Clean Line Abandons Tennessee CCN, Rendering Plains and Eastern DEAD...

Well, it's been quite a while since I've done a blog post. As it turns out, life DOES happen after Clean Line. It has taken over four years to get to this point, but I can now definitively say that the Arkansas portion of the Plains and Eastern project is, in fact, DEAD. Why do I say this?

Shortly after the Department of Energy and Clean Line mutually agreed to part ways, Mr. Skelly attempted to sew the seeds of doubt in landowners, investors, and anyone else who would listen to his bluster that the project was not, in fact, dead... rather, it was "on a much slower track in Arkansas and Tennessee." We all knew better, but some egos (*coughSKELLYcough*) don't allow the acceptance of failure. The facts always come out in the end.

Not only has the Department of Energy nullified their contract with Clean Line, recently there has been some word that Clean Line is abandoning it's easement options in Arkansas. In addition to that, this past Friday (7/13/18), Clean Line's Dave Berry submitted a letter to the Tennessee Regulatory Authority (TRA) requesting that their Certificate of Convenience and Necessity be nullified in that state. Here's that letter:

And, just like that, it was over. After more than four years, many thousands of dollars, countless hours of research, writing, Facebooking, talking to people, meetings and booths, sleepless nights, strain on relationships and future plans, and pretty much everything in-between: it is OVER.

Congratulations, Arkansas landowners! For me, personally, it is difficult not to be bitter. But I won't be. As with all experiences in life, valuable lessons are learned, new and amazing friends are made, and you just have to try to do what you can to protect what's yours and grow from the experience. It has been a really wild ride, no doubt. This is likely the last blog post on this subject I will make, as I will probably leave it up to the other professionals I have met along the way to unearth the rest of the Clean Line saga... it promises to get interesting very soon.

Thank you to each and every one of you who have read and provided support to us along the way. I would hope that the blog that Alison and I have created together chronicling our experience with Clean Line Energy Partners, LLC, will serve as an illustration of exactly the WRONG way to develop infrastructure in this country... "clean" or otherwise. Potential developers take note. 

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.

Who wants some (MORE) Clean Line whine?

If you hadn't noticed, Clean Line is having a pretty rough go of it these days. I thought I would provide a little update, because I wouldn't want anyone who is interested (*coughINVESTORScough*) to miss out on anything important.

1) Clean Line denied a third time in Missouri:

As many of you probably already know, on August 16, Clean Line was denied for a third time in its bid to become classified a "public utility" (with the added benefit of eminent domain) in Missouri. We wrote about that here so I won't go into much detail, but it definitely put a wrinkle in their plan.

2) Tennessee Valley Authority says "thanks, but no thanks" to Clean Line:

This one speaks for itself.

The cost of meeting TVA's power demand also involves more than just the marginal costs of what intermittent power producers such as wind and solar generators can quote for TVA, Johnson said. 

Clean Line Energy Partners, a Houston-based company that proposes to bring wind-generated power from Oklahoma and Texas to the Southeast along a $2.5 billion transmission line, says it could deliver power to TVA at less than 2 cents per kilowatt-hour. 

TVA signed a memorandum of understanding with Clean Line Energy in 2011 to study the proposal. But the utility has yet to commit to buying any of the 3,500 megawatts of wind-generated power Clean Line Energy will bring to the western edge of TVA's territory along its 720-mile transmission line from near Diamond, Okla. 

TVA said it doesn't need more power generation because of the stagnant demand for electricity in its seven-state region, and Johnson said TVA still would have to maintain or build other generation capacity to make up for the Clean Line energy when the wind doesn't blow.  

Johnson said "it is hard for us to fit that [Clean Line Power generation] in our portfolio," but he said "we are evaluating it closely." 

"Wind comes at night between 2 a.m. and 6 a.m. when demand dips, so for us to take that we have to turn down nuclear plants, which essentially have no fuel costs, and we really don't want to do that," Johnson said. 

The production tax credits that would help keep Clean Line Energy rates lower are declining and will phase out completely for new wind turbines built after 2020, "so we shouldn't be delaying a decision on this great opportunity," Smith said. 

But Johnson said production tax credits "are really not our issue" and TVA must evaluate the price options for wind, solar and other intermittent sources of power based upon the full costs to the agency. 

"The price [from Clean Line Power], in and of itself, is a good price for wind," Johnson said. "But it actually costs us a lot more to import it and to make sure we have gas plants running or capable of running in case the wind doesn't show up." 

Johnson estimates having the additional capacity to make up for when the wind doesn't blow or the sun doesn't shine typically adds at least 2 cents per kilowatt-hour to the quoted price of such renewable energy. 

"At the moment, we have yet to conclude that [buying power from Clean Line Energy] is the right fit for what we are doing," he said.

3) Clean Line denied rehearing at the Missouri Public Service Commission:

This one is pretty simple. Clean Line requested a rehearing after their denial at the MOPSC. This was more out of procedure for Clean Line so (after denial of the rehearing) they could move on to the appeals process. Which is next on the list...

4) Clean Line appeals Missouri PSC decision and hired big, scary (but voted out), ex-governor Jay Nixon to represent them:

I would think an ex-governor would be fairly expensive, but since Clean Line seems to think money can buy their way through anything, they went ahead and hired former Missouri Governor Jay Nixon as their legal counsel for their appeal. I guess they thought having a flashy ex-governor as their legal counsel might in some way sway the opinion of the court. Good luck with that strategy, guys.

It sort of seems like Clean Line has too many fires and not enough firemen to put them out, doesn't it? It's almost like they start trying to implement one PR strategy and then, within days, another fire gets lit that upends arguments they've made previously. We'll see if they continue to attempt to mislead everyone in the various states they're operating in, or if they will begin acknowledging the situation they currently find themselves in. A good example would be:

5) Clean Line acquires "legal hangnail" (Read: Legal Death Knell) in Illinois for its' proposed "Rock Island" project:

Just a few days after Clean Line hired former Governor Nixon and attempted to convince the media and everyone else that Missouri is the only state holding up the process and that they should just get out of the way, the Illinois Supreme Court handed them a decision that could represent a death knell for both their Rock Island and Grain Belt projects in Illinois.

Quite a while back, the Illinois Landowner Alliance filed an appeal with the Third District Court of Appeals contending that the Illinois Commerce Commission (ICC) erred in granting Rock Island public utility status. Later, that court determined that the ICC had, in fact, erred, and the order granting them utility status was reversed. Clean Line didn't like this, of course, so they appealed to the Illinois Supreme Court. The Illinois Supreme Court took the case and handed down a unanimous opinion reaffirming the lower court's opinion that Clean Line does NOT meet the definition of a public utility in that state.

How does this potentially apply to Clean Line's proposed "Grain Belt Express" line in Illinois? Well, the Concerned Citizens and Property Owners group (composed of landowners and citizens opposed to Grain Belt Express) appealed the ICC's order granting Clean Line a CCN for that project at the Fifth District Court of Appeals in Illinois. While that case is still pending, and the arguments are slightly different, it seems like a near certainty that the Fifth District will also state that the ICC erred in granting Grain Belt Express a CCN for that project.

A decision in that case is expected any time, so watch that one closely. So much for a "legal hangnail." As a good friend of mine stated to me: "Clean Line should be given props for being able to find a silver lining in literally anything."

6) On Monday, the Arkansas congressional delegation met with Secretary Perry about its' concerns with the proposed "Plains and Eastern" project:

Early this week, our full Arkansas congressional delegation went to the Department of Energy (DOE) to meet with Secretary Rick Perry about their concerns regarding the department's participation in Clean Line's proposed "Plains & Eastern" HVDC line. More here, as well.

Now, as anyone who has been paying attention to this issue for the last few years is aware, Clean Line was denied utility status at the state PSC way back in 2011. They saw an opening at the federal level with Section 1222 of the Energy Policy Act and they took it.

Over the past few years, there has been plenty of analysis and speculation about why and how a Request for Proposals (RFP) was issued by the DOE with such perfect timing as it applies to Clean Line's project. However, even assuming everything was on the up and up and the sudden "need" for a merchant transmission line was kismet (Ali's word, lol) or simple serendipity, there are issues with the statute and its application to this proposed project.

There are only so many ways you can beat a dead horse, but the process (or lack thereof) as it pertains to Section 1222 has been painfully insufficient and has, quite frankly, sucked. It is nice to see that the desire exists within Secretary Perry's office to revisit that process. Thank you! We stand ready to assist you in providing our experience with it.

7) Cherokee Nation Council rejects resolution to grant Clean Line easement in Oklahoma.

Wow, this is a MUST watch. It sounds like someone sent out a memo that had some pretty threatening language toward the Cherokee Council in it, doesn't it? Classy stuff, guys. It's pretty sickening, if you ask me.

That's all we've got for now! Hope you enjoy. :)

Golden Bridge Comment on Delegation Meeting with DOE's Secretary Perry

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

September 28, 2017

Contact: GoldenBridgeAR@gmail.com

On September 25, 2017, the Arkansas Congressional delegation, composed of U.S. Senators John Boozman (R-AR) and Tom Cotton (R-AR) and U.S. Representatives Rick Crawford (AR-01), French Hill (AR-02), Steve Womack (AR-03) and Bruce Westerman (AR-04), met with Secretary Rick Perry of the U.S. Department of Energy to discuss the preservation of states’ rights as they pertain to transmission line development and to the federal review of Clean Line Energy Partners’ proposed Plains and Eastern Clean Line Project. Senator Boozman’s press release on the meeting can be found here:

https://www.boozman.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=58142CB4-200A-4077-BB22-6A4D84DF7967

Golden Bridge, LLC, would like to thank each member of Arkansas Delegation once again for their continued attention to the issues surrounding Section 1222 of the 2005 Energy Policy Act.

As an organization, we believe the process by which the Department of Energy determined to participate with Clean Line Energy Partners was flawed, and that the participation itself is built on a faulty premise that the State of Arkansas lacks authority to review Clean Line’s proposals.

Arkansas maintains robust procedures for the siting and development of transmission lines. Procedures that ensure the protection of local communities and their residents, and provide impacted individuals with a legally recognized process.

We appreciate the Arkansas delegation’s recognition that Section 1222 does not provide the same level of protection for landowners or the state. The ability to submit comments on an application does not provide due process for Arkansas landowners whose property may be taken in a scheme to use federal eminent domain for Clean Line’s gain.

Golden Bridge, along with Downwind, LLC, filed a legal challenge against Department of Energy to address these concerns. The organizations are committed to the cause and will continue their pursuit of these issues in each and every available forum.

“The balance between federalism and states’ rights is a delicate one, even though it’s often generalized and politicized,” said Alison Millsaps, a founding member of Golden Bridge, LLC. “We believe there are serious and valid issues of overreach in this instance. The Arkansas Public Service Commission denied Clean Line’s application for utility status in 2011, and invited Clean Line to return to the Commission when it revised its plans. The federal government should not exist simply as a vehicle to override established state decisions and statutory requirements. Clean Line often purports to have an interest in caring for the landowners and communities they want to put their line through. However, Clean Line’s attempt to go around Arkansas’s regulatory body speaks volumes regarding its true intentions.

###

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!