An Invenergy official said the contacts ended last week and included communicating with the landowners.

"Members of our team held meetings, upon approval from landowners, to discuss conducting these surveys later this spring,” said Beth Conley, Invenergy spokeswoman. “These meetings were halted when CDC guidance limited the ability to have in-person meetings.”

Since the state commission approved the Grain Belt Express, a number of “development activities” must take place before the beginning of construction, which is expected in late 2021, Conley said.

For example, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services and the Missouri Department of Conservation require Invenergy to conduct bat surveys so the line can avoid rare populations of the species, she said.

Corona Virus Worries:  Landowner Groups Ask Invenergy to Suspend Land Agent Visits
 
March 19 – Two landowner groups have requested that Invenergy temporarily suspend its practice of making uninvited personal visits to individual homes by company land agents seeking rights-of-way and survey permissions for the Grain Belt Express electric transmission project (GBE).  The Missouri Landowners Alliance and the Eastern Missouri Landowners Alliance have requested the practice cease until such time as federal and state officials determine there is no longer any need for "social distancing" as a means of slowing the spread of the Corona virus.
 
The landowner groups have received several reports from individual landowners of GBE representatives showing up at their homes along the route unannounced and asking for their signature on a notice form to allow the entry of other unnamed individuals to perform numerous studies and tests at their properties.   Other landowners have found information packets from Grain Belt Express left on their doorsteps.
 
“It is my understanding that no one can guarantee that keeping a distance of 3-6 feet from someone carrying the virus will necessarily prevent its transmission.  And of course there is no guarantee that this distance would be maintained during the course of any conversations between the land agents and the property owner.  For example, handing a business card or any other document to the landowner would bring the two individuals in close proximity, if not actual physical contact.  Therefore, rather than take any chance at all of Grain Belt's agents inadvertently transmitting the virus to property owners, the most reasonable course of action at this time clearly would be to temporarily suspend all such in-person contacts,” said landowner attorney Paul Agathen in his request to Invenergy’s attorneys.
 
Landowners have reported that the visitors have presented themselves as real estate agents from other states working on behalf of Grain Belt Express, or agents of Contract Land Staff based in Texas.  None of the visits have been made by people with local contact information, leading the landowners to worry about transmission of the virus from other areas.
 
“I’m not sure what the rush is here,” said Representative Jim Hansen (R-40th District).  “Grain Belt Express isn’t approved in all states and has no designated connection point for its transmission project in Missouri at this time.  There’s no need to sacrifice social distancing health recommendations in order to rush this project through.”
 
The landowner groups’ request stated that Grain Belt's desire to move the project forward cannot possibly justify even the slightest possibility of transmitting the virus from Invenergy agents to even one of the property owners.  Some of the landowners are in the age category which would make them even more vulnerable to serious health problems if they should become infected.  Landowners also worry about person-to-person transmission in their own communities via Grain Belt Express land agents, as well as the possibility of transmitting the virus from a property owner to one of those agents.
 
“A person traveling door-to-door across rural areas is unlikely to be able wash their hands between calls,” said landowner Jim Daniels of Wright City.
 
Landowners note that Grain Belt Express may still try to contact them via phone or mail in the meantime, but vehemently object to the current practice of spontaneous in-person visits that may spread the virus from person-to-person.
 
“We’ve been told to stay at home and isolate ourselves from others to stop the spread of the virus,” said Dr. Dennis Smith, Assistant Professor, Clinical Emergency Medicine, University of Missouri, Columbia.  “It defeats the purpose of social distancing to have strangers pulling up in the yard and trying to hand us business cards or permission forms.  We don’t know where they’ve been, and we don’t know where they’re heading next.  A time of national emergency to prevent the spread of a highly contagious virus is the wrong time to be going door-to-door.”

Dear Ms. Mann,
I want you to know that in my opinion Invenergy's policy of continuing to have person to person contact with residents along the proposed route to be reckless and dangerous.
How do you explain bringing a person from New York through Texas then send her to the Ralls County Courthouse to come in direct contact with many people that work there. Or bringing an outsider from Kansas City to visit the Amish community. There are many such contacts by Invenergy personal.
I would appreciate an answer to why Mr. Polsky feels that during our National Emergency this type of perilous actions are needed by him.
If you can assure me that none of your employees or contract worker have not been exposed to the COVID-19 I will withdraw my objections.
Awaiting your reply,
Wiley Hibbard
Presiding Commissioner
Ralls County, Missouri

"Core sample" machine

We were contacted yesterday by someone representing Invenergy.  He stopped by our  house.  The landowner spoke with him.  The landowner was told that they wanted to do a “bat study” on our property along the proposed route.  He said they would want to camp out overnight and use a gun to throw nets to try to catch bats to find what species they were with the potential of moving the line based on the location of these bats.  He also mentioned doing some core samples.  The landowner did not give him permission.  We have cattle that are calving in that area right now, and having someone out there at night would definitely spook them.  Regardless of whether we had cattle out there or not, he was not going to give them permission.  The guy noted an “N” on his paperwork indicating that the landowner said No to the study, and then he wanted the landowner to sign next to that “N”.  He did not sign that either.

The landowner asked for his information, and his e-mail address was “Mossy Oak Properties” so it seems that Invenergy is outsourcing this testing.

Core drilling

Obtain unequivocal permission to enter property for purposes of surveying or conducting environmental assessments or other activities. Clearly explain to the property owner the scope of the work to be conducted based on the permission given. Attempt to notify the occupant of the property each time you enter the property based on this permission.

a. When contacting a property owner in person, promptly identify yourself as representing Grain Belt Express Clean Line.
b. When contacting a property owner by telephone, promptly identify yourself as representing Grain Belt Express Clean Line.

Do not threaten to call law enforcement officers or obtain court orders.

When asked to leave property, promptly leave and do not return unless specifically authorized by Grain Belt Express Clean Line.

All communications by a property owner, whether in person, by telephone or in writing,
in which the property owner indicates that he or she does not want to negotiate or does not want to give permission for surveying or other work on his or her property, must be respected and politely accepted without argument. Unless specifically authorized by Grain Belt Express Clean Line, do not contact the property owner again regarding negotiations or requests for permission.

All communications with property owners and occupants must be factually correct and made in good faith.
a. Do provide maps and documents necessary to keep the landowner properly informed.
b. Do not make false or misleading statements.
c. Do not purposely or intentionally misrepresent any fact.
d. If you do not know the answer to a question, do not speculate about the answer. Advise the property owner that you will investigate the question and provide an answer later.
e. Follow-up in a timely manner on all commitments to provide additional information.
f. Do not send written communications suggesting an agreement has been reached when, in fact, an agreement has not been reached.
g. If information provided is subsequently determined to be incorrect, follow up with the
landowner as soon as practical to provide the corrected information.
h. Do provide the landowner with appropriate contact information should additional contacts be necessary.

§903-E. Persons not authorized to administer an oath or affirmation to a petition circulator
1.  Certain notaries public and others.  A notary public or other person authorized by law to administer oaths or affirmations generally is not authorized to administer an oath or affirmation to the circulator of a petition under section 902 if the notary public or other generally authorized person is:  
A. Providing any other services, regardless of compensation, to initiate the direct initiative or people's veto referendum for which the petition is being circulated. For the purposes of this paragraph, "initiate" has the same meaning as section 1052, subsection 4-B; or   [PL 2017, c. 418, §3 (NEW).]
B. Providing services other than notarial acts, regardless of compensation, to promote the direct initiative or people's veto referendum for which the petition is being circulated.

Three engineers found that cell sites on electric transmission towers can lead to corrosion on underground wiring.

Patrick Clark, Clinton County Presiding Commissioner, said he wanted to hear more details from the answers given. He said he feels that Clinton County is a crossover county and will not receive benefits.

“They really couldn’t answer any questions. You know, they talked about livestock, they talked about electronics on tractors and stuff like that, but when the question was asked about other effects on people, they couldn’t answer,” Clark said. “One thing that really concerns me is this is the first DC line this company’s ever dealt with.”

Clark asked at the meeting why the line is proposed to go through Northwest Missouri instead of southern Kansas and southern Missouri. It was answered that the route was decided by a variety of reasons, which included areas with cultural sensitivities, terrain and other reasons.

“Invenergy is committed to working with the communities and the landowners who will host this project,” Mann said. “Our land team is going to be sitting down with landowners all along the route.”

The project is designed to provide a new electricity source for the region with the construction of 15 miles of transmission lines and improvements to four substations in Amherst, Appomattox, Campbell and Nelson counties.
The completed transmission line would strengthen the local power grid, increase reliability to the area and reduce the likelihood of power outages, according to APCo spokesperson George Porter. He said Albemarle, Appomattox, Amherst, Campbell and Nelson counties all would see increased service reliability.

There are also supplemental needs in the area that were evaluated together with the baseline violations. The supplemental needs in the area are driven by equipment condition for the Amherst – Clifford 69 kV and Clifford – Scottsville 46 kV circuits. The lines were built in 1960 and 1926 respectively, on wood pole structures and have many open conditions due to rot, woodpecker/insect damage, split poles, broken insulators, and damaged shield wire. The recommended solution addresses both the baseline and supplemental needs in the area and is the most cost effective. The estimated cost for this project is $85 million, and the required in-service date is December, 2022. Based on their FERC 715 TO Criteria, the local transmission owner, AEP, will be designated to complete this work.

Along the multiple possible routes, more than 300 landowners had the potential to be effected — largely by the 70- to 90-foot galvanized steel poles that would be constructed to carry the transmission lines.

Martin’s neighbors, Bill and Cole Carney, harbor similar fears. One of the proposed routes would cut through their property. Owners of the 1851 plantation home that gave Tin Top Place its name, they have been on the property for about a year. Budding farmers with plans to expand and potentially start an organic farm, Bill Carney said it will render swathes of their land useless, force acres of woods to be cut down and prevent them from moving forward with plans for the farm.
“How are we supposed to sell products if we have an industrial power line coming through our supposed organic fields?” said Cole Carney. “We never would have bought had we known this was coming.”

The commission shall make its decision with respect to the necessity for and the   reasonableness of the location of the proposed electric transmission line or urban electric transmission line, taking into consideration: (1) The benefit to both consumers in Kansas and consumers outside the state and; (2) the economic development benefits in Kansas; and (3) the local aesthetics, location, environment and population density. The  commission shall issue or withhold the permit applied for and may condition such permit as the commission may deem just and reasonable and as may, in its judgment, best protect the rights of all  interested parties and those of the general public.

Property owners were paid several hundred dollars to a couple of thousand dollars by the utility company for easements.

Rep. Gail Finney, D-Wichita, urged House colleagues to expand authority of the Kansas Corporation Commission to regulate placement of transmission lines in cities. It would require the KCC to take into account population density, location and aesthetics in siting decisions.

It wouldn’t alter reality faced by residents of about 75 homes in close proximity to the utility towers in Wichita, but it would create a form of due process for property owners by requiring a siting permit.

“It’s not going to do anything to help these people right now,” Finney said. “What I’m doing is trying to help people in the future. It could happen to any one of you.”

Whether there are benefits to the project is a moot point to me, considering the freedom my constituents and residents of the entire state would have to give up. I’m concerned about private property rights and protecting Missouri residents from being displaced from their land to line the pockets of a corporation.

If an out-of-state developer can work its way across north Missouri for this project, what’s to stop the next developer from building another line across yours?

For the past six years or so, developers have been trying to build a giant power line across northern Missouri. The proposed Grain Belt Express line would carry 4,000 megawatts of wind-generated DC electricity from southwest Kansas to a converter station near the Illinois-Indiana border. From there, the electricity would be sold to retail customers on the East Coast. The massive power line – the largest ever built in Missouri – would cross eight counties and span the entire width of the state. As originally planned, the 800-mile power line was not actually supposed to provide electricity to a single end-use consumer in Missouri. It was just passing through.

Senate Bill 597, which I sponsored, will stop the taking of private property for the purpose of private profit. Simply put, this legislation denies the power of eminent domain to utilities that do not serve end-use customers in Missouri. In my opinion, a big corporation wanting to make money by selling Kansas wind power to East Coast consumers should not justify taking private property from Missouri landowners.

There has been a spate of gas and oil company ads heralding their fight against global warming. They produce ever-greater greenhouse gas emissions and want credit for doing it more cleanly.

They claim natural gas is a bridge fuel while building new pipelines soon to lie uselessly in the ground. They could use their assets, tax subsidies and ratepayers’ money to electrify every home, business and vehicle very quickly.

Many believe the wind does not blow all the time. In fact, there are many, many places throughout the world where it does blow and blow strongly all the time. The Oklahoma panhandle produces thousands of megawatts. Vast quantities of constant strong wind off the New England coast are being developed now. Giant turbines driven by 120 feet blades produce constant electric power from wind which costs nothing. Direct current transmission lines deliver power efficiently over long distances. We have the technical know how and the construction capacity to power the United States by electricity now.

Skeptical, add solar and new pocket nuclear stations to the mix. Why squander billions of tax and customer dollars on new gas infrastructures while electrification is happening? Will these fossil fuel giants delay so long as to cause great climate damage while building useless stranded assets?

Please read Wall Street Journal reporter’s, Russell Gold’s, book, Superpower, One Man’s Quest to Transform American Energy.