Miss Kitty Hamm fancies herself a leading member of the Feline Bar. Miss Kitty Hamm is an amazing cat who not only can read, she can type for brief periods of time after consuming a certain pungent herb from her human servant's garden. Miss Kitty Hamm got her dander in an uproar this morning after looking over my shoulder (really sitting on my keyboard) while I was reading a story in a fake news source. Miss Kitty Hamm suddenly hissed and raced into the garden. The following is what happened next.
For the love of a catnip mouse and a bowl of warm milk, my dear Hansy-poo!
The Missouri Supreme Court opinion did not say:
The Missouri Supreme Court opinion did not say:
“What (the justices) said is that the only public interest determination to be made in Missouri is by the Public Service Commission,” said Hans Detweiler, vice president of development for Clean Line Partners. “So the counties… should not be making their own public-interest determinations. They should only look at engineering questions.”
The Missouri Supreme Court opinion said, and I quote:
Further, Grain Belt acknowledges it will be required to obtain county assent pursuant to section 229.100 if it intends to construct utilities impacting publicly owned roads. The provisions in that section, however, are not relevant to the Commission’s decision-making process in issuing a line CCN. Section 229.100 does not purport to give counties the authority to stand in the shoes of the Commission in determining whether a proposed utility project is in the public interest of the state or whether a utility should be granted a CCN. Other than providing that county assent must be obtained prior to beginning construction when county roads are impacted, section 229.100 is silent as to timing, order of priority, or any other reference to section 393.170 covering the Commission’s authority to issue CCNs. The Commission erred in relying on ATXI in denying Grain Belt’s application based on its failure to first obtain assent from impacted counties. Admittedly, Grain Belt will need to obtain such assent before it can begin construction if county roads will be impacted, but county assent is not required prior to the Commission issuing a line CCN.
What a catasstrophy! The Court didn't say anything about limiting the county's authority to engineering questions. It said counties are not granted the authority to "stand in the shoes of the Commission" in making a public interest determination in Sec. 229.100.
In Feline Law School, we were instructed that the plain language of a statute limits its intent to what is actually written. A court may not substitute its own judgement for the plain text of the regulation. A court may not presume additional text that is not in the statute in order to assume what the legislature meant. The court was very careful not to interpret Sec. 229.100 in this order.
Let's look at Section 229.100:
In Feline Law School, we were instructed that the plain language of a statute limits its intent to what is actually written. A court may not substitute its own judgement for the plain text of the regulation. A court may not presume additional text that is not in the statute in order to assume what the legislature meant. The court was very careful not to interpret Sec. 229.100 in this order.
Let's look at Section 229.100:
2011 Missouri Revised Statutes
TITLE XIV ROADS AND WATERWAYS
Chapter 229 Provisions Relating to All Roads
Section 229.100. Improvements along public roads--location--control.
Improvements along public roads--location--control. 229.100. No person or persons, association, companies or corporations shall erect poles for the suspension of electric light, or power wires, or lay and maintain pipes, conductors, mains and conduits for any purpose whatever, through, on, under or across the public roads or highways of any county of this state, without first having obtained the assent of the county commission of such county therefor; and no poles shall be erected or such pipes, conductors, mains and conduits be laid or maintained, except under such reasonable rules and regulations as may be prescribed and promulgated by the county highway engineer, with the approval of the county commission.
The first phrase says no electric lines may be constructed on under or across public roads without having first obtained the assent of the county commission. It does not specify what requirements must be met to obtain assent. It simply says counties must assent before construction. It does not limit or dictate the criteria a county may use to consider assent. The court said a county may not "stand in the shoes" of the PSC in making a public interest determination. The PSC's authority to make a public interest determination is a completely different statute. I'm pretty sure no county ever claimed it could overrule (or stand in the shoes of) a PSC's determination of public interest.
Now the second phrase of 229.100 adds (with the word, "and") that a county highway engineer may make reasonable rules and regulations for road crossings, and said crossings must receive county assent.
Nothing in that statute says the county MUST task its county highway engineer to promulgate rules, and that a county MUST assent to said rules.
Therefore, my dear Hansy-poo, my cat-clusion is that the counties are still in the cat bird seat. They never have to assent. There's no point in giving them the power of assent if the statute were written to require them to assent. That text is simply not to be found in the statute.
Clean Line finds itself in much the same situation I always find myself in when I rub the can opener vigorously and it continually fails to produce an open can of tuna, yummy yummy tuna. Clean Line just spent a bunch of time and money to still be tangled up in Sec. 229.100 and still needing county assent. Clean Line is right back where it started. Might it not have been quicker and cheaper to simply attempt to gain county assent and forego the trip to the Missouri Supreme Court? With county assent, the PSC would have issued a permit for GBE. Why must you always do things the hard way, Clean Line? Now you're out of time and out of money.
And I dare say you've further entrenched county resistance to your project with all this drama, and now you're trying to strong-arm the counties by making up things the Supreme Court never said? I find that purr-fectly ludicrous. If cats could laugh, I would be hissterical. Just know I'm laughing on the inside.
There's probably not enough ham and pulled pork in the state to convince all the counties to assent. However, I encourage you to try. Please let me know when the first meal is served. You're going to need some help consuming it all.
And what are you doing as the new spokeshuman for Grain Belt Express, Hans Detweiler? Are you the only former Clean Line employee who has yet to find gainful employment elsewhere?
And furrthermore...
Now the second phrase of 229.100 adds (with the word, "and") that a county highway engineer may make reasonable rules and regulations for road crossings, and said crossings must receive county assent.
Nothing in that statute says the county MUST task its county highway engineer to promulgate rules, and that a county MUST assent to said rules.
Therefore, my dear Hansy-poo, my cat-clusion is that the counties are still in the cat bird seat. They never have to assent. There's no point in giving them the power of assent if the statute were written to require them to assent. That text is simply not to be found in the statute.
Clean Line finds itself in much the same situation I always find myself in when I rub the can opener vigorously and it continually fails to produce an open can of tuna, yummy yummy tuna. Clean Line just spent a bunch of time and money to still be tangled up in Sec. 229.100 and still needing county assent. Clean Line is right back where it started. Might it not have been quicker and cheaper to simply attempt to gain county assent and forego the trip to the Missouri Supreme Court? With county assent, the PSC would have issued a permit for GBE. Why must you always do things the hard way, Clean Line? Now you're out of time and out of money.
And I dare say you've further entrenched county resistance to your project with all this drama, and now you're trying to strong-arm the counties by making up things the Supreme Court never said? I find that purr-fectly ludicrous. If cats could laugh, I would be hissterical. Just know I'm laughing on the inside.
There's probably not enough ham and pulled pork in the state to convince all the counties to assent. However, I encourage you to try. Please let me know when the first meal is served. You're going to need some help consuming it all.
And what are you doing as the new spokeshuman for Grain Belt Express, Hans Detweiler? Are you the only former Clean Line employee who has yet to find gainful employment elsewhere?
And furrthermore...
Well, I guess that's it for now...
RSS Feed