Invenergy sure is laying it on thick in Illinois these days. Do they think the people of Illinois don't have internet access where they can read about how the project is playing out in other states where it has been permitted by state utility commissions?
How about this article from Kansas? Invenergy is shopping around a "road use agreement" that it wants County Commissions to sign. Invenergy wrote this agreement for its own benefit. It's most likely not in the best interests of the counties, judging from this statement:
How about this article from Kansas? Invenergy is shopping around a "road use agreement" that it wants County Commissions to sign. Invenergy wrote this agreement for its own benefit. It's most likely not in the best interests of the counties, judging from this statement:
Brown said the roads would not take the wear and tear that building a wind farm would entail, as they aren’t traveling in with heavy loads such as big wind turbines. He said the transmission stations will be brought in pieces and put together on site.
The components of a steel lattice transmission tower and miles of metal cable don't weigh as much as a fiberglass wind turbine blade? Or the sections of a steel tower to hold the blade? This is ludicrous. A transmission line's components weigh as much as a wind turbine's components. Both are assembled on site, piece by piece. Who does Brown think he's kidding? Also, a transmission line will require huge AC/DC converter stations on both ends. The converter station uses enormous transformers that come fully assembled. Some of them are so huge that they cannot be moved by truck and must be brought in by rail and then trucked the last little bit to the site. That would probably produce a whole bunch of "wear and tear" on local road systems.
And because Brown is blowing smoke at the county commissions that there will be no road impacts, can we assume that Invenergy's agreement does not compensate for "wear and tear?"
And what about "wear and tear" on local landowners?
And because Brown is blowing smoke at the county commissions that there will be no road impacts, can we assume that Invenergy's agreement does not compensate for "wear and tear?"
And what about "wear and tear" on local landowners?
Brown also assured commissioners that the easement talks were peaceful and so far only a handful of requests have gone to court.
“We don’t want to use imminent domain,” he said. “We don’t want to use attorneys, we would rather have a conversation with landowners.”
Peaceful? Is that like a "mostly peaceful" protest where shop owners are shot and the city is in flames? Or is it more like the "peaceful" way some folks are said to pass on?
Taking private property through eminent domain, or the mere threat of it, is never "peaceful." It's stressful, maddening, and invasive. There's nothing peaceful about being forced to do something against your will. It's not a "conversation." It's a war, albeit one that takes place in legal offices and courtrooms.
If Invenergy doesn't want to use eminent domain, then why apply to use it? Facts on the ground say that Invenergy does, after all, want to use eminent domain.
Taking private property through eminent domain, or the mere threat of it, is never "peaceful." It's stressful, maddening, and invasive. There's nothing peaceful about being forced to do something against your will. It's not a "conversation." It's a war, albeit one that takes place in legal offices and courtrooms.
If Invenergy doesn't want to use eminent domain, then why apply to use it? Facts on the ground say that Invenergy does, after all, want to use eminent domain.
... only a handful of requests have gone to court.
How many is a handful? Does that include the fistful that have been filed in Missouri as well? Invenergy claims that it has acquired 65% of the easements it needs in Kansas and Missouri. Does that mean that Invenergy will take the remaining 35% using eminent domain? Hardly a "handful."
Invenergy doesn't even mention its recent use of eminent domain in Kansas and Missouri during its PR blitz across Illinois.
Invenergy doesn't even mention its recent use of eminent domain in Kansas and Missouri during its PR blitz across Illinois.
“Eminent Domain is something of a last resort used here,” Pnazek said. “In Kansas and Missouri to date, Invenergy has signed up about 65% of the affected parcels on a voluntary basis, and those are the approach that we’d be taking here as well as we progress the project through Illinois.”
He conveniently forgot to mention the eminent domain filings his company has made in Kansas and Missouri.
And then there's this from Kansas...
And then there's this from Kansas...
Brown also told commissioners that there need not be concern over pushy land agents, stating that Invenergy hires reputable and credible agents but told the commissioners to contact him with any concerns.
As if Invenergy would even want to do anything about "pushy" land agents that hound landowners to sign agreements instead of going to court. The fox is watching the hen house here! Funny he didn't mention the Grain Belt Express Code of Conduct for Landowners. See all those items that begin with "do not"? That's because land agents DID these things. It's how they do their job. Coercion is a job without a moral compass. When landowners have complained about "violations" of this "code" to GBE, they have been completely dismissed. Nobody here in the hen house but us foxes!
Hope you've got your snow shovels poised at the ready, Illinois! (Or maybe another kind of shovel would be more appropriate).
Hope you've got your snow shovels poised at the ready, Illinois! (Or maybe another kind of shovel would be more appropriate).
RSS Feed