The transmission line also creates several economic benefits, including added grid interconnection and future interconnection options, landowner easement payments, and county property tax payments.

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

“There’s a huge supply chain of service folks that really know how to do these things, and that will help us to be more flexible,” Skelly said. “There’s a bunch of states now that want 100% renewable energy. I think we’re on a great path, and for the younger folks just getting started in the industry, it’s going to be interesting.”

“We thought transmission was going to be the linchpin of expanding wind energy,” Skelly said.

“Transmission is super hard. We’re not really in the mood right now to do these giant projects in the United States,” Skelly said. “These things change. We’ll look back in 100 years. There’ll be times we didn’t do a lot of infrastructure; there are times we did a lot of infrastructure. Hopefully, the country will be in a better mood and ready to do these big-bone transmission projects.”

Coincidentally, Pattern Energy CEO Michael Garland sat at the other end of the panel. Pattern last year bought Clean Line’s interests in the Mesa Canyons Wind Farm and Western Spirit Clean Line projects in New Mexico. It has already reached a $285 million agreement with PNM Resources to sell Western Spirit once it’s completed in 2021.

“They’ve pushed forward with development,” Skelly said of Pattern. “Clearly it’s a new model, and that’s exciting.”

By December 2, 2024, GBE shall have either (i) obtained executed easement agreements, demonstrably commenced negotiations to obtain easements, or instituted proceedings in state district court to obtain easements, or any combination thereof, for at least **-** of the total number of easements required to construct the Kansas portion of the Project; or (ii) satisfied the Financing Requirement as defined in Paragraph 9.a. hereof. If unable to meet the requirements of the preceding sentence, GBE shall either, at GBE’s election: (a) commit to ** REDACTED **;1 or (b) file for an updated transmission line siting permit under K.S.A. 66-1,178.

"You have to run a power line somewhere," he told Newstalk KZRG a few weeks ago.  "It's kind of like our reservoir down down here, you have to build it somewhere."

“If you [are] transmitting power from point A to point B, you’ve got to go from point A to B,” he continued. “Ideally, you find a place where you can make an equitable agreement with everybody along the way so you don’t have the eminent domain process but if that’s not the case, you have eminent domain proceedings.”

Q.  Can you very briefly describe what Invenergy's wind catcher site is and what its status is at this point?
A. So wind catcher was a 2,000 megawatt wind project that was being sold to American Electric Power.
Q. Has Invenergy discussed the possibility of developing this site for wind farms?
A. We're-- we're constantly in the process of selling that project.
Q. And this project, in particular?
A. So again, the Wind Catcher project is in the Panhandle of Oklahoma and it was contracted by American Electric Power who failed to receive commission approval to purchase the project.
Q. And my question is, have you looked into
developing that project?
A. Well, we are developing that project.
Q. Okay .
A. I don't understand.
Q. What's the status of it at this point?
A. It's still in development, active development.
Q. Development meaning what?
A. Meaning that we have active land easements for the installation of generators, wind turbines specifically, and we're looking for off- takers for the facility.
Q. And is that site about one hundred miles
from the proposed Grain Belt converter station in Kansas, approximately?
A. Approximately.
Q. Have you discussed internally the
possibility of connecting wind generation at the Wind Catcher site with the Kansas converter station of the Grain Belt line?
A. Not really.
Q. Not really, meaning no?
A. So I mean there is a possibility that an
affiliate may want to purchase capacity on Grain Belt.
Q. An affiliate of whom?
A. An affiliate of Invenergy.

“I would contend that an interstate transmission line is an issue regulated by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,” added Petty. “And this issue may ultimately be appealed and decided in that arena.”

“State Rep. Jim Hansen, R-Frankford, has filed legislation which says no private entity has the power of eminent domain for the purposes of building above-ground merchant lines,” explained Petty. “ But he’s clearly not the only legislator feeling the pressure from about 15, or fewer, out of 500 landowners that share this ‘not-in-my-backyard attitude’ about transmission projects for any type of transmission project.”

Nevertheless, Petty is concerned that Hansen’s bill could pass the Missouri House and go to the Missouri Senate as early as next week. If it becomes law, it will be back to the courts for the much-delayed project.

So, what makes Grain Belt line different?
“The difference is it carries clean wind energy, so it threatens the fossil fuel industry, as well as the monopoly utilities that depend on coal,” Hickey said. “So, the issue of ‘eminent domain’ is only an issue for these legislators when it involves wind energy. If it is coal energy, or a tar sands pipeline, eminent domain is all okay.”

According to Hickey, Rep. Hansen is being joined in his fight against the transmission line by House Speaker Elijah Haahr, R-Springfield. He said the legislators are clearly carrying water for the fossil fuel industry.

"I am a firm believer in protecting individual freedom and rights of private property owners, especially our farmers and ranchers," Parson said in a written statement to The Associated Press. "We will continue to stay engaged with the legislature to ensure that we are equipped to protect all Missourians from potential threats of government overreach for private gain."

The vote was bipartisan, and approving the measure was the right thing to do. The Missouri Senate should pass the bill, and the governor should sign it.

...we agree with Missouri Republican leadership that allowing a company to condemn property for this purpose is wrong. Clean Line Energy should negotiate fair agreements with property owners for any towers it needs, and pay for the land accordingly.

It should not use the threat of condemnation to browbeat property owners into accepting low-cost deals.

Their efforts should be applauded. Eminent domain must always be the last resort for projects of major public benefit, not the first step in making rich companies richer.

Condition No. 4: Invenergy shall make preliminary easement payments of [redacted percentage, most likely 30%] of the total eventual compensation to all Kansas landowners affected by the line siting within 12 months of a Commission decision to extend the 13-803 sunset provision or gaining approval for a new line siting.

Placing a firm deadline by which preliminary easement payments must be made to all Kansas landowners unnecessarily and improperly restricts the ability of GBE, and by  extension Invenergy, to conduct Project development according to its proven best   practices which have resulted in the successful delivery of over 20,220 MW of generation   projects and 392 miles of transmission lines.

Importantly, this deadline, in a vacuum, does not account for the many other Project development activities that must be carefully sequenced prior to and in parallel with easement acquisition in order to ensure efficient scheduling and deployment of capital to minimize Project costs and facilitate timely delivery, including but not limited to:

Completing the regulatory processes in the various states;

Closing on the Membership Interest Purchase Agreement;

Completing environmental permitting requirements, including extensive consultation with state and federal agencies;

Advancing Project engineering, including detailed design of the route to conform with environmental permitting requirements and landowner considerations;

Conducting an open solicitation for Project capacity;

Negotiating transmission service agreements with customers; and

Obtaining financing for construction of the Project.

There are endless variables that could impact the timing of this process, such that placing a firm deadline on payments to all Kansas landowners restricts the ability of GBE and Invenergy to efficiently manage Project development, and thus severely inhibits the Project’s likelihood of success.

GBE and Invenergy fully understand and respect the uncertainty surrounding landowner impact from the Project, which has been an unfortunate consequence of regulatory uncertainty in other states that has hindered Project progress. It is important to clarify that, despite Invenergy’s concerns with Proposed Condition No. 4, it is in no way discounting the importance of landowner participation in the GBE Project and reaffirms its commitment to working with host communities to foster mutually beneficial relationships; this commitment is reflected in Invenergy’s track record of successfully negotiating over 16,000 lease agreements with landowners, entirely on a voluntary basis, across its project portfolio. GBE and Invenergy are planning, upon approval of the Transaction, to reengage affected landowners to provide Project updates and to be a resource for interested parties. This effort to become a known commodity in host communities and to develop and foster local relationships is an important first step in the land acquisition process that must not be overlooked simply for the sake of quickly obtaining easements.

The best way to obtain certainty regarding the Project is to utilize available capital in an efficient and logical manner. Each of the development activities listed above will add incremental certainty to the Project. Inefficient use of capital will decrease certainty by putting unnecessary financial and logistical strain on the Project. Accordingly, while the intended result of Proposed Condition No. 4 is to increase certainty, it will actually have the opposite effect.