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

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

Ding Dong!  Know Your Rights Before GBE Comes Calling

3/12/2020

0 Comments

 
Picture
"Core sample" machine
Word is that Grain Belt Express has begun calling on Missouri landowners to seek their permission for "surveys" and invasive testing of their properties.
We were contacted yesterday by someone representing Invenergy.  He stopped by our  house.  The landowner spoke with him.  The landowner was told that they wanted to do a “bat study” on our property along the proposed route.  He said they would want to camp out overnight and use a gun to throw nets to try to catch bats to find what species they were with the potential of moving the line based on the location of these bats.  He also mentioned doing some core samples.  The landowner did not give him permission.  We have cattle that are calving in that area right now, and having someone out there at night would definitely spook them.  Regardless of whether we had cattle out there or not, he was not going to give them permission.  The guy noted an “N” on his paperwork indicating that the landowner said No to the study, and then he wanted the landowner to sign next to that “N”.  He did not sign that either.

The landowner asked for his information, and his e-mail address was “Mossy Oak Properties” so it seems that Invenergy is outsourcing this testing.
Lots of things to unpack here. First of all, someone from Mossy Oak Properties is disclaiming any responsibility for this caller's actions.  Mossy Oak says this person is an impersonator and not affiliated with Mossy Oak.

Next, let's move on to the the premise that Mossy Oak Properties would be doing the testing.  No, they will not.  First of all, the "Mossy Oaks" guy is an impersonator.  Second, that's not what land agents do.  Land agents work for a real estate company.  The most they do professionally is contact landowners for permission to survey.  The bat surveys would be conducted by a third party environmental survey company with the requisite skills and expertise.  Nobody knows the name of this company, and the land agent impersonator isn't telling.  It looks like perhaps the impersonator is insinuating that he would personally be conducting the bat survey, along with the "core sampling."  What is core sampling?  It's drilling deep holes on your property using large pieces of equipment in order to discover the make up of soils and rocks 30 feet down under the surface of your property.  The company would use this information to engineer the bases for their towers.  Again, the land agent doesn't have this expertise.  It's simply a middle man.  Being a middle man with no real knowledge of the procedures and their purpose, you may not believe anything Invenergy's representative says, including who he works for.  The only thing binding would be on the piece of paper the land agent wants you to sign that grants Invenergy/GBE permission to perform any kind of testing it wants on your property, at any time it wants, using any part of your property it wants, and creating whatever damage or hazards it wants.  Why would anyone voluntarily sign this form?  Notice also that the Invenergy representative tried to get the landowner to sign another piece of paper instead.  But he was smart enough to refuse to fall for that trick.  Don't sign anything!
Picture
Core drilling
What are your rights in this situation?  It's best to consult an attorney for legal advice.  One attorney has opined that Invenergy does not have the right to survey or test your property without your express permission as set out in GBE's "Code of Conduct" for employees and representatives.
Obtain unequivocal permission to enter property for purposes of surveying or conducting environmental assessments or other activities. Clearly explain to the property owner the scope of the work to be conducted based on the permission given. Attempt to notify the occupant of the property each time you enter the property based on this permission.
You may be told that the Missouri PSC has approved the project and that the company has a right to enter and test your property.  That may be so, but that approval does not require you to grant permission to do so.  You never have to grant voluntary permission for entry and testing, and the Missouri PSC (or a court) can never order you to grant voluntary permission by signing a form.  And then there's GBE's "Code of Conduct" which requires the company to obtain unequivocal permission before testing.  GBE filed this "Code of Conduct" with the PSC and promised to abide by it.  It can't change its mind now without express PSC approval to change the "Code of Conduct".  You may refuse to sign anything, just like the quoted landowner did.

The "Code of Conduct" also requires any employees or representatives to promptly identify themselves upon making contact with landowners.  Although it doesn't specifically state it, we can presume the representative must also accurately identify himself.  Maybe you should ask to see a photo ID?
a. When contacting a property owner in person, promptly identify yourself as representing Grain Belt Express Clean Line.
b. When contacting a property owner by telephone, promptly identify yourself as representing Grain Belt Express Clean Line.
How prompt was the land agent's identification to the quoted landowner?  Sort of sounds like it didn't happen until the end of the conversation.  That's not prompt.  Prompt means in the first sentence uttered, and certainly before asking a landowner to sign anything.  In addition, it is purported to be a misrepresentation.  Who was this guy?

We're not off to an auspicious start here.  Perhaps Invenergy needs to review its "Code of Conduct" with its third party contractors and land agents.  And guess what?  YOU should also review the GBE "Code of Conduct".  In fact, why don't you print out your very own copy and keep it on hand so you can review and critique the actions of the representatives that invite themselves to your property?  Violations of the "Code" should be documented and reported to the various opposition leaders in your community.  How best to document these violations?  Of course, video reins supreme in today's digital lifestyle, but a written record of the conversation can also be used.  Be sure to write down what happened as soon as possible, while your memory is fresh.

And if you refuse to sign anything, remember, the representative is prohibited from doing this:
Do not threaten to call law enforcement officers or obtain court orders.
And they have to leave when you tell them to leave.  It can be at any time you find them on your property.
When asked to leave property, promptly leave and do not return unless specifically authorized by Grain Belt Express Clean Line.

All communications by a property owner, whether in person, by telephone or in writing,
in which the property owner indicates that he or she does not want to negotiate or does not want to give permission for surveying or other work on his or her property, must be respected and politely accepted without argument. Unless specifically authorized by Grain Belt Express Clean Line, do not contact the property owner again regarding negotiations or requests for permission.
Just a note here... GBE does not have any right to tell its representatives to trespass on your property after you have told them to leave.  You have every right to tell them to leave and they must leave "promptly."  Let's hope that's a lot more "promptly" than they identify themselves.
Invenergy's invasion of Missouri has begun.  This is going to be a long process, folks, and become more desperate as landowner resistance becomes the norm.  The more desperate Invenergy becomes, the more its representatives may stray from their "Code."

I'm still trying to figure out the rush here.  Why is Invenergy spending millions of dollars seeking voluntary permissions and easements with landowners in Missouri when it doesn't even have an end point for its project or enough customers to make it economically viable?  Maybe you want to ask the representatives who call if Invenergy has even applied for a permit in Illinois yet?  Ask for a list of its contracted customers?  Ask to see ownership of land for the converter station proposed to be built in Missouri?  You have a right to this information, according to the "Code."
All communications with property owners and occupants must be factually correct and made in good faith.
a. Do provide maps and documents necessary to keep the landowner properly informed.
b. Do not make false or misleading statements.
c. Do not purposely or intentionally misrepresent any fact.
d. If you do not know the answer to a question, do not speculate about the answer. Advise the property owner that you will investigate the question and provide an answer later.
e. Follow-up in a timely manner on all commitments to provide additional information.
f. Do not send written communications suggesting an agreement has been reached when, in fact, an agreement has not been reached.
g. If information provided is subsequently determined to be incorrect, follow up with the
landowner as soon as practical to provide the corrected information.
h. Do provide the landowner with appropriate contact information should additional contacts be necessary.
Why is Invenergy trying to obtain voluntary easements in Missouri now?  This is the million dollar question.

We've all been told to avoid large gatherings and practice proper hygiene to prevent the spread of the corona virus.  But here's Invenergy, sending people door-to-door to call on folks unannounced.  Where do these Invenergy representatives come from?  And where do they go after they leave?  Do they wash their hands between calls?  Who would you be permitting to enter your property?  Who will be showing up at your property unannounced?  Doesn't seem very safe to me.  This is exactly the wrong time to have strangers calling on people and trying to share forms, pens and information with them.

If it was my farm, I'd put one of these at the gate.
Picture
0 Comments

Is GBE Making Promises It Can't Keep?

3/3/2020

0 Comments

 
Invenergy's Krista Mann is touring Missouri County Commissions and making all sorts of promises.  But are they promises Grain Belt Express can keep?  Or are they just empty promises serving as a carrot on a stick to lure Missouri in for the kill?

In Monroe County last week, Mann said that GBE will now add cell sites to its electric transmission towers, in addition to its earlier promise to add broadband. Was she just trying to sweeten her prior promise that simply fell flat?  Let's hope the addition of cell sites is one of those promises that doesn't actually materialize.
Picture
Remember the MO DOT report concerning corrosion of nearby underground metallic infrastructure caused by DC transmission lines?  GBE claimed that its bipolar construction would limit that effect on parallel gas pipelines, although that did little to allay the concerns of potential host landowners who would have to live and work around the parallel infrastructure.

Well, guess what?
Three engineers found that cell sites on electric transmission towers can lead to corrosion on underground wiring.
So adding cell sites to GBE would directly cause corrosion on parallel, underground metallic infrastructure, such as wiring?  Would that exacerbate the amount of corrosion on adjacent pipelines as well?  Well, gee, thanks for the offer to put bombs on your transmission towers, GBE.  Seems like this idea needs a bit more research.  Gotta wonder if Invenergy's engineers have even vetted this idea, or is Mann just making up stuff that she thinks Missouri wants to hear?

If Missouri suddenly falls in love with GBE because it will provide broadband and cell sites (of course, this will never happen) what are the chances of it actually happening?  Seems pretty slim.  Seems more like Mann is just making empty promises.

And speaking of empty promises... Mann told the audience in Monroe County that Invenergy continues to have discussions (that are going well) with commercial companies to have Missouri be a bigger part of the project, possibly delivering all its power to Missouri.  Oh, c'mon!  What does Missouri need with 3,500 MW of unreliable wind power from Kansas and Oklahoma?  And which Missouri utilities are going to pay above cost for transmission capacity in order to cover the "savings" GBE promised to municipalities in order to get them to sign a contract? 

Reality check... maybe Invenergy doesn't intend to build its project through Illinois to connect to the east coast electric market?  Perhaps they've finally seen the impossibility of getting a permit from Illinois?  Congratulations, Invenergy!  However, chances of finding customers for 3,500 MW of transmission capacity in Missouri are even more impossible.  It's not happening.

And here Invenergy sits holding the rotten hot potato it purchased from Clean Line Energy Partners.  It's a project that can't work as envisioned.  It's a square peg trying to fit into a round hole.  Invenergy thinks if it pounds its hammer hard enough, the peg is eventually going into the hole.  Invenergy is now trying to change the project to make it work.  And Invenergy is now threatening to open its wallet to begin acquiring easements across Missouri, even though its project currently has no end point.

Sounds like a pig in a poke to me.

Is Invenergy really about to spend millions of dollars gambling on a project that has no end point and no customers?  That would make the company just plain old stupid, in my opinion.  Or does Invenergy have a plan that has yet to be revealed?  What if it decides not to sell capacity on GBE after all and simply uses GBE as its own private generation lead line to sell its own power generation at a point in Missouri?  That's not a public use, it's a private driveway.  But if GBE had already acquired easements using the threat of eminent domain before changing its project, would it have to give them back?  Not if the easements were entered into voluntarily.  Beware, Missouri, there may be more here than meets the eye.  GBE is making illogical promises that perhaps it can't keep.
0 Comments

Invenergy Bombs in Clinton County

2/28/2020

0 Comments

 
Well, that didn't go as expected, did it, Invenergy?  News-Press reports that Clinton County was left with more questions than answers about Grain Belt Express after a recent pep-talk attempt by Invenergy's Krista Mann.

Before an audience packed with opponents of GBE, Mann presented an out-of-touch, canned presentation to the county commissioners, and very little in the way of satisfactory answers.
Patrick Clark, Clinton County Presiding Commissioner, said he wanted to hear more details from the answers given. He said he feels that Clinton County is a crossover county and will not receive benefits.

“They really couldn’t answer any questions. You know, they talked about livestock, they talked about electronics on tractors and stuff like that, but when the question was asked about other effects on people, they couldn’t answer,” Clark said. “One thing that really concerns me is this is the first DC line this company’s ever dealt with.”

Clark asked at the meeting why the line is proposed to go through Northwest Missouri instead of southern Kansas and southern Missouri. It was answered that the route was decided by a variety of reasons, which included areas with cultural sensitivities, terrain and other reasons.

I've heard that it's because Kansas said no to the project crossing the Flint Hills.  That would have been the sensible and believable answer, instead Mann chose to give a non-answer that left Clinton County wondering why their own cultural sensitivities, terrain, and other reasons didn't matter.  This is the problem with corporate critters reading from a sterile script created in some conference room in downtown Chicago.  The people in Clinton County are real people, and they want real answers.

In a similar move to prove her tone-deafness towards Clinton County, Mann said her company personnel would be "working with" and "sitting down with" landowners in Clinton County.  None of the people in the audience looked even remotely willing to have anything to do with Mann and her company.
“Invenergy is committed to working with the communities and the landowners who will host this project,” Mann said. “Our land team is going to be sitting down with landowners all along the route.”
That's a bit presumptuous on her part, isn't it?  In order to "sit down" with folks, Invenergy would first have to be invited in.  These landowners have been harassed by Clean Line and its landmen for going on a decade now.  700 of them have resisted all those efforts, and they're unlikely to have a change of heart now.  Perhaps this could happen?
Really, they've heard the canned promises many times before and they simply aren't buying it.  Doesn't look like any landowners in Missouri want to "work with" Invenergy.

Go away, Invenergy.  It's not working.
0 Comments

Eminent Domain For Private Profit in Missouri

2/27/2020

2 Comments

 
Senator Justin Brown has a great new piece in The Salem News this week regarding the use of eminent domain on Missouri property in order to increase corporate profits.

Private Property Before Profits thoroughly explains what is at risk if the legislature doesn't take action to rein in the use of eminent domain by private corporations.
Whether there are benefits to the project is a moot point to me, considering the freedom my constituents and residents of the entire state would have to give up. I’m concerned about private property rights and protecting Missouri residents from being displaced from their land to line the pockets of a corporation.

If an out-of-state developer can work its way across north Missouri for this project, what’s to stop the next developer from building another line across yours?
Senator Brown's analysis of the project points out the developer's original intent:
For the past six years or so, developers have been trying to build a giant power line across northern Missouri. The proposed Grain Belt Express line would carry 4,000 megawatts of wind-generated DC electricity from southwest Kansas to a converter station near the Illinois-Indiana border. From there, the electricity would be sold to retail customers on the East Coast. The massive power line – the largest ever built in Missouri – would cross eight counties and span the entire width of the state. As originally planned, the 800-mile power line was not actually supposed to provide electricity to a single end-use consumer in Missouri. It was just passing through.
Just passing through... except that didn't work.  GBE's original developer modified its plan to create a converter station in Missouri from which it could offload power from the line for sale to Missouri utilities that serve end-use customers.  The developer optioned a property in Ralls County on which to build this proposed converter station at a specific point where the regional grid operator said the existing transmission system was strong enough to support the injection of up to 500 MW of electricity.

Except somewhere in between Clean Line Energy Partner's ownership of the project and Invenergy's purchase, the property option in Ralls County was allowed to expire.  Invenergy now has no place to connect GBE in Missouri.  It's just passing through again.

But wait, Clean Line also signed an agreement with a handful of Missouri municipalities to provide transmission capacity to enable their purchase of wind power from another state.  Has that also been lost in the transition?  What good is a contract when there is no electrical outlet to plug in the electricity in Missouri?  Can Invenergy back out of its contract with the municipalities and leave them high and dry once it's done using them as a "benefits" shield?  Better read the fine print!

The project's original developer also planned to continue the project across Illinois in order to tap into the east coast transmission system.  However, it was ultimately not successful in gaining a permit from Illinois.  GBE currently has no connection point at Missouri's eastern border.  It's an extension cord not plugged into anything.  It has no end point stations to connect it to the existing transmission system, anywhere.

But, yet, Invenergy claims that it will soon be approaching landowners in Missouri to acquire easements for its project.  That's going to cost hundreds of millions of dollars.  What kind of a company spends hundreds of millions of dollars acquiring a route for a project that has no end point?  Not a smart one, that's for sure.  So, what does Invenergy have up its sleeve?  Obviously it has yet to reveal the truth of its intentions to Missouri.

How can Missouri protect itself from the less than transparent intentions of an out of state corporation?
Senate Bill 597, which I sponsored, will stop the taking of private property for the purpose of private profit. Simply put, this legislation denies the power of eminent domain to utilities that do not serve end-use customers in Missouri. In my opinion, a big corporation wanting to make money by selling Kansas wind power to East Coast consumers should not justify taking private property from Missouri landowners.
This important legislation pauses Invenergy's progress before its intentions are clear, while still allowing Missouri utilities to conduct their business.  It's better to be safe than sorry.  Smart thinking, Senator Brown!
Picture
2 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

    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.