Mea Culpa

We’re behind on our blogging again, but things have been moving so quickly it’s hard to keep up. So while I want to do a post on Michael Skelly’s recent interview in the Dover Times, which was incredibly juicy and chock full of sorta truths (40k “letters” to landowners during the scoping period? Really?... May want to reread that scoping summary report, my friend. No discussion of eminent domain during the Arkansas  Public Service Commission process? So this testimony from the Senior Assistant to the Attorney General somehow doesn’t count? Uncontested? Sure, but only because Arkansas Electric Consumers, Inc wasn't permitted to. They certainly had some interesting things to say. But no, this blog post is about something else entirely…

Oops! Not that! Though that’s important… and interesting since Clean Line had a few industry reps there to testify on their behalf, but no landowners. Why? Because all the landowners were too busy writing their names down to testify against Clean Line and for the committee’s letter to the Department of Energy. Big kudos to all the legislators at that meeting who asked their questions with the caveat: “I don’t want you to pull my leg!”

I’m sorry if I sound a little extra snarky and bitter tonight. It might because one of Clean Line’s reps told me that people who didn’t know about the scoping period should have read the newspaper (I didn’t realize a paper subscription was a constitutional requirement for landownership). It might be because after all this time, and all this opposition, they still don’t realize that landowners aren’t just your average “stakeholders” and that money doesn’t mean that much when it doesn’t come with respect. It might be because Jimmy Glotfelty sought to reassure our legislators that his extensive history with the Department of Energy had nothing to do with the project by testily proclaiming that anyone could submit a proposal under Section 1222... Except that no one else has.

Were we surprised that Mario continued to insist landowners will only experience a ten percent reduction in property value? (Especially when a man sitting in the audience was prepared to testify he’d been told by his mortgage broker that he can build the house he’s been saving for all these years, but if the line comes through, he will instantly be underwater?) Nah. That we could power our own light bulb with static electricity by holding it while we walked across a dry carpet? Uh-uh. That Jimmy pulled his relationship with GW out of his pocket the second he lurched out of the gate for us country folk? Nope.

The big surprise was in the modification of the Sierra Club’s endorsement of the project. Oh, they’re still endorsing it, for sure… but there was an extra sentence in Glen Hooks' testimony that was kind of similar to the one from Sierra Club OK’s official statement at the Muskogee DOE meeting last week:

“Sierra Club has heard concerns raised by several communities about how construction of this transmission line will affect their enjoyment of the natural environment in their region or disrupt their livelihoods,” Pearson said. “We believe the Clean Line Partners should take these concerns seriously and work with landowners and others to identify an acceptable route."

That bit right there about the landowners... we haven't heard that from them before. 

And this is where I have to apologize (I seem to be doing that a lot lately). Some months ago I wrote a blog post in which I made it pretty clear how angry I was that NGO’s had been given earlier and greater opportunity to have siting issues addressed than landowners.  At the time I assumed they did so knowingly… After talking to several members of these NGO’s over the past few weeks, and reading some of their public statements, I no longer believe that to be true. Rather, I think they were unaware of the lack of communication between Clean Line and landowners. 

In fact, after talking to one of Clean Line's industrial supporters on Monday before he was whisked away by a Clean Line rep, I feel like the same is likely true of the "jobs" people. They've been told we're just NIMBYs... I think they're learning that's not the case.  

I can’t explain all of my reasoning behind these hunches without breaking confidences, but I can say that it seems the NGO experiences have been vastly different from ours. Cocooned in Clean Line charm… 

I can’t say that others in the opposition feel the same, there are a lot of very deep wounds associated with this and a lot of people who still disagree with the endorsements for other reasons. But when we see statements like this one from an Audubon email (donated by a STO member):

“While the project could nearly double the amount of clean energy used in Arkansas, it would also completely bisect the state. That creates concerns about collision hazards to birds, habitat fragmentation, and private property rights along the 300-mile route. We also have concerns about how the proposed route will cross the Cache-Lower White River Important Bird Area. This IBA harbors significant populations of birds that are known to be susceptible to transmission line hazards.

Audubon Arkansas remains neutral on the issue right now, despite being urged by both sides to support their views. As conservation leaders in the state, we take this role seriously. Our team is thoroughly reviewing the Environmental Impact Statement and will draft a formal position to send to the Department of Energy. As we evaluate the science and specific mitigation and restoration plans – we want to ensure that you are kept aware of the plans and are empowered to participate in the process.”

And this one from SC Tennessee's Scott Banbury (posted on the SC Central Arkansas Group's Facebook page): 

"As the Conservation Program Coordinator (sole employee) of the Tennessee Chapter of the Sierra Club, I will be speaking at the Draft EIS hearing in Millington, TN. Here in TN we have taken the position of supporting the concept of wind power delivered from wind rich areas in the Midwest as a replacement for power generated at fossil and nuclear plants operated by the Tennessee Valley Authority. I will also speak to the need to avoid, minimize and mitigate the impacts that the siting of the power line might bring. Further, I will speak to the agreement that Clean Line made in their Sec 1222 application that they only seek the power of eminent domain if absolutely necessary. I will not state unconditional support for the project, nor will I reject the very valid objections that opponents of the project have raised. Rather I will do everything I can to ensure that their concerns are addressed and that all pertinent questions are answered in the final EIS."

That these environmental and conservation groups would recognize the importance of private property rights and concerns is impressive. That they can look beyond those glossy booklets… As a friend who attended our Hendrix College panel with Sierra Club said, “The Sierra Club’s position has changed significantly since last November.” Is it a withdrawal of the endorsement? No, but it counts for a lot. Especially because, whether this line comes through or it doesn’t, those of us who are divided on this issue now will want to come together again. On other projects and in other ways. This is our Arkansas.

Mea culpa.