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

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

Grain Belt Express Is An Electric Toll Road

2/20/2020

0 Comments

 
The legislative battle over eminent domain for private purpose projects continues to rage in Missouri.  There are several months left in the legislative session, and the battle is already half over, with the House overwhelmingly supporting new legislation to prohibit the use of eminent domain for merchant transmission projects.  Now all eyes are on the Senate, and the people of Missouri will support this legislation wholeheartedly. 

Fantastically well-written op eds are appearing in Missouri news outlets from Missouri Farm Bureau.  I particularly love Eric Bohl's comparison of GBE to a private purpose toll road.  It is a must read!
Imagine if Warren Buffett wanted to build a private toll road across northern Missouri. The billionaire would charge cars $100 apiece to race from his home city of Omaha, Nebraska, to Nashville, Tennessee, pocketing a huge chunk of profit on each trip. He might call it the “Music City Express.” Unfortunately, the toll road would have no exits in Missouri. Cars could only get on in Nebraska and exit in Tennessee. No local residents could use it at all.

Even though the Music City Express would make a fortune for Buffett, he would probably have trouble convincing every single landowner in his path to sell. The road would do them no good — it would just be a nuisance and take away their land. Surely a few holdouts would foil his plans. If only his project qualified as a “public use,” he could invoke the governmental power of eminent domain to force unwilling landowners to sell. But the project isn’t designed to benefit the public — it’s meant to enrich its owner.

And there's lots more, particularly about GBE (or Buffett) tossing money at cities in another part of the state in order to create a false "need" to toss the northern part of the state under the bus in order to benefit cities in the southern part.  You've got to read it!

Another fabulous op ed written by Blake Hurst is appearing in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch.  You can read that one here.  Hurst makes a very important point:
The promotional literature for the company touts the project as a “free market solution to meet the growing demand for sustainable energy.” Well, there is nothing in a “free market” that gives entities the right to condemn property owned by the residents of Missouri and taking it for a private business.
When normal utilities are granted the ability to use eminent domain, their electricity rates are regulated by the state of Missouri. In exchange for the convenience of siting their facilities and the money saved because sellers have no bargaining power, the PSC protects consumers and makes sure that the benefits of eminent domain are passed along to electricity consumers.

The benefits of using eminent domain for GBE go into the Chicago-based pockets of Invenergy CEO Michael Polsky.  They don't go to electric customers in Missouri.  Even the pie-in-the-sky savings of $12M in electric costs each year aren't drawn from eminent domain savings.  The Cities will save money either way because their contract price will not change if eminent domain is used.  They would still get the "benefit" if eminent domain for GBE is prohibited by law.

And then Hurst absolutely nails exactly what I was thinking after reading American Wind Energy Association's breathy, disconnected push for GBE that absolutely fails to resonate with Missourians.
Tom Kiernan, writing in favor of the project in the Feb. 12 Post-Dispatch, has made it clear that the project, part of a multi-state effort known as the Grain Belt Express, would be “difficult” to complete without eminent domain. But his op-ed piece seemed designed to avoid actually mentioning the words “eminent domain.” Why did he fail to mention the central issue driving this controversy?
I dunno.  Maybe he thinks the people of Missouri lack the gray matter necessary to make their own decisions about their own property?  How does anyone discuss GBE and completely avoid the words "eminent domain?"

It seems that Invenergy is fighting a losing battle.  Limiting the use of eminent domain is something every voter can support.  The only ones who seem to like it are the ones who think they can profit from its use.

And, hey, there's that broadband thing.  Just a couple more cheap trinkets for the natives.
Picture
Hurst says:
As the Missouri Legislature enters its third year of debate over the project, Clean Line’s backers have started talking about fiber optics as well. Not only will electricity consumers receive a bonanza, but everybody in north Missouri will be able to watch Netflix.

Perhaps not as good as a toaster for opening a new account, but haven’t we all been asking for better rural broadband? Well, yes we have, but extending the fiber to homes, which is the most expensive part of providing rural broadband, is a much more difficult and expensive proposition than what Clean Line is offering.

And be sure to tune into This Week in Missouri Politics on Sunday, where you can hear more from Farm Bureau and the legislators involved in this important issue.

Maybe you'll even be inspired to write your own op ed?
0 Comments

Beware, Missouri!  Child Catcher Sighted In Your Neighborhood!

2/6/2020

1 Comment

 
Lollipops... cherry pie... ice cream... treacle tarts... broadband...  ALL FREE TODAY!
Today, Invenergy's Grain Belt Express announced its plans to include broadband capability on the project infrastructure at no additional cost to Missouri communities or taxpayers.

So, hey, guess what?  Missouri communities and taxpayers won't have to pay to build it but they will have to pay to use it.  There ain't no such thing as a free lunch... or lollipop... or broadband.

Discussions are underway with Missouri internet service providers who could use the infrastructure to provide internet for nearly 1 million underserved Missourians.

Yes, they could use it, once they pay Grain Belt Express a fee for the service.  And then they'll charge end users a fee to use it as well.

Invenergy will seek permission from landowners to consolidate this infrastructure in project easements along the Missouri Public Service Commission approved route.

Ya mean when they take the property using eminent domain, now extended for the use of broadband, too?  Does this mean that anyone who wants to build broadband in Missouri can use eminent domain just like Invenergy?

I'm gonna spare you the rest of the garbage about how wonderful Invenergy thinks they are and how much they just love, love, love you and your community!  I simply can't type when I'm retching.

If you see the Child Catcher in your neighborhood, it is recommended that you hide in your basement and don't come out, no matter how delicious the free treats are today.  You don't want to end up in his cage.
1 Comment

Eminent Domain Bill Clears Committee in Missouri Senate

1/29/2020

1 Comment

 
Word is that the Missouri Senate Commerce, Consumer Protection, Energy and the Environment Committee voted the Senate's version of the eminent domain bill out of committee this afternoon by a vote of 6-5.

The bill, SB597 sponsored by Senator Brown, is identical to HB2033 that was passed by the Missouri House of Representatives earlier this week.

This is good news!  Hopefully the bill will be on the Senate floor soon for debate and vote.

Many thanks to all the committee members who supported this bill, especially Senator Riddle who stood strong for her constituents today!

This is Howard Cosell, signing off... until the next big game!

Picture
1 Comment

Silly Cities Getting Desperate

1/28/2020

3 Comments

 
The more desperate someone becomes, the further their arguments stray from the truth.  When the truth isn't working, the message gets embellished.

You'd think all Missourians were head over heels for Grain Belt Express after reading this.
...a project that will benefit so many small rural communities and save Missourians millions of dollars...
It's also a project that will destroy so many family farms and the rural economies they support.  Lower yields and higher costs to farm mean less income for farmers.  Less income for farmers equals less they have to put back into the agricultural economy in their own communities.  Not every rural community would "benefit" equally.

And let's talk about all those amazing savings, shall we?
Missourians do not like living paycheck to paycheck paying high utility bills and soon many won’t have to. The Grain Belt Express Transmission Line will lower the cost of utility bills to dozens of communities throughout the state.
Oh, c'mon!  This guy has no idea what it's like living paycheck to paycheck if he thinks that saving the price of a cup of coffee on your monthly electric bill will lift you into economic prosperity.  I think maybe he's spreading it on a little thick.

What are the savings?  And how accurate are they anymore?  How much is waiting around for GBE to be built costing municipal electricity customers?  The amazing savings claim is overblown.

I'm guessing this fella hasn't looked at the MJMEUC contract, or GBE's filings at the PSC.
In Missouri, the line will span eight counties delivering at least 500 megawatts of low-cost energy (and probably much more). 
GBE said it would make available 500 MW, a very small percentage of its 3,500 MW capacity.  MJMEUC only agreed to purchase up to 200 MW of the 500 offered.  The other 300 MW is going stale on the shelf because no one in Missouri wants to buy it.  Get it?  There's no need for GBE in Missouri!  If it was needed, there would be buyers willing to pay for it.
Picture
And then there's all the jobs blather.  I'm sorry, but creating jobs is not a "public use" granted eminent domain authority.  No one's right to have a job trumps another's right to own and enjoy property.

We're currently experiencing a booming economy.  Unemployment is at record lows.  Justifying the use of eminent domain for some jacked up number of temporary jobs for workers from other areas completely falls flat.

But this... this is the ultimate piece of work...
In recent years, special interest groups have gathered in Jefferson City with the goal of preventing the project from moving forward. This legislative session, these special interest groups are at it once again, introducing legislation to block the project and hinder Missourians in rural communities, suburbs, and across our state.
Is your land a "special interest?"  Calling landowners, voters, citizens, engaged in a grassroots effort to protect their homes, businesses, and way of life "special interest groups" is the ultimate insult.  These are honest, hardworking people defending the taking of what's theirs from out-of-state "special interest group" Invenergy, who is seeking to make money from the taking.  The only "special interest groups" here are Invenergy, and a handful of municipalities who have bellied up to the buffet to gorge themselves on the loss of others.  (Except, hey, check the menu... it's really just granola bars and water, not the feast they promised you.)

I think it's Grain Belt Express that is "hindering Missourians in rural communities" across the state.  Landowners have been held in limbo for a decade while first Clean Line bumbled its way through years of unsuccessful permitting, and now Invenergy comes after them, even though it doesn't have enough customers to make the project economically feasible.  How many sleepless nights will the landowners endure while out-of-state corporations play their corporate money-making games?  How much of the landowners' hard-earned income is being siphoned away in an effort to protect their rights?  Landowners didn't ask for this, and to continue to hold them hostage while Invenergy plays energy games is shameful.  Let Invenergy play its games in a free market where no one is held hostage!  Invenergy could build its project underground, on existing rights-of-way, and not bother anyone, but it doesn't want to.  It must believe Missouri is its doormat, as much as the author of this op ed seems to.

When other Clean Line projects were defeated, better projects emerged.  Buried transmission on existing rights-of-way is really happening!  If this guy really cared about Missouri, he'd drop GBE like a hot potato and look to the future where a project that does no harm will emerge.

Is this guy convincing anyone with his pie-in-the sky, exaggerated claims of how wonderful GBE would be for Missouri?

Not me.

But, hey, there's one point where I can agree with him!
I encourage everyone who wants to see their family and neighbors benefit from this project to contact your legislator. As a constituent, taxpayer, and Missourian, your voice matters.
The only way anyone is going to benefit from this project is by leaving it in the dust and moving on to better ideas.  Contact your Senators, because your voice matters!  A quick email or phone call is all it takes!  Do it today!
3 Comments

Caveat Emptor, Invenergy!

1/27/2020

3 Comments

 
Congratulations, Missouri!  This evening, the House of Representatives voted overwhelmingly in favor of HB 2033 that would prohibit the use of eminent domain by merchant transmission developers!

The bill is now on to the Senate.  Stay tuned for ways you can help ensure this very important new law is put into place.

But what about Invenergy?  Caveat Emptor, fellas!  You bought a used transmission project with a host of problems.  It's not just a little dog-eared, it's rode hard through a briar patch with stones in its shoes and put away wet lame. 

The people of Missouri have spoken through their elected representatives.  I think the message is loud and clear.
Picture
NO NEED, NO GAIN, NO EMINENT DOMAIN!
3 Comments

The "Changing Rules" Myth

1/16/2020

0 Comments

 
Here's another stupidity currently being recycled by Missouri municipalities in opposition to legislation that is currently working its way through...
Lawson wondered whether singling out one project should be a concern to anyone planning to develop large scale projects in the state. Lawson said, “What signal are we sending about our state’s desire for job creation and economic progress if we change the rules at the last minute?”
Different versions of the "changing rules" myth have been hanging around for years.  It's time to put them to rest.

The legislature isn't "changing the rules," it's changing the law.  That's what legislatures do.  It's a risk all transmission projects accept when developing a project.

Laws are not a stagnant thing.  Once they're made, they're often changed.  New laws are made.  Existing laws are amended.  It's what happens in a healthy, democratic society.  If we had to keep all laws stagnant for fear of "changing the rules" on someone, there are plenty of old laws that would still be hanging around, much to our detriment.  We change laws to make them work better, for the benefit of all citizens.

To answer Lawson's question about the "signal" it sends, let's look at Iowa.  In 2017, the Iowa legislature passed a new law that declared above-ground merchant transmission lines a private development purpose that may not be granted eminent domain authority.  The Clean Line project that inspired this legislation, the Rock Island Clean Line, was faced with a choice... to build its project without eminent domain authority, or to bury it.  Nothing the legislature did actually banned or stopped the project.  It was Clean Line's choice to abandon it.

The "signal?"  Transmission is still being built in Iowa, but not above-ground merchant lines.  Instead a better project has been proposed for basically the same purpose.  SOO Green Renewable Rail proposes an underground merchant transmission project built on existing rights-of-way.  It's a much better solution to the imagined problem.  It may be more expensive, with undergrounding costing roughly twice as much as above-ground lines, but that's okay because this is a market-based project.  The market for transmission capacity will dictate the prices customers will be willing to pay in a voluntary market, free from manipulation and outside influences.  The developers of SOO Green believe their project will be marketable, despite its cost.

This is the signal the Iowa legislature sent... that projects must do better to avoid impacts to Iowa citizens.  And they all lived happily ever after.

Arkansas also passed a law inspired by a different Clean Line project, the Plains and Eastern Clean Line.  That law prevented the use of eminent domain for a transmission project that was not directed or designated to be constructed by a regional transmission organization.  What happened?  Nothing.  There's still transmission and economic prosperity going on in Arkansas, and the lights are still on.

Legislatures can and do change laws all the time.  And the one in Missouri desperately needs updating!  Public utility and eminent domain law were developed at a time before merchant transmission was proposed in the state.  Multi-state merchant transmission without contracted customers is a relatively new thing everywhere, and other states have dealt with it in the recent past, as noted above.  Nothing disastrous happened. 

The law that gives a public utility eminent domain authority is premised on a belief that a public utility is constructing regulated infrastructure.  The cost of that infrastructure and the ones who pay for it is highly regulated, whether by state utility commissions, or the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

Enter speculative merchant, market-based, transmission.  Its rates aren't regulated in the same way.  Its rates are negotiated between willing buyers and willing sellers.  Nobody is forced to pay for anything they don't want to.  The regulators cannot say whether a rate is too low, or too high.  They rely on the market to do so.   If a price is too high, there will be no market interest.  Market rates police themselves (assuming they were negotiated in a fair manner without undue influence or preference).

Eminent domain is not a market based mechanism.  It is the government stepping in to effect the taking of private property at a "fair," not market-based price.  If the price paid for property was negotiated without any limit, that would be a market-based price between a willing buyer and a willing seller.  The sellers are unwilling in an eminent domain situation.

Using the market interference of eminent domain on a market-based transmission project is not only unfair to the unwilling seller, it unjustly enriches the transmission project owner, who is still operating in the realm of negotiated, market-based rates.  Its market isn't affected by the price it pays for property.  In fact, if it was truly market-based, the price of property necessary for the project should be based on the same voluntary, free market in which the project negotiates its rates.

It's a legal mismatch that uses the regulated utility's eminent domain authority to boost the earnings for a market-based project.  Many states, such as Iowa and Arkansas (and Illinois, too, although this happened at the state Supreme Court) have recognized this.  Missouri has also now realized it, and that's why its legislators want to remove eminent domain authority for market-based, merchant transmission projects.

It's not to "change the rules," it's to update the law to support new development while protecting the citizens of Missouri.  Grain Belt Express could still build its project.  It just would have to negotiate property prices in a market-based environment without the government-granted power of eminent domain to limit its acquisition costs, and GBE doesn't want to assume that responsibility or cost.

A project that is truly market-based has no need for eminent domain.  GBE and its supporters are simply complaining because legislators are intent on fixing the current legal loophole they slipped through.  With the loophole firmly closed, new transmission in Missouri will be better for ALL citizens, not just a few.
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.