,” according to Kincheloe.
And, according to Kirkwood's Petty:
“We would also hope that this helps convince legislators that we will prevail in the courts if they attempt to block the project. Clearly precedent is on our side on this one and this Supreme Court decision demonstrates it,” Petty said.
I'm going to guess these two guys failed basic government classes.  The legislative branch makes the laws.  The executive branch enforces the laws.  The judicial branch interprets the laws.
Separation of powers is a doctrine of constitutional law under which the three branches of government (executive, legislative, and judicial) are kept separate. This is also known as the system of checks and balances, because each branch is given certain powers so as to check and balance the other branches.
If the legislative branch makes a new law that clearly prohibits the use of eminent domain for merchant transmission projects, the judicial branch would interpret it in conjunction with other existing laws, and the executive branch would enforce it.  The courts do not make laws.  And the courts cannot prevent the legislators from making new laws.  These two yakkity-yaks are beyond confused.  They seem to think that the appeals court decision the Supreme Court refused to re-hear somehow prevents the making of new laws because making new laws would be "unconstitutional."

Let's stop and ponder this... the decision of the court is based on EXISTING law.  It's not based on hypotheticals of passing new laws.  When a court determines that an existing law does not do what the legislators want it to do, it is up to the legislators to make a new law.

And that's exactly what they plan to do as soon as the legislature goes back in session.
“Quite honestly, I’ve been focusing on keeping the power on in the wake of the coronavirus crisis,” said Petty. “I’m not sure where things are in the Senate. Hopefully, this Supreme Court ruling will be something they use as guidance.
Sure they will... guidance demonstrating the urgency for making new laws!

In the court decision, the standard of review was whether the PSC had the authority to approve the project under the existing statute.  The court found that it did.  The court also had to determine whether the PSC's action was reasonable; that is whether it was based on substantial evidence.  The court found that the PSC's decision was reasonable.  The court also found that GBE met the definitions of "electric corporation" and "public utility" under existing laws.  However, if the law changes, all that goes out the window.  If the law prohibits the PSC from issuing a permit to a certain entity (such as a merchant transmission project as defined by the law), then all those prior findings fail at their source... whether the PSC has the statutory authority to approve the project in the first place.  If the PSC has no authority to issue a permit, none of the rest of it matters.  There are no constitutional issues here.

Full steam ahead at the legislature!
Earlier this year, the Missouri House of Representatives passed by a 118-42 a bill sponsored by Rep. Jim Hansen, R-Frankfort. His bill will prohibit developers of the 4,000-megawatt high-level transmission project from forcing landowners to sell property.

“This bill protects the rights of landowners in Missouri,” Hansen has insisted in sponsoring the bill.

The Senate also is expected to support the bill along party lines. Petty has urged Kirkwood residents to contact legislators and express their concern over the statehouse blocking the new green energy source.
Looks like Missourians are in good shape at the legislature, once it's back in session.  If any residents of Kirkwood even bother to contact their legislators and plead their case to save a few cents on their electric bills, it is likely to fall on deaf ears.

This editorial masquerading as news is an untimely bit of propaganda based on a misreading of the law.  Legislators are not constrained in any way against the making of new laws.  Trying to convince them that they are is misinformation.

Be ready to go when the time is right, folks!  Defeat of GBE is still a very real possibility!
0 Comments

Invenergy Finally Says It Will Stop Going Door-to-Door During Pandemic

3/24/2020

0 Comments

 
Two days ago I asked what it was going to take to make Invenergy show some consideration for others and stop making unannounced visits to landowners across the state.

Here's what it took.
Picture
The people of Missouri could have no better advocate than Ralls County Presiding Commissioner Wiley Hibbard.  When he found out that Invenergy was continuing to make its door-to-door calls on landowners, and also sending agents from out-of-state to do business at the Ralls County Courthouse, he kept working until the issue was resolved.

It also took intervention by the Governor's office, Rep. Jim Hansen, Missouri Farm Bureau, MLA and EMLA attorney Paul Agathen, opposition group leaders, and the landowners themselves.

But, finally, Invenergy acquiesced this morning and said it would halt the in-person visits.  Of course, they also claimed they never made them in the first place, or if they did it was at the landowner's invitation.
An Invenergy official said the contacts ended last week and included communicating with the landowners.

"Members of our team held meetings, upon approval from landowners, to discuss conducting these surveys later this spring,” said Beth Conley, Invenergy spokeswoman. “These meetings were halted when CDC guidance limited the ability to have in-person meetings.”
'scuse me, Beth, but the CDC guidance for social distancing started long before last week.  That's why the people were so disgusted by Invenergy's refusal to stop putting them at risk with home visits!  Quit trying to pretend Invenergy wasn't doing anything wrong.  Invenergy put the lives of Missourians at risk by sending traveling land agents and courthouse researchers from other areas into their communities, and Invenergy did it long after the first request to stop was made.

And how DARE you pretend that any of these visits were made with the "approval" of landowners?  "Approval" would imply prior consent, not just showing up unannounced, which is what Invenergy agents did.  Just because landowners answered the door doesn't mean they "approved" the visits.
Picture
And Invenergy would still be doing it without all the effort of many people in Missouri.  Like these people don't have anything better to do than invest a week of their time trying to inspire some ethics at Invenergy?  I'm thinking that this company must regularly put its own profits over the well-being of the communities where it does business.  Not exactly a way to inspire confidence in landowners that they would be treated fairly in easement negotiations, is it?  Invenergy = public relations fail.

And what else does Beth have to say?
Since the state commission approved the Grain Belt Express, a number of “development activities” must take place before the beginning of construction, which is expected in late 2021, Conley said.

For example, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services and the Missouri Department of Conservation require Invenergy to conduct bat surveys so the line can avoid rare populations of the species, she said.

Someone get the hose... I smell something burning!  Does Invenergy really think construction is going to begin in 2021 when it hasn't even applied for a permit in Illinois yet?  Hey, guess what?  Those bats will still be there after the pandemic.  You're not convincing me that there's an urgent need to survey them during a pandemic, a need so urgent that people's lives should be put at risk.  And what do you mean "avoid"?  I think the word Beth was looking for is "mitigate."  Mitigate:  make less severe, serious, or painful, lessen the gravity of (an offense or mistake).  No transmission line has ever "avoided" endangered bats, they only "mitigate" the damage they cause.

So, mission accomplished, for now.  Be sure to let your group leaders know if you receive any more uninvited visitors.  The groups have requested that Invenergy monitor the health of its representatives that have traveled through rural Missouri over the past two weeks and to notify the groups if any Invenergy agent becomes ill.  By the same token, any landowners who become ill after having come in contact with an Invenergy representative should probably let group leaders know so the information can be passed on to Invenergy.

With this kind of introduction, Invenergy's going to have an even bigger hill to climb in Missouri... or maybe it's more a hole to slither out of...

Pretty despicable, Invenergy.
0 Comments

Invenergy Demonstrates That It's Profits Over People

3/22/2020

0 Comments

 
Picture
Was it just a month ago that spokespuppets from Invenergy claimed they were "very invested in the communities where we develop and build projects"?

Ya got a funny way of showing it, Invenergy.  In fact,  Invenergy continues to demonstrate that it puts its profits over the well-being of the people in the communities where it intends to build its Grain Belt Express transmission lines.  I'm talking about Invenergy's continuing door-to-door calls across rural Missouri to seek landowner signatures on a "Survey Access Form."  If you sign this form you "acknowledge" that Invenergy will enter your property to perform whatever tests and surveys it wants.  I wouldn't sign this form even in a healthy environment, much less during a global pandemic.

Sure looks like Invenergy is in a giant hurry to do a bunch of very expensive tests and surveys.  In fact, it's in so much of a hurry that it feels the need to send strangers out to call on landowners unannounced for the express purpose of getting signatures right now, today.  This is not only annoying, it's downright unconscionable and dangerous during a time when we've been advised to avoid unnecessary travel and stay at home in order to avoid contracting or spreading the virus.

Last week, an attorney for two landowner groups sent a request to Invenergy's attorneys asking that the unannounced personal visits from land agents cease until the isolation restrictions are lifted. 
Corona Virus Worries:  Landowner Groups Ask Invenergy to Suspend Land Agent Visits
 
March 19 – Two landowner groups have requested that Invenergy temporarily suspend its practice of making uninvited personal visits to individual homes by company land agents seeking rights-of-way and survey permissions for the Grain Belt Express electric transmission project (GBE).  The Missouri Landowners Alliance and the Eastern Missouri Landowners Alliance have requested the practice cease until such time as federal and state officials determine there is no longer any need for "social distancing" as a means of slowing the spread of the Corona virus.
 
The landowner groups have received several reports from individual landowners of GBE representatives showing up at their homes along the route unannounced and asking for their signature on a notice form to allow the entry of other unnamed individuals to perform numerous studies and tests at their properties.   Other landowners have found information packets from Grain Belt Express left on their doorsteps.
 
“It is my understanding that no one can guarantee that keeping a distance of 3-6 feet from someone carrying the virus will necessarily prevent its transmission.  And of course there is no guarantee that this distance would be maintained during the course of any conversations between the land agents and the property owner.  For example, handing a business card or any other document to the landowner would bring the two individuals in close proximity, if not actual physical contact.  Therefore, rather than take any chance at all of Grain Belt's agents inadvertently transmitting the virus to property owners, the most reasonable course of action at this time clearly would be to temporarily suspend all such in-person contacts,” said landowner attorney Paul Agathen in his request to Invenergy’s attorneys.
 
Landowners have reported that the visitors have presented themselves as real estate agents from other states working on behalf of Grain Belt Express, or agents of Contract Land Staff based in Texas.  None of the visits have been made by people with local contact information, leading the landowners to worry about transmission of the virus from other areas.
 
“I’m not sure what the rush is here,” said Representative Jim Hansen (R-40th District).  “Grain Belt Express isn’t approved in all states and has no designated connection point for its transmission project in Missouri at this time.  There’s no need to sacrifice social distancing health recommendations in order to rush this project through.”
 
The landowner groups’ request stated that Grain Belt's desire to move the project forward cannot possibly justify even the slightest possibility of transmitting the virus from Invenergy agents to even one of the property owners.  Some of the landowners are in the age category which would make them even more vulnerable to serious health problems if they should become infected.  Landowners also worry about person-to-person transmission in their own communities via Grain Belt Express land agents, as well as the possibility of transmitting the virus from a property owner to one of those agents.
 
“A person traveling door-to-door across rural areas is unlikely to be able wash their hands between calls,” said landowner Jim Daniels of Wright City.
 
Landowners note that Grain Belt Express may still try to contact them via phone or mail in the meantime, but vehemently object to the current practice of spontaneous in-person visits that may spread the virus from person-to-person.
 
“We’ve been told to stay at home and isolate ourselves from others to stop the spread of the virus,” said Dr. Dennis Smith, Assistant Professor, Clinical Emergency Medicine, University of Missouri, Columbia.  “It defeats the purpose of social distancing to have strangers pulling up in the yard and trying to hand us business cards or permission forms.  We don’t know where they’ve been, and we don’t know where they’re heading next.  A time of national emergency to prevent the spread of a highly contagious virus is the wrong time to be going door-to-door.”
Instead of showing its "investment" in the communities it proposes would host Grain Belt Express through the use of eminent domain, Invenergy continued its visits, with additional reports filtering in at the end of the week.

Landowners in eastern Missouri say they were visited by a young woman from Kansas City (incidentally Missouri's virus hot spot with the most reported cases and the location of Missouri's first "stay at home" order).  The woman was very friendly and chatted with a landowner about her own family (5 kids) and revealed she would be calling on landowners in the Amish community that same day. 

There have been several media reports about Amish in other states continuing to have gatherings and maybe taking a different view of social distancing.  The last thing they need is a Typhoid Mary, or maybe it's a Corona Cathy, potentially introducing the virus into their community.

In addition, several states have taken action to prohibit door-to-door energy sales during the pandemic.

But Invenergy is still going at it hammer and tongs.

What's it going to take to get them to show some concern for others?

Do you suppose if you knocked on the door of Invenergy CEO Michael Polsky (assuming you could even get to the door of one of his mansions) that he'd open the door and take business cards from you, have a chat and sign your papers, and then go back to his own family?

Not In Michael's Back Yard.

But he feels it's okay to send out a mother of 5 from a corona hot spot to visit unsuspecting landowners across the state and then bring whatever she may have come in contact with back to her own nest.  What kind of monster is this guy?

Some landowners are now looking to protect themselves by emailing Invenergy's project manager and advising her to keep Invenergy agents off their property.  Poor old Krista, you gotta admit she's got a hard job acting as a landowner punching bag to keep the riff raff away from her bosses in Chicago.  But, hey, if it makes you feel better, go ahead and email her at  [email protected].  But don't hold your breath... she's been fabulously unable to provide answers or information requested by landowners to date.  How effective could she possibly be at keeping landowners and land agents safe from the spread of coronavirus?

People's champion Wiley Hibbard is undeterred, however.  He recently penned his own plea to Krista:

Dear Ms. Mann,
I want you to know that in my opinion Invenergy's policy of continuing to have person to person contact with residents along the proposed route to be reckless and dangerous.
How do you explain bringing a person from New York through Texas then send her to the Ralls County Courthouse to come in direct contact with many people that work there. Or bringing an outsider from Kansas City to visit the Amish community. There are many such contacts by Invenergy personal.
I would appreciate an answer to why Mr. Polsky feels that during our National Emergency this type of perilous actions are needed by him.
If you can assure me that none of your employees or contract worker have not been exposed to the COVID-19 I will withdraw my objections.
Awaiting your reply,
Wiley Hibbard
Presiding Commissioner
Ralls County, Missouri

Bringing someone from New York (via Texas) to expose the people at the Ralls County Court House?  Oh.my.word!!!  New York is the national hot spot for the virus!

Why, Michael Polsky, why?  What's it going to take to show concern and respect for Missouri landowners?  Why don't you email him at [email protected] and ask?
0 Comments
<<Previous
Forward>>

    About the Author

    Keryn Newman blogs here at StopPATH WV about energy issues, transmission policy, misguided regulation, our greedy energy companies and their corporate spin.
    In 2008, AEP & Allegheny Energy's PATH joint venture used their transmission line routing etch-a-sketch to draw a 765kV line across the street from her house. Oooops! And the rest is history.

    About
    StopPATH Blog

    StopPATH Blog began as a forum for information and opinion about the PATH transmission project.  The PATH project was abandoned in 2012, however, this blog was not.

    StopPATH Blog continues to bring you energy policy news and opinion from a consumer's point of view.  If it's sometimes snarky and oftentimes irreverent, just remember that the truth isn't pretty.  People come here because they want the truth, instead of the usual dreadful lies this industry continues to tell itself.  If you keep reading, I'll keep writing.


    Need help opposing unneeded transmission?
    Email me


    Search This Site

    Got something to say?  Submit your own opinion for publication.

    RSS Feed

    Archives

    August 2025
    July 2025
    June 2025
    May 2025
    April 2025
    March 2025
    February 2025
    January 2025
    December 2024
    November 2024
    October 2024
    September 2024
    August 2024
    July 2024
    June 2024
    May 2024
    April 2024
    March 2024
    February 2024
    January 2024
    December 2023
    November 2023
    October 2023
    September 2023
    August 2023
    July 2023
    June 2023
    May 2023
    April 2023
    March 2023
    February 2023
    January 2023
    December 2022
    November 2022
    October 2022
    September 2022
    August 2022
    July 2022
    June 2022
    May 2022
    April 2022
    March 2022
    February 2022
    January 2022
    December 2021
    November 2021
    October 2021
    September 2021
    August 2021
    July 2021
    June 2021
    May 2021
    April 2021
    March 2021
    February 2021
    January 2021
    December 2020
    November 2020
    October 2020
    September 2020
    August 2020
    July 2020
    June 2020
    May 2020
    April 2020
    March 2020
    February 2020
    January 2020
    December 2019
    November 2019
    October 2019
    September 2019
    August 2019
    July 2019
    June 2019
    May 2019
    April 2019
    March 2019
    February 2019
    January 2019
    December 2018
    November 2018
    October 2018
    September 2018
    August 2018
    July 2018
    June 2018
    May 2018
    April 2018
    March 2018
    February 2018
    January 2018
    December 2017
    November 2017
    October 2017
    September 2017
    August 2017
    July 2017
    June 2017
    May 2017
    April 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    January 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016
    August 2016
    July 2016
    June 2016
    May 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    January 2016
    December 2015
    November 2015
    October 2015
    September 2015
    August 2015
    July 2015
    June 2015
    May 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015
    February 2015
    January 2015
    December 2014
    November 2014
    October 2014
    September 2014
    August 2014
    July 2014
    June 2014
    May 2014
    April 2014
    March 2014
    February 2014
    January 2014
    December 2013
    November 2013
    October 2013
    September 2013
    August 2013
    July 2013
    June 2013
    May 2013
    April 2013
    March 2013
    February 2013
    January 2013
    December 2012
    November 2012
    October 2012
    September 2012
    August 2012
    July 2012
    June 2012
    May 2012
    April 2012
    March 2012
    February 2012
    January 2012
    December 2011
    November 2011
    October 2011
    September 2011
    August 2011
    July 2011
    June 2011
    May 2011
    April 2011
    March 2011
    February 2011
    January 2011
    December 2010
    November 2010
    October 2010
    September 2010
    August 2010
    July 2010
    June 2010
    May 2010
    April 2010
    March 2010
    February 2010
    January 2010

    Categories

    All
    $$$$$$
    2023 PJM Transmission
    Aep Vs Firstenergy
    Arkansas
    Best Practices
    Best Practices
    Big Winds Big Lie
    Can Of Worms
    Carolinas
    Citizen Action
    Colorado
    Corporate Propaganda
    Data Centers
    Democracy Failures
    DOE Failure
    Emf
    Eminent Domain
    Events
    Ferc Action
    FERC Incentives Part Deux
    Ferc Transmission Noi
    Firstenergy Failure
    Good Ideas
    Illinois
    Iowa
    Kansas
    Land Agents
    Legislative Action
    Marketing To Mayberry
    MARL
    Missouri
    Mtstorm Doubs Rebuild
    Mtstormdoubs Rebuild
    New Jersey
    New Mexico
    Newslinks
    NIETC
    Opinion
    Path Alternatives
    Path Failures
    Path Intimidation Attempts
    Pay To Play
    Potomac Edison Investigation
    Power Company Propaganda
    Psc Failure
    Rates
    Regulatory Capture
    Skelly Fail
    The Pjm Cartel
    Top Ten Clean Line Mistakes
    Transource
    Valley Link Transmission
    Washington
    West Virginia
    Wind Catcher
    Wisconsin

Copyright 2010 StopPATH WV, Inc.