Initial briefs have been filed in the joint appeal of the Missouri PSC's issuance of a permit to Grain Belt Express.
Eastern Missouri Landowners Alliance, Missouri Farm Bureau and landowner Christina Reichert filed an appeal stating that the PSC has no jurisdiction to issue a permit to GBE because is is not an "electrical corporation" under Missouri law. If it's not an "electrical corporation," it's not a public utility entitled to use eminent domain to acquire easements.
It's actually pretty simple and follows the successful arguments made at the Illinois Supreme Court that vacated a permit issued by the Illinois Commerce Commission to Rock Island Clean Line, and a permit for Grain Belt Express that was vacated by the Illinois Court of Appeals. Clean Line (now Invenergy) doesn't own utility property in the state that qualifies it as a "public utility" under Illinois law. GBE also doesn't own utility property in Missouri, as defined by Missouri law. The PSC tried to pretend it did in order to issue the permit, concluding that a handful of easement options and a bank account with some cash was "utility property." By that definition, anyone with a quarter in his pocket is an "electrical corporation" because he could use that quarter to buy some utility property in the future. Cash can be used for many things, but you can't build a transmission line out of dollar bills. The easement options also fail because GBE does not own, control or manage any land. It has an option to purchase an easement at a later date, but it does not control the land at this time. The landowner can still do whatever they want with their land before the option is exercised.
But that's not the only problem with GBE, although you may think it is if you read this article. Try though it might to masquerade an an actual independent news source, Energy News Network (formerly Midwest Energy News) is funded and controlled by "Fresh Energy" which is in turn funded by numerous dark money "foundations" and renewable energy companies.
Eastern Missouri Landowners Alliance, Missouri Farm Bureau and landowner Christina Reichert filed an appeal stating that the PSC has no jurisdiction to issue a permit to GBE because is is not an "electrical corporation" under Missouri law. If it's not an "electrical corporation," it's not a public utility entitled to use eminent domain to acquire easements.
It's actually pretty simple and follows the successful arguments made at the Illinois Supreme Court that vacated a permit issued by the Illinois Commerce Commission to Rock Island Clean Line, and a permit for Grain Belt Express that was vacated by the Illinois Court of Appeals. Clean Line (now Invenergy) doesn't own utility property in the state that qualifies it as a "public utility" under Illinois law. GBE also doesn't own utility property in Missouri, as defined by Missouri law. The PSC tried to pretend it did in order to issue the permit, concluding that a handful of easement options and a bank account with some cash was "utility property." By that definition, anyone with a quarter in his pocket is an "electrical corporation" because he could use that quarter to buy some utility property in the future. Cash can be used for many things, but you can't build a transmission line out of dollar bills. The easement options also fail because GBE does not own, control or manage any land. It has an option to purchase an easement at a later date, but it does not control the land at this time. The landowner can still do whatever they want with their land before the option is exercised.
But that's not the only problem with GBE, although you may think it is if you read this article. Try though it might to masquerade an an actual independent news source, Energy News Network (formerly Midwest Energy News) is funded and controlled by "Fresh Energy" which is in turn funded by numerous dark money "foundations" and renewable energy companies.
Since all these hypocritical environmentalists like to point the finger at grassroots opposition to invasive energy projects as being funded by "dark money" (which is absolutely NOT TRUE), the finger goes back at them and this time it IS true. Try finding out who funds FreshEnergy donor "Energy Foundation". Influence Watch calls it "...a left-of-center “pass through” charitable foundation founded by and supported by a network of left-wing organizations...". But, "In reality, it is a medium for bundling vast sums of money from donors to far-left political causes, under the guise of philanthropy." "News" source, indeed! It's nothing but dark money propaganda.
Anyhow... back to our show...
Perhaps a bigger hurdle for GBE is the fact that its business model and rate scheme do not meet the definition of public utility in Missouri. This point was argued quite well at the Illinois Supreme Court, however the justices found Rock Island was not a public utility because it did not own utility property, saving for another day a decision on whether its business model and rate structure prohibited it from meeting the legal definition of a public utility. And if you think that decision would have been a squeaker, it wasn't. Anyone watching the oral arguments could discern how the justices felt about it. Therefore, this argument is alive and well.
In Missouri, a public utility is under the jurisdiction of the PSC. Except GBE really isn't. It's rate scheme is under the jurisdiction of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. Under state law, a public utility must serve everyone indiscriminately, and must charge the same rates to similarly situated customers. But GBE won't do that. GBE will sell its service to only select customers who bid highest for its service, and it will negotiate a different rate for service with each customer. Imagine if your electric company did this. What if they refused to serve your home, but served your neighbors? And what if they charged your neighbors a much lower rate than they charged you for the same service? This isn't a public utility, it's a private enterprise. As a private enterprise, it isn't entitled to eminent domain authority to take private property for its own use.
That's pretty much been the basis of the arguments of landowners since day one. Clean Line, or GBE, can build whatever it wants, but it should never be given the power of eminent domain.
In addition, the Missouri Landowners Alliance has filed a separate appeal that hinges on legal errors made by the PSC during the course of its hearings. MLA was prohibited from accessing "confidential" information that made up the basis for GBE's testimony. If MLA did not have the information, it could not examine it nor question its validity.
Meanwhile, GBE is in a heap of trouble unrelated to its PSC permit. It still does not have the Missouri county assents it must have before beginning construction. Therefore, it's PSC permit is nothing more than a useless piece of paper. What do you think the chances are of the county governments assenting to GBE crossing their roads at this stage of the game... after more than 7 years of lies and harassment from GBE? In addition, GBE has not even applied for a permit in Illinois. Doing so would be at least a 2-year endeavor, probably greater, and the chances of the Illinois Supreme Court vacating any permit issued are huge.
So, what does Invenergy intend to do with GBE? Not what it told the Missouri Public Service Commission at hearing, obviously.
It's time to retire this white elephant. Merchant transmission does not pass the test of state public utility laws.
You can read the Joint Appeal Brief here.
And the Missouri Landowners Alliance Brief here.
Anyhow... back to our show...
Perhaps a bigger hurdle for GBE is the fact that its business model and rate scheme do not meet the definition of public utility in Missouri. This point was argued quite well at the Illinois Supreme Court, however the justices found Rock Island was not a public utility because it did not own utility property, saving for another day a decision on whether its business model and rate structure prohibited it from meeting the legal definition of a public utility. And if you think that decision would have been a squeaker, it wasn't. Anyone watching the oral arguments could discern how the justices felt about it. Therefore, this argument is alive and well.
In Missouri, a public utility is under the jurisdiction of the PSC. Except GBE really isn't. It's rate scheme is under the jurisdiction of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. Under state law, a public utility must serve everyone indiscriminately, and must charge the same rates to similarly situated customers. But GBE won't do that. GBE will sell its service to only select customers who bid highest for its service, and it will negotiate a different rate for service with each customer. Imagine if your electric company did this. What if they refused to serve your home, but served your neighbors? And what if they charged your neighbors a much lower rate than they charged you for the same service? This isn't a public utility, it's a private enterprise. As a private enterprise, it isn't entitled to eminent domain authority to take private property for its own use.
That's pretty much been the basis of the arguments of landowners since day one. Clean Line, or GBE, can build whatever it wants, but it should never be given the power of eminent domain.
In addition, the Missouri Landowners Alliance has filed a separate appeal that hinges on legal errors made by the PSC during the course of its hearings. MLA was prohibited from accessing "confidential" information that made up the basis for GBE's testimony. If MLA did not have the information, it could not examine it nor question its validity.
Meanwhile, GBE is in a heap of trouble unrelated to its PSC permit. It still does not have the Missouri county assents it must have before beginning construction. Therefore, it's PSC permit is nothing more than a useless piece of paper. What do you think the chances are of the county governments assenting to GBE crossing their roads at this stage of the game... after more than 7 years of lies and harassment from GBE? In addition, GBE has not even applied for a permit in Illinois. Doing so would be at least a 2-year endeavor, probably greater, and the chances of the Illinois Supreme Court vacating any permit issued are huge.
So, what does Invenergy intend to do with GBE? Not what it told the Missouri Public Service Commission at hearing, obviously.
It's time to retire this white elephant. Merchant transmission does not pass the test of state public utility laws.
You can read the Joint Appeal Brief here.
And the Missouri Landowners Alliance Brief here.
RSS Feed