Voices from the Route

When Dave and I started our Facebook group, one of our main objectives was to give people a place to discuss the effects the threat of Clean Line's proposed line had on their own lives. We wanted a space where people could come and realize that they are not alone. To that end, we have a guest post tonight from a gentleman local to our corner of Arkansas.

In the coming weeks, Block Plains and Eastern Clean Line will be hosting a series of Neighbor Hours in our area in an attempt to enable meaningful discussion in the community, and to provide easy access to the Draft EIS to the many folks out here without an internet connection.  Danny, who wrote the following, has generously offered to present new material at our next Dover meeting-- "Potential issues with watershed erosion and herbicide management of right-of-ways". 

Danny makes a lot of good points, but I hope that readers will pay special attention to parts about the tradition of bartering we have in these hills. As Danny mentions, it is a way of life... I trade fresh, free-range eggs for locally caught fish. There is a family whom we allow to bow-hunt on our family's land in exchange for helping us optimize the area for wildlife and for a portion of the venison they take. We trade. We share. We give when someone needs something, or when we just happen to have extra and think they might like it. I can't tell you how much okra I got this summer... Along with a cabbage the size of a turkey and a cantaloupe almost as big. This is not the kind of socio-economic impact you'll read about in the draft (unless I somehow skipped over that part), but it is important. It is real. 


Danny's Story

I am in the primary/preferred easement for the proposed Plains and Eastern Clean Line Project.

I am James "Danny" Taverner and have moved back to this region to be close to my family. I have a Master's Degree from Louisiana State University in Plant and Soil Systems. I conducted research for the university that included levee erosion control projects and herbicide maintenance of right-of-ways.

A supposed environmental survey was scheduled to be done across my property, I made sure to be home the day of the survey. No persons ever showed up on my 40 acre property. I wanted them to understand the sensitivity of the site through which they planned the line. The steepness of the grade on the region intended is severe. The grade is impractical to log and if the timber were to be removed, a cascade of environmental issues would follow.

I have about 2 to 3 acres of arable (farmable) land. I have a small fruit tree orchard with peaches, apples, pears, and cherries. I have raspberries, blackberries and muscadines as well. In addition to the orchard is an extensive vegetable garden and a large plot rotated between sorghum cane and corn. This small farm is irrigated by a pond which is directly within the easement and is fed by the watershed consisting of the very steep area which is also within the easement.

The produce from this farm is not sold for money but bartered which is a unique cultural identity of this region. Produce had been traded for beef, pork, eggs, labor, lumber, and even dog-sitting favors. My family has a grist mill and corn produced on the property is ground into cornmeal. We also have a sorghum mill and cook down the cane into sorghum using the same family technique passed down for generations. My grandmother used to go around and cook other people's cane for "shares". This is a cultural product that has been maintained by the production from my farmland which is irrigated by the waters from the watershed within the proposed easement.

So what would be the big deal if the line went through across the property? 

The pond will receive significant amounts of silt even with standard erosion control measures. This would reduce the volume of water available for irrigation by making the pond more shallow. Having worked on levee stabilization projects around New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina, I am we'll aware that there is no way to fully mitigate erosion especially when the pond and watershed slope is many times more steep and rocky than a levee. 

The herbicide maintenance of the right-of-way poses another significant impediment to the continuation of my farming lifestyle. I am intimately familiar with herbicides and their positive and negative attributes. My thesis research involved cultural and herbicide management techniques. I was involved in countless herbicide trials while working at Louisiana State University. The proposed herbicides commonly used in right-of-ways have the potential to be sprayed into or wash into the pond killing fish and rendering the water unusable for irrigation purposes. This would render all the hard work and money in getting a garden established and cut off an entire system of trade for the many families with which I barter.

My current home is at the edge of the easement and the aesthetic value of the beauty of an Ozark sunset will be lost. All of my out-buildings for tractors and equipment and shop are directly under the route. The shop and buildings are not visible on the satellite maps for they are within a forested area and must be seen from the ground. All of the time and expense of building the shops and having electricity and water run to the site would be undone since the buildings would have to be removed  for the line. There is no other rational area for these several buildings to be placed and the years spent acquiring material and constructing them could not be duplicated.

There is no compensation for the destruction of all that I have mentioned. The thought of a private company forcing eminent domain and taking all of the aforementioned blood, sweat, and tears from my family is unfathomable.

I am but one small landowner that was never contacted until this year about this project. One small landowner in an over 700 mile line across the entire state of Arkansas. A landowner with so much to lose that there can be no reasonable compensation made for the damage to be caused. I will not stand for wealthy, out-of-state private businessmen to use the threat of eminent domain to further line their pockets under the guise of "clean energy". 

I am all for renewable energy. I am a fan of wind, solar, and hydrothermal energy. This is not an attack on these resources. This is a transmission line, by a private company, willing to condemn land  across two entire states and disrupting the landowners from western Oklahoma all the way to Memphis.

James "Danny" Taverner

Freedom of Information Act Request?

Well, there wasn't a lot of information involved and it sure wasn't free...

This was posted by a member in our group last night:

"I have a confession. I was foolish enough to allow myself to be swindled. I was swindled by the U. S. Department of Energy. This swindle involves a Freedom of Information Act request I made to the DOE.

From my FOIA request # HQ-2014-01728-F:

'I am requesting the following materials related to the Management Committee: meeting dates, attendance lists, agendas, minutes, transcripts, and any related documents. I am requesting this material for every meeting of the Management Committee.'

The Management Committee I referred to is described in Section 8a of Contract No. 1 between Clean Line Energy and the DOE, the Advanced Funding and Development Agreement for the Plains and Eastern Clean Line Energy project.

The Agreement can be found on the link:

http://energy.gov/…/Advance%20Funding%20and%20Development%2…

The Management Committee as described was to be composed of two representatives from the DOE and two representatives from Clean Line Energy and was to meet quarterly to discuss:
1. The progress of the NEPA environmental analysis, Clean Line's land acquisition, and the interaction with other state and Federal agencies.
2. The progress of the technical review and proposed procurement, construction, operations, maintenance, ownership roles of each party, and the progress of Southwest Power Pool, Inc. (SPP)'s review under applicable SPP processes.
3. The progress of DOE's review of the Project on issues other than environmental analysis.
4. A comprehensive schedule of work to be completed under this Agreement, including quarterly work plans.

On November 21, I received the results of the DOE's alleged research. It consisted of a series of emails between Clean Line and the DOE arranging the meeting time and details of a single Management Committee meeting in December of 2012.

The DOE response to my request did not contain a single item I requested in the FOIA.

The DOE response raises several questions. Was there only one meeting, in 2012, of the Management Committee? In the 2012 meeting, did the Management Committee discuss any of topics outlined in the Advanced Funding and Development Agreement? If so, where is the documentation requested in the FOIA? If the Management Committee only met once, in 2012, how is Clean Line keeping the DOE apprised of the project status? Is the Advanced Funding and Development Meeting still in effect? Has the Management Committee been circumvented?

I requested a fee waiver when I submitted the FOIA, but my request was denied. The DOE charged $798 in advance for research.

I paid the research fee because I really believed this FOIA request would yield a wealth of information about the working relations between Clean Line and DOE. I guess I should have known the DOE would not allow a lowly citizen to have access to information.

This is a cautionary tale. Do not trust the DOE!"

This is part of the discussion that followed between another member and the original poster:

Commenting Member: Because... "Disclosing this information could cause harm to the DOE and other agencies if the public is able to listen to agency discussions." and "With respect to the discretionary disclosure of deliberative information, the quality of agency decisions would be adversely affected if frank, written discussion of policy matters were inhibited by the knowledge that the content of such discussion might be made public. For this reason, DOE has determined that discretionary disclosure of the deliberative material is not in the public interest because foreseeable harm could result from such disclosure." In other words, YOUR public servants justify that they are allowed to carry on in secrecy with a private company that wants to use the DOE's federal authority to take your property for its own private profit. Any affected landowner who tries to get information is punished with unreasonable fees to discourage further prying. Isn't the DOE taking enough from Original poster's name without this added insult? Better believe the founding fathers are spinning!

Original Poster: Yes it was about a dozen pages. Some of the pages were nearly blank. Just copies of emails. Most of them containing one or two sentences. No, I did not receive an invoice or receipt.

Yikes... 

Maps

Tell me again how we need to do our part for the public good...

Our Little Piece of Earth

** Update** Just received word from Dave that the zoom restrictions on the draft EIS interactive map have been lifted. This is great news! I doubt it had anything to do with this blog... but just in case... Given a certain corporation's history of busing college students in to clog open mic time at PSC hearings, it would be really great if affected landowners (you can't get much stakeholdier than that) were guaranteed a minimum amount of time to make their case during the public comment sections of the EIS meetings. I don't mean extending the three minute time limit, I just mean that landowners shouldn't have to drive an hour to participate only to find that they won't be able to participate because someone brought in a busload of students...

This is a wonderful and crazy time of year. A lot has happened since my last blog post, but it’s difficult to find the time to time to share… That’s true today, too, but I can’t let the release of the Plains and Eastern draft EIS go without talking a little bit about it. First, though, I’d like to get just a couple other things out of the way.

“Literally thousands of landowners”

In a recent radio segment by KUAF’s JACQUELINE FROELICH, Mario Hurtado went on the record to talk about Clean Line’s compensation package for landowners. He described it as being the result of input from “literally thousands of landowners”.

First, I just want to say that I have yet to meet a landowner who would structure an ideal payment this way. No stock options? No percentage of transmission sales? A perpetual easement without renegotiation after so many years? The specter of condemnation? Nah.

Second, I’d like to take a moment to remind everyone that the law in Arkansas for condemnation is fair market value. So when Mario, or anyone from Clean Line, tells you that they are being generous with their 100% of fair market payment for an easement, you can remind them that they don’t get bonus points for offering what they are legally obligated to pay. 

A better question would be why aren't they offering the same to Iowans, to whom they are only offering 90% of fair market value?

Wait, I think Beth Conley has the answer…

“We have worked really hard to put together a package that we believe is fair and also consistent,” Conley said.

She said “25 to 30 percent of fair-market value” is common for easements.” 

So Iowans get less than Arkansans, but should just be glad they didn't get 25 to 30 percent… for the land that they own and have actually worked for? How fair.

But don’t worry, Clean Line isn't just offering a lump sum payment up front. Land owners can choose a yearly payment with a 2% increase instead… That should help offset the property value reduction, right?

Per Mr. Hurtado:

“Research shows that transmission infrastructure does not lower property values on agricultural land over the long-term. In instances where there is an effect on property values, the effect decreases with time and with distance from the transmission line.” 

Besides the fact that this statement kind of throws people in close proximity to the line or those who want to sell in the next few years under the bus, current research shows that blanket statements regarding the effect of transmission lines on property values are pretty unreliable and that actual effects involve factors including the property’s size, use, and proximity to the line, especially in rural areas… There’s a fair amount of land on this route that is not only agricultural, but residential and recreational as well. (All of which, not to beat a dead horse or anything, would be less of an issue if those closest to the line, who will shoulder the greatest adverse effects, were given the opportunity to choose for themselves whether or not the risk was worth the payment. Or better yet, what payment would be worth those effects). 

Lurk on transmission line questions on a real estate board and see what you find. Anecdotally, agents report that homes next to or near transmission lines take much longer to sell and are cheaper to buy.  

Clean Line says that landowners will also receive a “bonus” per structure payment for each tower or monopole erected on their property.

A bonus, you say? Sounds good. Yeah, but it’s non-negotiable

“Conley reiterated that, as the company works to get more landowners to sign up, there will not be a negotiation. The lump-sum payments are $6,000 for a single-linetower or $18,000 for a “corner line” tower that allows the line to shiftdirections. CLEP also offers annual payments of $500 for a single tower of$1,500 for a corner structure with 2% increases for each year.

“It’s fair and consistent,” said Conley.”

Fair and consistent for whom? The landowner? The landowner to whom you are dictating what you’ll pay for their property? Who doesn't get to negotiate? Who gets to shut up and take it or risk condemnation from (yes, I’ll say it again…) a private company consisting of three primary investors. 

“Thank you, sir. May I have another?”

Maybe Mr. Hurtado has something more to say about it…

“Clean Line seeks to negotiate all easement agreements on a voluntary basis and is committed to working with landowners to minimize impacts of the project to their properties.  In most places, the final easement for the direct current transmission line will be 150 to 200 feet wide.”

So what the blank-blankety-blank are we negotiating?! The language? The money isn’t negotiable, but the language is? Sure. Tell me once more why we’re being forced to negotiate in the first place.

Again, Mario-

“In order to assure that infrastructure projects in the public interest can be completed, the entities building them may have the right to condemn certain easements. Plains & Eastern Clean Line views the use of eminent domain as a last resort that is appropriate only after exhausting all reasonable attempts at voluntary easement acquisition.  In all cases,landowners are entitled to due process and payment of market value for any easement acquired.”

Oh, so ignoring the fact that, in eminent domain cases, "due process" simply refers to the monetary aspect of the case and not the question of whether or not the taking is just at it's core, he's saying this line is in the public interest? Great! Except...

“These are private, for profit commercial enterprises. They build these projects, they own them and they profit from them. They are not government entities. How can you justify the government giving the power to private companies to take private property away from landowners with a government sanctioned power reserved for public interest? That would be government sanctioned commercial confiscation.” David Kruse, president of Commstock Investments, Inc. 

^^This guy, right? He gets it.

So does this guy:

“We believe that there’s a potential for a massive scale-up of renewable energy, probably done under public ownership and social control. That’s really the most important dimension. To leave it to private corporations who charge high fees for electricity produced by renewable energy in the form of power purchase agreements is not the way we want to go.”

That was Sean Sweeny of Cornel University’s Global Labor Institute speaking to Democracy Now on the overinflated jobs numbers for the Keystone XL pipeline given by TransCanada and the potential to transfer traditional jobs in fossil fuels to green energy. Granted, he’s talking about generation, not transmission, but the principle holds. 

And, hey, while we’re at it… Should the Department of Energy choose to partner with Clean Line on P&E, what happens to those settlements Clean Line made with the landowners’ groups in OK not to use eminent domain? Are those agreements honored? SWPA puts eminent domain in OK fully back on the table, right? And as Mr. Skelly so kindly reminded us during his recent Missouri PSC testimony when asked what would happen if their GBE petition to was denied: “We would look at the no and figure out a way to turn it into a yes.” 

Speaking of Oklahoma

There have been some incredibly disturbing accounts from landowners in Oklahoma regarding their treatment by land agents, including threats of eminent domain use, and a certain Clean Line representative telling a landowner just last week that this is a “done deal” that he needs to “get used to it”. That might be news to the Department of Energy. 

On the other hand, this whole project has certainly been news to quite a few members of the newly formed Facebook group Block Plains and Eastern Clean Line: Oklahoma . It’s open to the public and growing by leaps and bounds, by word of mouth, since, like us, they have no corporate sponsorship (Psst- we don’t have to pay for our likes and adds… just sayin’).

The Draft EIS

Finally, I want to touch on the EIS. I actually owe Clean Line and the Department of Energy an apology. When the new interactive map came out on the EIS website yesterday, I made a comment on Facebook about how crappy the maps were. I should have differentiated. The easily accessible “interactive map” is pretty crappy. It doesn’t zoom in far enough, street names are practically non-existent…

But, oh, the maps inside the actual EIS! 

You see, my friend Dave and his partner, Delinda, came over last night so we could pour over the 3700 pages of the paper copy. The maps inside those binders? Man, were they beautiful. Crisp and clear mosaics of emerald and ochre. Tiny squares and circles marked the homes and easements. Land uses were indicated. Streets were easy to read…

And the route! The actual route, not the mile wide corridor… There it was!

Or I should say, there they were… the preferred routes and the DoE’s alternates (which might have been slightly different had the vast majority of people on them had known about the scoping period). 

Those little lines, solid and broken, marking the land people will, if all goes according to Clean Line’s plan, lose control over.  And, in all honesty, drawn on those maps, those route lines do look little. But they’re not…

Dave and I were sitting next to each other at the kitchen table. Delinda stood behind him, bending her head down close to his, examining the brilliant green checkerboard that represented their “region”. She had her hand on his back and they were both pointing out properties and structures--who would be getting hit, what they farmed, their history, their lives… “Look, that’s going right through her.  That’s their old homestead, right there.” (By the way, if you’re not familiar with the practice of describing a person’s land as part of their being, read this.)

Finally, Dave tapped his finger on a little square.

“That’s us,” he said, turning to look at me. “That’s our little piece of earth.”

And that’s the thing isn't it? None of us are under any illusions that we’ll live forever. Our little piece of the pale blue dot is only ours for an instant. Less than a cosmic blink. And if asked, we would give up a piece of it to save humanity, no doubt. But we’re not being asked, we’re being told. And it’s not for humanity, it’s for a couple investors who want to feel good about their investments as long as it eventually ends in profit. It may not be our little piece forever, but it’s our little piece right now. What happens in the next year is about more than a transmission line. It's about more than wind energy. It is about the future, but it's about more than climate change, as terrifying as it is.

So it all comes down to a few little lines across a map. How many people in that mile wide corridor have spent months wondering about whether they were on the route? Worrying? If it’s not something you've ever experienced, then you can have absolutely no idea. You become consumed. You almost envy the many people who didn't know. Almost, but not quite, because they’ll always wonder if they could have done more to stop it, if only they’d known sooner.

And to know, worst of all, that Clean Line had a preferred route all along. That they've had it for months… Years… When they stood above these perfect maps, with no connection to the land or the people on it, and decided where they wanted to put their project.

Dave was quiet for a minute. Then he shook his head…

“When you zoom in on your little property and see that you'll be affected, it is like winning the lottery… but all we get is a transmission line.”

A couple months ago, Michael Skelly was kind enough to talk to me on the phone. He said that he understood our concerns… I don’t really think that’s true.