Golden Bridge, LLC's, Statement RE: DOE Termination of Clean Line Participation Agreement...

###

"We believe this is a logical decision for the U.S. Department of Energy given Clean Line Energy Partners’ apparent abandonment of the proposed Plains & Eastern HVDC project. 

We hope Clean Line’s attempt to override both state law and the will of the people will serve as a cautionary tale for future developers. We thank our federal delegation, state assembly members, and local officials for their unwavering support throughout this process. Finally, we would not be here today without the tireless grassroots support of hundreds of landowners in Arkansas and Oklahoma over the last several years."

###

Hubris: Clean Line's Michael Skelly and the End of the Plains and Eastern Project...

Another joint update from Ali and Dave...

THIS = Michael Skelly:

See the smoldering ruins behind Michael Skelly over there? The twisted steel and scorched concrete trailing behind him? Those are the bridges he burned in Arkansas. Well, rhetorically, of course... because Michael Skelly never actually built anything here, except a list of enemies.

There’s a difference between innovation and hubris, reality and fantasyland. Maybe you need a bit of both to pull off the project of Skelly’s dreams, but somewhere along the line… between attempting to circumvent state authority and bluffing about local tax payments, Clean Line Energy Partners, LLC, managed to make their project so toxic no one seems to want anything to do with them.

To recap the events of recent weeks: Plains & Eastern, Clean Line’s regulatory crown jewel and the only of its projects to be fully (if questionably) permitted, is DEAD in Arkansas. Hallelujah. Don't take our word for it, though. Let's look at a little evidence:

Clean Line Withdraws from TVA's Interconnection Queue:

Just a little background: Clean Line has three points of interconnection for it's project - at Southwest Power Pool (SPP) in Oklahoma for its proposed converter station at the beginning of the line, at Midcontinent Independent System Operator (MISO) for its proposed converter station in Pope County, Arkansas, and at Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) for its proposed converter station in Shelby County, Tennessee. All three are vital to the Project's ultimate success. As you can see in the following screenshot, Clean Line has withdrawn its position in TVA's interconnection queue.

What's missing from the second screenshot (TVA's current interconnection queue)? #219 and #220 (Clean Line). Now, Skelly will likely attempt to say that the position can simply be revived later, but that's not really how the process works according to TVA:

3.5 Withdrawal.

The Interconnection Customer may withdraw its Interconnection Request at any time by written notice of such withdrawal to TVA. In addition, if the Interconnection Customer fails to adhere to all requirements of this LGIP, except as provided in Section 13.5 (Disputes), TVA shall deem the Interconnection Request to be withdrawn and shall provide written notice to the Interconnection Customer of the deemed withdrawal and an explanation of the reasons for such deemed withdrawal. Upon receipt of such written notice, the Interconnection Customer shall have fifteen (15) Business Days in which to either respond with information or actions that cure the deficiency or to notify TVA of its intent to pursue Dispute Resolution.

Withdrawal shall result in the loss of the Interconnection Customer’s Queue Position. If an Interconnection Customer disputes the withdrawal and loss of its Queue Position, then during Dispute Resolution, the Interconnection Customer's Interconnection Request is eliminated from the queue until such time that the outcome of Dispute Resolution would restore its Queue Position. An Interconnection Customer that withdraws or is deemed to have withdrawn its Interconnection Request shall pay to TVA all costs that TVA prudently incurs with respect to that Interconnection Request prior to TVA’s receipt of notice described above. The Interconnection Customer must pay all monies due to TVA before it is allowed to obtain any Interconnection Study data or results.

TVA shall (i) update the OASIS Queue Position posting and (ii) refund to the Interconnection Customer any portion of the Interconnection Customer's deposit or study payments that exceed the costs that TVA has incurred. In the event of such withdrawal, TVA, subject to the confidentiality provisions of Section 13.1, shall provide, at Interconnection Customer's request, all information that TVA developed for any completed study conducted up to the date of withdrawal of the Interconnection Request.

There goes Clean Line's proposed end point.

Clean Line Withdraws from MISO's Interconnection Queue:

This is the one we've been waiting for. A withdrawal from MISO's interconnection queue removes the Project's midpoint (the Pope County, Arkansas, converter station connection point) from the equation. Go here and search for "J319." The evidence:

There goes Clean Line's proposed mid-point.

Long story short: No connection point in Tennessee and no connection point in Arkansas = NO PROJECT IN ARKANSAS. This is fantastic news, Arkansas landowners. The multi-year fight has been unnecessarily taxing and expensive, but this is looking good for you.

In spite of Skelly’s many, many protestations, the simple fact is, absent the Oklahoma portion of the line, whatever Frankenmonster he intends to “someday” cobble together is NOT Plains & Eastern. The Project, as pitched, hyped, and sold to the U.S. Department of Energy, no longer exists, whether or not Skelly believes he could somehow manage to get back into line at the TVA or MISO.

Do Skelly, et al, (meaning those few scraps of leadership left in his company) really not comprehend what they’ve done by selling Oklahoma to NextEra? Who gave this man their investment money? And for goodness sake, why?

Why a company that had the hubris to assume they could jump the appellate queue all the way to the Illinois Supreme Court… a company that never misses a chance to appeal an unfavorable decision, would assume dedicated landowners would stop with a district court ruling is beyond us. This company spent years, YEARS, holding Arkansans hostage. You think we’re going to let the first judge be the end all? Not likely, princess.

No, Mr. Skelly, you will not be allowed to sit in Houston and twiddle your thumbs until a magic buyer comes along. You will not be allowed to hold onto your “permit” with one hand while selling off pieces of your company with the other. You will not be allowed to fail to file updates with regulatory agencies and simultaneously claim the project is still alive. You will not be allowed to do that to so many Arkansans.

Now, the ten-ton elephant in the room falls on NextEra: What about our good friends in Oklahoma? What are your intentions there, NextEra? We think you owe Oklahomans an explanation about what your true intentions are. Are you actually proposing a different transmission line? Maybe to compete with AEP's "Wind Catcher" project? If so, where might that project stop in Oklahoma? Again, these landowners deserve an explanation from you... sooner, rather than later.

And what about the reporters who continue to give this company so much deference? Don't you feel like it's time to do a little bit more digging and put this to bed for landowners in Arkansas and Oklahoma? It's time for you to stop handling these guys with kid gloves, isn't it?

So, go back to your firehouse, Michael Skelly… maybe do a little more glory hounding and dream up your next snake-oil scheme. With the exception of greeniacs like Dr. Smith (BTW, I’m sure Bill Johnson is shaking in his boots. *eyeroll*), everyone can see right through you.

Michael Skelly is now living in a world filled with hubris and fantasy. We'll update you again with more when we know more.

Does Clean Line not love Arkansas anymore?

Well, it’s happened. Clean Line doesn’t love Arkansas anymore. “The markets have shifted," Mario says. First, we got friend-zoned (remember when they were just going to use us as an doormat for their extension cord to Tennessee?), then loved us no matter how much we didn’t want it (baby, I’m gonna give you all the taxes-not-really-taxes-voluntary-payments and jobs you can handle), and now Clean Line is moving on and trying to sell (kind of like multiple interested parties always said they would) this debacle of a project to American Electric Power (AEP) to "help" facilitate their proposed "Wind Catcher" project. We could go on for a while about what exactly "Wind Catcher" is, but this article by Jeffery Tomich of E&E News very effectively summarizes what it is and gives a brief summary of what Clean Line is now seeking:

Clean Line did disclose an unusual offer to a potential customer last week in an Oklahoma regulatory filing. 

In testimony filed at the Oklahoma Corporation Commission, the company suggested that the Plains and Eastern project provide the transmission for Public Service Co. of Oklahoma's piece of American Electric Power Co.'s Wind Catcher project.

The $4.5 billion AEP project would be able to provide wind energy to its utility customers in Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma and Texas from a 2,000-MW wind farm being developed in Oklahoma and 350-mile high-voltage transmission line (Energywire, July 27).

Clean Line supports the Wind Catcher project and its ambitions to bring utility customers access to low-cost wind energy in the same way that utilities such as Xcel Energy Inc. and MidAmerican Energy Co. are doing, Hurtado said.

"It just happens that we're a number of years ahead on our project compared with the [transmission line] that they proposed back in July," he said. "We think our project can provide a lower risk and ultimately a lower-cost option to move that power that they want to serve their customers."

Clean Line, which has been an evangelist for the benefits of DC technology for long-haul transmission projects, even said it's willing to use alternating-current technology if that's what AEP wants to do.

"We didn't want the discussion about the benefits that this project brings to be focused on a technology discussion of AC versus DC," Hurtado said.

So far, Clean Line's very general proposal to play a part in Wind Catcher is just that.

Read that again. One more time. I had to read it four times to grasp exactly what Mario was saying here. And then I did a little research because I like to know what Mario and crew are up to. ;) In my search, I was able to locate the Wind Catcher docket at the Oklahoma Corporation Commission (OCC). By the way, OCC, you really should update your system so it can be more easily searched. Here's a small tutorial about how to view the whole docket:

1) Click Here. After the page loads, do this:

2) After the results have loaded, do this:

3) Viola! You now have access to the Wind Catcher docket at the OCC. I'm a pretty simple person, but this took me a decent amount of time. It shouldn't have, OCC. You should be able to search for terms such as "Clean Line" or "AEP" to bring up results. If the case number is unavailable or difficult to find, the "Search" function is pretty much useless.

Now that your chin is on the floor and you've learned how to access the Wind Catcher docket: click here and read. It is, at times, vomit-and-laughter inducing, but it's also revealing. Let's examine a little bit of that testimony, shall we? It's really important.

1) The "market has changed" and there is currently no demand for the Plains and Eastern project east of Oklahoma:

Translation: Clean Line STILL has no customers. This is something we've been trying to say for a long time, but it's pretty satisfying to see it finally coming from the horse's mouth directly. Something else is also revealed:

2) Clean Line is more than willing to re-route the project away from its current route and terminate the project at Tulsa. A "second phase could be built at a later date if market demands warrant such action."

Let that sink in for a moment. This has always been about HVDC, how great that technology is, and how this project is designed to "deliver the best wind energy to the mid-south and southeast" through a converter station in Pope county, Arkansas, and Shelby county, Tennessee. It's almost like Mario would have you believe everything that's happened for the last seven years didn't actually happen. Now, Mario is essentially saying: "Arkansas and the southeast United States, PSSSSH!, this thing is GREAT for Oklahoma. Did I mention this is GREAT for Oklahoma? We will do anything if you'll just get this thing off our hands, AEP. Please - BUY THIS. No, but seriously, we'll do ANYTHING. We'll even change it to AC, move the route so it stops at Tulsa, and we don't even care if we own it. In fact, we'd probably just rather sell it":

This is a fundamental change, folks. New territory. In fact, Mario made it sound so much like the project was pre-designed and destined for Oklahoma that he mentioned the word "Oklahoma" 119 times in his testimony. Arkansas got the short end of the stick with 2 mentions. You're hurting our feelings over here, guys. I could go on and on, but there are a couple key things to take away from this: 

1) Clean Line is proposing to do something altogether different than it has been for the past 7+ years with its Plains and Eastern project. It should be both frightening, as well as reassuring that Clean Line will literally do ANYTHING at this point to salvage something out of this project. Their desperation is becoming harder and harder to hide.

2) If you are a landowner that has been impacted by this debacle and are interested about where it is going, it is imperative that you follow the Wind Catcher docket at the OCC. Why? Because AEP is scheduled to respond by the 22nd of this month. We'll find out very soon if this is some off-the-wall proposal by Clean Line to AEP that will be laughed away, or if AEP is actually seriously considering Mario's sales pitch... which could almost completely re-write the route of this project and what it intends to accomplish.

If someone at AEP is reading this, I can give you a simple analogy about what Clean Line represents:

I am a car guy. Clean Line is what I would call a "fifty foot car." If you've ever purchased a used car before, you can relate. Let's say you are driving along the road, and you see a car for sale that catches your eye. It looked GREAT when you drove by. So, you decide to turn around and have a look. When you start looking it over, you notice that the paint is nice and shiny, but there's hail damage on the roof. You look at the tires and they're worn out. You climb underneath and notice that there are oil leaks everywhere, and it's obvious that things have been leaking for a long time. You open the doors and look inside, and the interior looks pretty nice, but there are cigarette burns on the seats and it smells like someone just smoked a pack of cigarettes in it. Then you look at the odometer and it reads 200k miles... just right at that point where, if you don't spend a lot of money replacing some core things, you're going to HAVE to spend more money changing those things later, likely after it's left you stranded on the side of the road in the bad part of town somewhere a couple hundred miles from home.

Now, let's say you make it past all of that because the current owner is offering you a killer deal. So, you decide to take her for a test ride! You start it up and it has a rough idle and it smokes a little bit. You put it in reverse and the differential makes a loud "click." You put it in drive and take off and the transmission doesn't shift properly. It's making a lot of noise, and the steering doesn't feel right. You make it back to where you started and you have to make a fundamental decision: Do I really want this car? Is the amount of work and money I am going to have to put into this car going to be worth what I am paying for it? Am I ready to accept all of the problems that it has, despite my better judgement telling me to RUN? You get the point.

AEP: Clean Line Energy Partners is a "Fifty Foot Car." She looks pretty good at fifty feet away but, upon closer inspection, she's really just an eight year old car that is rife with problems... past, present, and future. It would probably be a better decision to buy a newer model because this one is worn out. And, on top of all that, she's been owned by a few jerks her whole life. We'll all find out within the next few days if AEP is considering taking Clean Line for a test drive, or maybe deciding to RUN and look for a newer model. Unless, of course, the case is dismissed altogether as the Oklahoma AG has requested. Only time will tell.

Clean Line: Arkansas has been wanting to break up with you for a loooooong time now. We're beyond ready to call you an "ex." 

Mario Hurtado: Here's what I (and many other landowners) think of your quote...

Furthermore, the Plains and Eastern team has received many questions from landowners and other stakeholders in Oklahoma about the Wind Catcher project. The team has been asked if Plains and Eastern can be involved or assist in the Wind Catcher project given that Plains and Eastern has a construction-ready, long-haul transmission project that runs from the Oklahoma Panhandle to the east and has acquired easements on more than 750 parcels in Oklahoma.

I am calling BS.

Clean Line Dealt Significant Blow in Missouri...

Three strikes and Clean Line’s OUT in Missouri? For our friends up there, we hope so.

Investors: We hope you’re getting as weary as we think you should be.

Remember back in March when we explained that things weren’t looking good for Clean Line in Missouri? Yesterday, in a devastating (but not wholly unexpected) blow, the Missouri Public Service Commission unanimously denied Clean Line’s application for its’ proposed “Grain Belt Express” transmission project.

The landowners and others who organized to protect property rights in Missouri are amazing! Two different projects with two different sets of landowners unexpectedly came together to help deliver a voice to rural landowners (and a message to special interests) across the country. Let their dedication and hard work be an example for what can be accomplished if you work together and NEVER give up.

We’re going to keep this pretty simple today, because we are absolutely sick and tired of dealing with these “folks." That’s the nicest label Ali and I could come up with… we had others in mind. Let us sum up in the simplest terms possible:

1) Projects must benefit local communities. Not in a vague “taxes, jobs, economic development” kind of way, but in a substantial way that encourages the enthusiastic blessing of the people most directly affected by any project. The experience a company such as Clean Line has with landowners is directly proportional to the respect those landowners are given. Maybe that’s a hint about why you’ve found so much opposition to your projects?

2) You can’t force landowners to participate in venture-capitalist schemes. You just can’t. It is not our job to make you money. We don’t owe you our sweat equity. We’re already productive members of society and many of us have made sacrifices to infrastructure that you wouldn’t tolerate in the backyard of your McMansions. We don’t care about your investors, or their return on their investment. We just. Don’t. Care. It’s not our fault they made a bad investment in you. People make bad investments every single day. Maybe the Ziffs will take one less ride in their private jet this year, or buy one less yacht or “summer home.” Cry us a long and winding river.

3) Whining doesn’t help.

"We absolutely want to do the project," said Mark Lawlor, development director for Grain Belt Express. But he added: "Unfortunately, the message that we're getting from Missouri is that investments of these kind might be better spent in other places."

and:

Lawlor said the four commissioners' belief that the project was worthwhile but not approvable under state law "makes for an interesting argument" if Clean Line decides to instead seek federal permission to proceed.

And, what’s up with the hollow threat (again) to get the feds involved? Another multi-year-long, ~$100 million process? Doubtful. If you feel like you’re up to that challenge, we’re ready and willing to share our experience(s) and knowledge with our friends in Missouri.

Maybe that's why you've spent $750k on lobbyists in DC in the first half of this year, eh? (One such lobbyist being Arkansas Governor Asa Hutchinson's former Chief of Staff... but, more on that later.) I guess his newfound "opportunity" included being a lobbyist for Clean Line. Revolving-door politics is everywhere.

What really matters:

Despite the bluff and bluster coming from Clean Line, the positive things the Commission said about Grain Belt Express (in what seems like as much C-Y-A as it does genuine praise), and the "Blame Game" going around between Clean Line, the Commissioners, and the environmental groups... at the end of the day, only ONE fact remains:

YOU LOST, Clean Line. You can try to spin it however you like, but you still can’t build that transmission line in Missouri. Do not pass go, do not collect $200. Case closed.

Congratulations on your win, Missouri!

Arkansas Delegation Rolls Out the APPROVAL Carpet for Secretary Perry

I'm late. I meant to have this posted yesterday, but... life. Anyway, we're gonna keep this simple because some things don't need a lot of chatter...

On Monday afternoon, the Arkansas delegation filed the APPROVAL Act. 

On Tuesday, they sent a letter to newly confirmed Department of Energy Secretary Rick Perry. And it really perfectly distills the core issue with the Department of Energy's proposed participation in Clean Line Energy Partner's Plains & Eastern HVDC line:

Our objection to Clean Line’s application should not be viewed as a fight against renewable energy; we each understand the importance of having a reliable electricity grid and are strong advocates of a diverse energy portfolio, including wind, solar, hydropower, renewable biomass, and nuclear energy. Likewise, we do not take issue with the building of national infrastructure; robust infrastructure investments, including the enhancement of the electrical grid, are often productive undertakings.

Instead, our objections relate to the vast overreach the Obama Administration employed, allowing this project to skip the necessary protections which exist to protect state sovereignty and private property rights.

Throughout the history of electric transmission, factors for the approval of these lines have been reviewed and decided at the state level. As the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service has noted:

“The location and permitting of facilities used to transmit electricity to residential and commercial customers have been the province of the states (with limited exceptions) for virtually the entire history of the electricity industry. State and local governments are well positioned to weigh the local factors that go into siting decisions, including environmental and scenery concerns, zoning issues, development plans, and safety concerns”[1]

The rejection of the transmission line by Arkansas’s (PSC) forced DOE and Clean Line to resort to using Section 1222. This is the first time DOE has used Section 1222 to authorize the development, construction, or operation of transmission facilities, and the only partnership the Department has (to date) with an entity to do so.

Sigh. It's so good, right? Love those guys when it comes to this stuff... my Clean Line BFAPs. As to whether 1222 actually does give the DOE room to use eminent domain... I guess we'll wait and see what a judge has to say.

For a deeper dive into all of this stuff, please check out Keryn Newman's most recent blog post. She hits it as only Keryn can.

I should stop right here, but I can't. I promise I'm only going to address one of the reported responses to this legislation, though... And it actually didn't come from Clean Line (because we've all heard everything they say before. I read it and in my head I hear the noises grown ups make when they talk on Charlie Brown).

It actually came from the IBEW... Guys. C'mon.

Let me preface my comment by saying I am a freak for unions. I'm a Utah Phillips listening, Union Thugs following, right-to-work disdaining, union lover. However, "the IBEW strongly disapproves of politics getting in the way of American job creation"... Please. I'm assuming politics are fine as long as they actually create jobs then? It's just a problem when they get in the way?

Seriously, unions have got to stop allowing themselves to be used as corporate pawns. The whole concept of lifting and protecting the middle class goes out the window when you allow yourselves to be manipulated into strong arming regular people. You want jobs, we want you to have jobs... But we want to be kept whole, too. Is that not fair? We want bread, yes... but we want, what? What?? Roses too. Cripes.

 

Fake Newsiness

"A pre-inaugural list of top infrastructure projects, attributed to the transition team of President Donald Trump, doesn't reflect the administration's official views, White House officials say. 

In emails to the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette late Tuesday, presidential spokesman Sarah Huckabee Sanders said the list isn't a White House or a transition team policy document."

In my last solo blog post, I promised I would only write again if something really egregious

happened.

Guess what?

In the grand scheme of things, the 50 project infrastructure document "leaked" last week is not a big deal. Don't get me wrong, it's dubious as all get out. But the more that comes out about it's origins (consulting group= lobbyists), the clearer and clearer it becomes that this is more of a Governor's Association/Industry boner list than a well thought out proposal. If you're interested in reading more about the history of the list and don't have a subscription to Politico Pro, try these:

http://www.dallasnews.com/business/economy/2017/01/24/report-trumps-infrastructure-priorities-include-two-big-texas-projects

http://politics.blog.ajc.com/2017/01/25/donald-trump-tweets-a-motive-for-voter-fraud-claim/

http://m.dailykos.com/story/2017/01/25/1624695/-First-hints-of-just-what-might-be-in-Trump-s-infrastructure-bill-released-maybe-Or-not

Yes, you would expect some of these projects to be under consideration regardless of who was looking, but no... consideration doesn't equate to an action item. And in a time where "fake news" has become the rallying cry for anything one disagrees with, the fact remains (true, not alternative) that some of the reporting on this issue was grotesquely optimistic... I'm lookin' at you Arkansas Times ;) (P.S. If you're gonna quote a girl, call a girl) That witty, snarky banter makes for a nice echo chamber noise, but it's more truthiness than truth, Ernie. Why? Oh, because the truth is boring... and hard to get at... and maybe, just maybe, a little gray.

So, just for fun, let's talk a smidgen about permitting. I'm going to run defense for the entire Arkansas delegation for a minute here. Hold my coffee, Mr. Koch. Just kidding...

Ok, so both of the aforementioned Times articles push the idea that the delegation's support of the Keystone XL is evidence of their hypocrisy in terms of their stance on Clean Line. I understand. I get it. I cried for days after the election and I went to the Women's March in Little Rock. This last weekend was both heartbreaking and inspiring. We all approach issues from our own worldview. I believe there are valid reasons to challenge the delegation's general support of pipelines. And, honestly, if you want to go after them for taking money from the Koch brothers? Have at it. Just make sure you're publishing Clean Line's lobbying expenditures, too (Like you did on the $400 lunch)... And the AWEA... And every other moneyed special interest group that actually moves politics in this country.

If you want to go after them because of eminent domain, I'll pull your collar just a little, even though that's my primary area of interest. Same thing with permitting. Why? Because different types of infrastructure projects have different permitting requirements. Some happen at the state level (like transmission lines) and some happen at the federal level (like natural gas and some aspects of oil lines). Before we let our snark monsters rage at these guys, it's helpful to understand what's going on.

Keystone XL, DAPL, and Diamond require some level of federal permitting to build. Transmission lines, with a very few exceptions, are the providence of the state. Clean Line lost their bid for a CCN at the state level. Why? Because our state laws are not set up to permit merchant transmission lines without instate assets and with no mandate from an Regional Transmission Organization (RTO). This is not necessarily a bad thing depending on which side of the bench you're sitting on. If you're on Clean Line's side, it's a hindrance to development. If you're on the side of landowners, states rights advocates, and existing utilities, it protects the state and its residents from fly by night operations with no real intention of making a positive local impact. Mr. Dumas has no problem with Clean Line running to the Department of Energy (DOE) to kiss their CCN rejection boo-boo. Whatever, that's his prerogative, but the state legislature had a problem with it. So did the impacted landowners... And the federal delegation... because it's a valid complaint. Keep in mind that the legislation Dumas referred to was passed after Clean Line applied to the DOE, not before. They didn't try to fix it instate. They should have.

Now, if the argument is that the "balkanization" (they love that word, and all that it implies) of processes makes permitting huge projects like Plains & Eastern hard, there is every reason to have that discussion as a country, but you better bet your bottom dollar that the states aren't going to just roll over and hand the power that ensures their people are treated fairly to the feds. Especially if that means the feds use that authority to permit private projects that can't demonstrate necessity. Something tells me the RTO's won't be dancing in the streets about it either.

If anyone out there ready to rage against the delegation for their support of Keystone XL and DAPL... or Diamond for that matter, wants to help effectively (instead of just screaming into the abyss) they need to refocus their attention on the laws that govern regulatory agencies and the permitting processes that allow these projects to go through the way they do. Yelling at the delegation, the Corps of Engineers, or the PSC is like trying to put spilled milk back in a cup with a toothpick. If you want to effect change, you've got to change the laws. Bottom line... Or be ready to spend a lot of money on legal. The Diamond Pipeline is a four-hundred mile, 20" crude oil pipeline that was permitted without a comprehensive EIS because it didn't trigger a NEPA process and there is NO STATE LEVEL REQUIREMENT for one. If you're going to be pissed about something, be pissed about that.

Back to Clean Line... To be clear, both Keystone and DAPL were lacking permits that they needed to finish. In other words, there was a clear path the new administration could take to give those projects a push. How is that different from Clean Line? Well, for all intents and purposes, the Plains & Eastern project has been "approved" by the Department of Energy. Whether that "approval", or the process they used to get there, holds up in court is one thing, but the fact that they haven't started construction yet has nothing to do with the feds holding up their project and everything to do with the fact that Clean Line just can't seem to get it done. The Department of Energy set up specific requirements Clean Line has to meet before they will give them the go ahead to start construction on the line... These requirements (Conditions Precedent) for financing, subscription, etc... were established to protect the people of Arkansas, the SWPA, and the taxpayers in general. So what steps exactly could a new administration take to push P&E? Well, I don't know, but they'd have to be pretty creative. (By the way, if the new administration tried to get creative like that with a pipeline, the same people getting all warm and toasty over the possibility it could happen for Clean Line would be losing their marbles). And with all Skelly's bellyaching about changing the rules mid-process regarding the APPROVAL Act, they should be ready for a pretty significant backlash should they try anything sketchy.

While all these things seem kind of academic, it's pretty clear from Mario Hurtado's interview with NewsOK that the truthiness of this list isn't going to stop Clean Line from spinning it in a way they can use to preen (beg?) for financing and to pressure landowners.

"When the Trump campaign was looking at infrastructure, we thought it was a good thing to mention. We're just happy to be part of the conversation."

Like, when did you just happen to mention it? Did you run into them in the grocery store? How much did that conversation cost?

I'm not going to get into the potential psychological damage that comes from all these "nice" conversations my friend Mario claims to be having with people. I'm sure some of them probably are. Some of them probably aren't... and as I mentioned to an acquaintance the other day, we have a word for people who repeatedly contact you in spite of a clear request to be left alone. Who call you all the time and show up at your work and home uninvited. Who pressure you repeatedly into something you don't want to do, threatening you with financial harm. Who contact your family members to try and get in touch with you. Who make you feel alone and at risk... They're called "stalkers" and there is no other situation in society in which this kind of behavior is acceptable. By the way, is a "fair deal" an easement "option"?

This is already too long and I have other things to do today, but... in closing. There are three things everyone needs to remember in this somewhat surreal situation:

1. There is still an outstanding federal lawsuit against the Department of Energy regarding this project.

2. The Department of Energy has yet to announce that Clean Line has met the Conditions Precedent they need to move forward.

3. Lobbyists are constantly working on behalf of their clients. At the federal level and at the state level. So this kind of stuff... this "newsiness" is only the beginning. As the new administration settles in and establishes its goals, the swamp ain't going anywhere without a fight. And you can bet that whatever infrastructure plan, commission, or law finally takes place, it's going to have their greasy little fingerprints all over it. The ONLY way for people to get adequate representation in that process is for them to engage and fight for it. My generation was asleep and at war when the 2005 Energy Policy Act was passed. We've woken up. Stay awake.

January 2017: Clean Line Post-Election Update...

Happy (belated) New Year from Ali and Dave!

We sincerely hope you had a wonderful, Clean Line-free holiday season. Unfortunately, with the holidays coming to a close, we all have to remain informed and vigilant. Remember, while many of you only found out about this project in late 2014, Michael Skelly and crew have been actively attempting to execute this boondoggle since 2009... maybe earlier. It's hard to say with certainty exactly when the idea for this first arose. As we have written about before, Jimmy Glotfelty (cofounder of Clean Line) lobbied Congress in 2003 during his stint at the Department of Energy (DOE) in support of the very same provisions (Section 1221 & 1222) that his company is attempting to utilize now. We thought we would take this opportunity to provide you with an update, as well as a few things you should be paying attention to as we move through 2017:

Donald Trump, Scott Pruitt, and Rick Perry

Donald Trump:

As a rule, we keep politics out of this issue. It is not a political issue. It is a private property and states' rights issue. However, as all of us are aware, we had an election last year. Hate it or love it: Donald Trump was sworn in as President of the United States of America on January 20. Elections have consequences. As a good friend of ours stated a couple days after the election: "I'll bet Clean Line woke up and sh*t their pants on November 9." We tend to agree. To say the results of the election were anything less than unexpected would be an understatement. Jimmy Glotfelty has already attempted to set the stage for a change in conversation at the TVA board:

"Election Day was a big sea change in America," Jimmy Glotfelty, executive vice president for Clean Line Energy Partners, told the TVA board last week. "But we believe that just because we've gone from Democrats to Republicans (in the White House) that does not change the need for jobs and low-cost energy in America and we believe we will provide that. We've been before this board for the past seven years and our project dynamics have not changed."

But the truth is that no one can say right now what the Trump presidency means for Clean Line, which is due in part to the very nature of the project. Yes, it represents private investment in infrastructure, but it also represents an example of gross federal overreach in which the Department of Energy virtually ignored not only state law, but an established state PSC ruling.

With past comments like these, it will be interesting to see what his position is:

Scott Pruitt:

As some of you may remember, Scott Pruitt is the Oklahoma Attorney General. During the comment periods for both the NEPA review and the Section 1222 "review", his office issued scathing comments in landowners' and states' favor in opposition to the process being used to advance this project.

Why is that important? Because Scott Pruitt has been nominated to become the next EPA Administrator. He has been a staunch opponent of the "Clean Power Plan" (CPP). The CPP has been a primary justification by Clean Line for the "necessity" of their line. Under a Trump administration, the CPP will likely be nullified. Love it or hate it, it is what it is.

If you're interested in viewing Mr. Pruitt's confirmation hearing, you can do so here (Part 1):

and here (Part 2):

Rick Perry:

Why is former Texas Governor Rick Perry involved in this? Because he has been nominated to be the next Secretary of the Department of Energy. He is sort of a wild card. While he is mostly an oil and gas person, he also supported the so-called "Competitive Renewable Energy Zone" (CREZ) transmission expansion for wind energy in Texas. Many environmental-types seem to see this as a positive attribute in Perry for renewable energy. Others see this support as having been less about wind energy, and more about an economic opportunity for Texas. The CREZ lines were concocted and approved IN Texas, FOR Texas. Whether or not support for larger projects like Clean Line's translates to support from Mr. Perry at the federal level remains to be seen. He is known for being a staunch states-rights advocate. In fact, Mr. Perry wrote in a 2009 blog post:

The Founding Fathers understood that a one-size-fits-all approach just doesn’t work, especially in a country the size of America, and it certainly doesn’t work for Texas. Our economic strength, compared to the federal budget mess and other states’ troubles, is evidence that Texans know what’s best for Texas. 

The Constitution simply does not empower the federal government to override state laws without restraint. 

I agree with Texas’ 7th governor, Sam Houston, who once said, “Texas has yet to learn submission to any oppression, come from what source it may.”

We didn’t like oppression then and we certainly don’t like it now. Unfortunately, pressure is increasing from a federal government that is growing increasingly oppressive in its size, its intrusion into the lives of our citizens, and its interference with the affairs of our state.

Also:

In his book, he sets out a view that the founders intended a federal system that allowed “people of like mind” in the states to make their own decisions about how to live, while the national government’s role was properly focused on national security. “From marriage to prayer, from zoning laws to tax policy, from our school systems to health care, and everything in between,” he wrote, “it is essential to our liberty that we be allowed to live as we see fit through the democratic process at the local and state level.”

While we don't have much indication as to which side Mr. Perry will ultimately fall on RE: Clean Line, we are paying attention. We stand ready to work with the new DOE Secretary (whether Perry or someone else) on this important issue. We are hopeful Mr. Perry, if confirmed, will bring the same respect and zeal for states' rights to the Department of Energy.

If you're interested in listening to Mr. Perry's confirmation hearing, it can be viewed here:

Tax Credits for the Wind Industry

Federal Production Tax Credit Down 20% in 2017:

As you may know, Congress passed an extension to the Production Tax Credit (PTC) for the wind industry in late 2015. However, a year-over-year PTC reduction will occur until the end of 2019:

The tax credit is phased down for wind facilities and expires for other technologies commencing construction after December 31, 2016. The phase-down for wind facilities is described as a percentage reduction in the tax credit amount described above: 

• For wind facilities commencing construction in 2017, the PTC amount is reduced by 20% 
• For wind facilities commencing construction in 2018, the PTC amount is reduced by 40% 
• For wind facilities commencing construction in 2019, the PTC amount is reduced by 60%

Oklahoma's Budget Deficit and In-State Wind Tax Credits:

As many of our readers may know (Oklahoma's, especially), Oklahoma has, by state standards, a massive budget deficit. From a recent article:

(Reuters) - Oklahoma's budget deficit will be $868 million next year, higher than recent estimates as sustained low oil prices, tax cuts and corporate tax credits continue to weigh on the state's finances, the Oklahoman newspaper reported on Tuesday. 

Governor Mary Fallin estimated just days ago that the state would face a $600 million gap for the 2018 fiscal budget year, but Finance Secretary Preston Doerflinger told reporters at a news conference on Tuesday that the hole will be deeper.
A $900 million budget shortfall would represent nearly 15 percent of its expected $6 billion in spending power. 

With less money to spend, state lawmakers could choose to make cuts to government services like education and health care or raise taxes. 

"I think it's important for everybody to realize you're not cutting your way out of this situation," Doerflinger said. "We have to have a serious conversation about revenue."

One of the "corporate tax credits" weighing on Oklahoma's budget is a state tax credit for wind energy. Tax credits paid by taxpayers to (mostly out-of-state) wind companies have ballooned in the past few years:

"Oklahoma is bankrupt and unable to pay its bills because of $1 billion worth of tax cuts, hundreds of millions of dollars in gross production tax giveaways to the oil and gas industry, and $2 billion worth of tax credits and exemptions to wealthy corporations, all of which this governor supported," said House Democratic leader Rep. Scott Inman, of Oklahoma City. "That's the reason we're in this mess. To get out of it, we need to roll back those irresponsible tax plans, not raise taxes on working families." 

Another likely target for revenue will be some of those hundreds of millions of dollars in incentives Inman spoke of — specifically a credit for the production of wind energy that an independent consulting group has recommended be capped or ended. Payments under that program have skyrocketed from $3.7 million in 2010 to more than $113 million in 2014.

Numbers were not available for 2015 and 2016, but many, many more wind turbines have been constructed in Oklahoma in those two years. That number would have to be much higher for 2016. What do you think the 2,000 additional wind turbines Clean Line would like to see constructed in the Oklahoma panhandle would do to that figure? Our opinion: since wind tax credits account for at least 15% of Oklahoma's budget deficit, lawmakers in that state are going to be required to get serious about capping or eliminating them in the 2017 session. Will they wind up with a result that is fair to Oklahoma taxpayers? Who knows. In this age of "pay-to-play" politics, we would say that nothing would be surprising.

Relation to Clean Line:

So, how does this relate to the Plains and Eastern (P&E) project? Quite simply, as the years progress, Clean Line's "delivered product" becomes more expensive and less financially appealing to end-use utilities. The price of delivered energy on P&E to an end-use utility (such as TVA, Georgia Power, etc) is composed of the price a wind generator can produce the energy for, added to the cost of delivery Clean Line will charge to deliver the electricity to the TVA system, plus whatever TVA would charge to wheel that electricity through their system to them. If the cost of the electricity rises on the generation end, the cost of the electricity on the receiving end rises, as well. So, how does this relate to the TVA?

Clean Line and the Tennessee Valley Authority

As discussed above, the "prime time" to sign up for capacity on Clean Line's proposed transmission line was by the end of last year. And, Clean Line and others have parsed no words in attempting to push TVA to sign a contract for electricity on Plains and Eastern. Take, for example, this fluffy article from Dave Flessner that seemed to imply that TVA was right on the brink of signing a contract with Clean Line before year's end:

The Tennessee Valley Authority is studying whether to contract this year to buy into what would be one of the biggest wind energy projects in the country. 

Despite last week's election of a new president who has pledged his support for more fossil fuel power generation, TVA President Bill Johnson said the utility is still studying whether to ink a deal in the next six weeks to buy at least some of the wind-generated power windmills a Houston group is trying to transfer across the middle of America. 

Clean Line Energy Partners LLC is planning to build high-voltage, long-distance transmission lines to carry power generated by windmills in Texas and Oklahoma to the Tennessee Valley. The development group wants to reach a deal with TVA to buy its power before the end of this year to take advantage of maximum federal tax incentives for wind generation that will not be as generous after this year.

Or, this earlier article by Mr. Flessner with an equal amount of fluff (there seems to be a pattern with him):

Jimmy Glotfelty, executive vice president for Clean Line Energy Partners, told the TVA board last week that it could deliver wind-generated power from Oklahoma and Texas up to 60 percent of the time at around 3 to 3.5 cents per kilowatt-hour, which is cheaper than some of TVA's other energy costs. Such wind-generated power could be available in two to three years after new wind turbines are erected in Oklahoma and Texas, where the wind blows more steadily than in the Southeast, and after Clean Line builds its proposed 700-mile line from the panhandle of Texas to Memphis. 

The cost will be cheaper this year because the maximum federal production tax credits, worth the equivalent of 2.2 cents per kilowatt-hour, will begin to decrease after Jan. 1."We continue to have strong discussion with utilities in the Southeast and we continue to have productive talks with TVA because we believe this is a very competitive source of clean energy which we think would add value to their portfolio," Glotfelty said.

(If you're interested in watching Mr. Glotfelty plead as an ordinary citizen for TVA to purchase their "product" before the end of 2016 at their August 2016 board meeting, click here and fast forward to minute 138:00 or 2:18:00, or at their November 2016 board meeting by clicking here and fast forwarding to minute 35:00 or 0:35:00.)

Environmental groups have also been lobbying TVA hard to sign a contract with Clean Line by the end of 2016. Back in August, Dr. Stephen Smith of the "Southern Alliance for Clean Energy" even went so far as attempting to offer the Plains and Eastern transmission project as a potential aid in the solution to the Zika virus (it's hard to make this stuff up, folks). In November, Allie Brown (also of SACE) had this to say:

Clean Line’s transmission project is a no-brainer for TVA and other Southern electric companies to buy into. It will help diversify our energy mix, create tens of thousands of jobs, protect natural resources, and provide health benefits by decreasing pollution from fossil-fuel generation in our region. 

Critical deadlines regarding the federal production tax credit for wind power are fast approaching. Fortunately, contracts for wind power can be signed today, but can take delivery as late as December 2020, and still qualify for the important tax incentive. We strongly encourage TVA’s board of directors to immediately contract for at least 1,000 megawatts of wind power on the Plains and Eastern Clean Line. We need your help to urge TVA to buy wind power from Clean Line today:

SACE even created this nifty petition.

This guy even threw his hat into the ring with an op-ed entitled: "Tennessee Valley Authority should get into wind power". Leaving out the obvious fact that TVA is already "into wind power," the opinion piece seemed to be neatly crafted with all of Clean Line's dead-horse talking points. Accident? Probably not. The op-ed was printed after December 31, however, so it's doubtful anyone at TVA actually read it.

Clean Line STILL Has No Publicly Available Contracts:

Despite all the fluff and bluster, Clean Line has still yet to release a single publicly available contract for transmission capacity on Plains and Eastern from TVA or anyone else. As with any business, customers draw more customers, so it seems highly unlikely that Clean Line wouldn't have released information about a major contract with TVA. As we have become accustomed, it seems incredibly hard for them to keep positive news on the proverbial "down low". It would also seem unlikely, with credits being reduced, that a rising "delivered product" price for Clean Line would provide increased incentive for an end-user contract in 2017.

But what do we know? We're just "misinformed" landowners.

Landowner Groups File Legal Complaint Against U.S. Department of Energy Over Clean Line Decision

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

Please refer media inquiries to:

Gill Ragon Owen, P.A.
Jordan P. Wimpy
(501) 801-3816 or jwimpy@gill-law.com

Landowner Groups File Legal Complaint Against U.S. Department of Energy Over Clean Line Decision

Golden Bridge, LLC, and Downwind, LLC, two organizations representing the property rights and interests of member landowners along the entire route of the proposed "Plains and Eastern" HVDC transmission line in Arkansas, filed a legal complaint against the Department of Energy and the Southwestern Power Administration regarding their approval of and participation in the proposed project. "Landowners were never offered an appropriate avenue for due process during the DOE's review of Clean Line's application," said Dave Ulery of Golden Bridge. "An opportunity to comment is not the same as an opportunity to directly participate in the matter in an official capacity. Review is meaningless if those most affected are not given ample and significant opportunity to engage on a meaningful and substantive level."

The legal complaint raises concerns regarding the legality of the Department of Energy’s decision to participate in the project using Section 1222 of the Energy Policy Act. “While understanding the importance of infrastructure in the production, transmission, and distribution of electrical energy,” a spokesperson for Downwind noted, “the landowner-managed organization is concerned with the federal government’s legal authority, and the scope and manner of its proposed participation in transmission projects pursuant to Section 1222. There are lingering doubts about the substance and merits of the Department’s determination in this project, with particular concern relating to the potential use of federal eminent domain to condemn private property for the benefit of a private, for-profit company.”

Both groups continue to accept new members. For more information, please go to www.GoldenBridgeAR.org.

Contact:

GoldenBridgeAR@gmail.com
Golden Bridge, LLC
4300 Rogers Ave., Suite 20-148,
Fort Smith, AR 72903

My last blog post… Well, so I hope.

This is my last blog post.

At least it is barring some extreme Clean Line shenanigans. I’ve been meaning to write one for a while now. Ever since the Department of Energy’s Record of Decision/Participation Agreement with Plains & Eastern made it absolutely clear this project would end up in a courtroom instead of ending on Moniz’s desk. I don’t really blame the DOE for that decision… How many federal agencies stand up and say, “No, we really don’t have the power or authority to do XYZ”? It doesn’t happen. And in a way, this is better: Congress proposes, an administration acts, and judges rule. Is a law really a law before it’s been tested by fire? There’s this great line from Robert Graves' I Claudius: 

"Let all the poisons that lurk in the mud hatch out."

Courtrooms and the discovery process are pretty good places for the hatching out of poisons… And of redacted financial information.

So anyway, what prompted me to finally take up the keyboard for this quasi-final farewell was Clean Line’s self-aggrandizing press release following the defeat of Senator Boozman’s energy bill amendment (thank you, Senator) earlier this week. Don’t worry if you haven’t seen it. It’s not getting much exposure at this point. Maybe it will later. But either way, I promise you... you’ve heard Clean Line say everything in it before. Ad nauseum.

I mean… where to begin? Well, let’s start with the biggest shock. Where is Louis Schmoll? Louis, the landowner from Atkins who gets trotted out and quoted every. single. time Clean Line needs to show how Arkansans support their project. Not enough space to include him and/or Bob AND industry reps perhaps?

Instead, how about we begin with Micheal Skelly’s pleasure at the “bipartisan” nature of the vote? Guess what other big vote was bipartisan? Go on... Guess...

If you were thinking of the 2005 Energy Policy Act, you'd be correct. It passed by an almost 3/4ths majority mix of D&Rs. Compared to that vote, this week’s vote, a.k.a. the “vote to say no” (gag), looks a little weak. And pretty clearly, there are a number of senators ready to tug the reins at the DOE. Is that partisan? Meh, maybe somewhat. But “partisan” isn’t the answer to everything and, if there’s anything we’re learning from this election cycle, it’s that where the politicians are is vastly where the people aren’t.

Now, if you had actually read Clean Line's press release, depending on your point of view, you could have interpreted just a whiff of desperation. A kind of… “Look at us! We won! Pleeeeeeease look at us!” sorta thing. But what exactly did Clean Line “win”? Not much. Legally, this changes nothing. Not the vagueness or contradictions in 1222. Not the attempted application of the law by the DOE. And certainly not the applicability of Plains & Eastern to that law.

They got the adamant support of New Mexico Senator Heinrich (wonder why... WAPA territory, maybe?) and the support of Senators Lankford and Inhofe- yes, he of "snowball on the floor" climate change denying fame- (R-OK) and McCaskill (D-MO). Oh, if only us little people had had an extra $400k to spend in DC last year…  

So, I ask again, what did they win? Besides the chance for the continued confidentiality of certain financials? Well, they won the opportunity to have a senator get up and argue, on the record no less, that Boozman’s amendment… this little report to ensure transparency and fiscal responsibility… is a "job killing amendment". (@3:15:00) Really? Because Plains & Eastern is so vulnerable a report could kill it?

0.o

Yikes. With friends like that, who needs enemies?


Arrivederci


P.S. Omg- I didn't expect to be back so soon. I wrote this on Friday morning. It's now Saturday and all I can say is... clearly, nothing quite has the power to draw the poison out like another proposed amendment. This one, announced by Senator Cotton yesterday afternoon, blocks funding for 1222 projects (thank you, Senator). The response from "Clean Line" was truly breathtaking. Take a look at the sky above you, folks, because if this amendment passes, that sucker is coming down! D.O.W.N! Down! I think they covered just about every threat in the capitalist handbook: Hostile business environment? Check! Harder to build infrastructure? Check! Job KILLER? Check! Higher energy bills? Check! 

Except that... Well, in the interest of time, just read this.  And this. Or, like, open the business section of the Democrat Gazette.

The thing that really grinds my gears, though... The one thing in that statement that doesn't make me snicker into my coffee even a little is the argument that this is going to cause higher energy bills. And to me, it's kind of a perfect example of what I don't like about Clean Line. It assumes we'll pay a higher rate than what they say they can provide for us and presents that as if it were already a reality. The bottom line is that you can't lose what you don't already have.

Finally, this is it I promise, we have this gem: 

The company said the amendment is “a clear example of political meddling targeted at one company and changes the rules in the middle of the game, after tens of millions of private dollars have been invested. The Cotton amendment hurts American consumers and business by undermining the law that was passed under a Republican administration with bipartisan support. 

I have been very careful never to curse on this blog, but oh, how I want to... Instead I'm going to put on my cleanest Battlestar Galactica uniform and say... Frack you, buddy. Frack you.

How about this instead:

Clean Line spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on lobbying efforts in Washington D.C. in direct opposition to the APPROVAL Act is a clear example of big business meddling targeted at a small group of landowners and changes the rules in the middle of the game, after those landowners have spent their lives building sweat and financial equity in their properties, paying their taxes and living like decent human beings. The Cotton amendment is yet another attempt to protect those individuals and their state by bringing attention to a vague and contradictory section of a law that was passed in the era of Cheney's Energy Task Force with a glut of lobbying dollars spent on behalf of industry to provide them with a "piñata of perks".

Meddling.  Phooey.

Hannibal BPW not a "good witness" for Clean Line...

In an interesting turn of events, Hannibal, Missouri's Board of Public Works has decided it is in no hurry to be a "good witness" at the Missouri Public Service Commission:

HANNIBAL, Mo. -- The Hannibal Board of Public Works has suspended talks with Houston-based Clean Line Energy Partners about investing in or using its proposed Grain Belt Express transmission line to bring wind-generated electricity to the city.

BPW General Manager Bob Stevenson told the utility's board of directors Tuesday that the BPW has decided to step back and observe developments between the company and other municipalities before moving forward.

"We just decided to sit back, take it easy for a while, and just study what's going [on], keep asking questions, keep researching," Stevenson said. "We've got nothing to put forward. There is no pending contract."

In a pitch to the BPW last month, Mark Lawlor, Clean Line director of development, outlined the possibilities of the utility paying an annual service fee to bring energy from the west to meet its demand or taking part ownership in a Ralls County converter station and a portion of the project's capacity. The latter would allow the BPW to sell what capacity it doesn't use.

And, really, this comes as no surprise because, as with Plains and Eastern and Rock Island, Clean Line has "got nothing":

Stevenson said the BPW has no deadline for making decisions related to the project despite Clean Line's goal of appearing before the commission again this year.

"Without us, they've got nothing," he said. "Just because they're in a hurry doesn't mean we have to be." (emphasis added)

And, Kudos to the Ralls County, Missouri, for understanding the heart of this issue:

Wiley Hibbard, Ralls County presiding commissioner, told BPW board members he was pleased the utility plans to hold off on further consideration of participating in Grain Belt Express. Farmers and landowners have blasted the project over concerns it would hurt land values; make land around the line's infrastructure unusable; and grant a private firm public utility status, which would allow eminent domain. 

"It's not that we're opposed to easements and power lines -- Lord knows we've got hundreds of them throughout the county," Hibbard said. "It's just the sheer immensity of this project."

To read the full story, go here.

It's the Eminent Domain:

It's the eminent domain. It's not the source of energy, it's the eminent domain. Clean Line, being little more than a potential profit center for a few privileged investors, has not justified a need for any of its projects, and shouldn't be granted eminent domain. Let me repeat: It is the eminent domain.

It is a hard pill for landowners to swallow when they understand that Clean Line is potentially planning to offer them what would amount to roughly $18 for each 1' long X 200' wide strip of their land here in Arkansas. It becomes even harder to swallow when landowners read stories about the Ziff family (Clean Line's majority stakeholder) setting records in real estate sales at Martha's Vineyard and also offering up a private compound for sale in Malalapan, Florida, that is topped in price ($195 million) in the United States only by Hugh Hefner's Playboy mansion. If I shell out that kind of cash, do I get to keep the elephant tusks that are on display at 0:53 in the video, or are you taking those with you when you move out?

Investors: It is time to bail. With your help, Clean Line's optics are truly terrible (and only getting worse) and the opposition's resolve is strong across the board against their speculative projects. Landowners have made it clear they're not going to accept this sort of abuse simply to enrich a few at the expense of many. Enough is enough.

So, what happens now in Missouri?

So, all of this begs the question: What is Clean Line's next move in Missouri? Do they re-file there with absolutely nothing more to offer? Now that everyone there is watching closely, I suppose they can hope to get a few more closed-door meetings? They'd better be really sneaky, because quite surely other municipal utilities are watching this outcome at BPW. Just in case they aren't, we'll continue to make sure what is going on in Missouri receives due attention.

Also, what happened to that "parked" Section 1222 application Clean Line has with the Department of Energy and the threats Mark Lawlor lobbed to utilize it after the Missouri Public Service Commission denied their application? If the decision that is going to be handed down from DOE is going to be such a slam dunk for you, Clean Line, why not just totally bypass Missouri like you're trying to do in Arkansas? Should you decide to go ahead with your Section 1222 application, Arkansans stand ready to help our friends in Missouri fight that process.

And, by the way, where is the decision on Arkansas' Section 1222 application? It was supposed to be delivered by the end of last year, wasn't it, Mr. Skelly? We're a month beyond the DOE's timeline showing it would be delivered by mid-January. What's going on there?

Not an oligarchy, yet:

Listen, everyone: This great country in which we all reside is not yet an oligarchy. However, if this speculative group of individuals is allowed access to eminent domain at the hands of our federal government, I am afraid this will be just one more example of and step toward our country turning into one.

Now, don't get me wrong, I am not railing against rich folks. I think it is perfectly fine for people to have $200 million compounds if they so choose, because that is part of the freedom of being a citizen of the United States. I think you're totally ridiculous if you do, but it is your right to live as you please, just as it is my right to tell you that I think you're silly for doing so. Where the problem arrives for me, and I think others, is when you use your never-ending wealth to lobby OUR federal government to use eminent domain on your behalf as an investment discount to increase the profits of your purely speculative business model on the backs of thousands of wonderful, hard-working people. We all live under the same Constitution, including the privileged few... at least, we're supposed to.

I will leave everyone with a clear message: The opposition in the beautiful "Natural State" in which I proudly reside is strong, active, and unified. You shouldn't expect us to give up.