It’s just possible that next to the word "monkey wrench" in a dictionary for elected officials that there will be a picture of James Hartson.

Thursday, July 06, 2000

It’s just possible that next to the word "monkey wrench" in a dictionary for elected officials that there will be a picture of James Hartson.

On Wednesday, the rural Waltham farmer caused Great River Energy’s effort to finalize the permitting process for a new $190 million electric generating plant in Pleasant Valley Township to be halted.

The conditional use permit is the last piece of paper needed by the generation and transmission cooperative that wants to build a 434-megawatt natural gas-fired peaking power generating plant along Mower County CSAH No. 1 east of Sargeant in the far northeastern corner of the county.

A week ago, the county Planning Commission considered the GRE request at a meeting held at the Mower County Senior Citizens Center in Austin.

After hearing comments both pro and con – mainly Hartson – the commission members voted by a 4-1 margin to recommend approval of the conditional use permit request to the county board.

On Tuesday, Hartson, the human form of a wrench with one adjustable jaw, was able to convince the commissioners to take a second look at GRE’s proposed corridor for a 161-kilovolt transmission line from the plant to Austin Utilities’ northeast plant.

"The Mower County Board has no authority to grant a CUP to Great River Energy," Hartson said.

Hartson based his argument on the fact that GRE does not yet own easements where it plans to build its 161-kilovolt transmission line from Pleasant Valley Township westward to the city of Austin along a corridor now owned and used by Dairyland Electric Co-op.

Issuing a conditional use permit to a petitioner that does not own the land would be wrong, according to Hartson, and deprive people of their right to due process under the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

"If the county board decides to approve this CUP before they acquire the land, I will hold the Mower County Board of Commissioners accountable," Hartson said.

Hartson was not alone in his objections. Kenneth Peterson objected and so did Roger Levy and Bev Weness.

The latter was the only county Planning Commission member to vote against the proposal a week ago.

Gary Ostrum, supervisor of land rights for GRE, admitted when Hartson asked him whether GRE owned any easements along the corridor that it did not own a single one of the 60 to 70 easements it needs to build the electric transmission line.

Which must come first?

Thus, it became a version of the question, "Which came first: the chicken or the egg?"

In this case, the two sides were divided over which must come first: the conditional use permit or the land easements.

Hartson told the county board, "Today, they have no rights and you must decline their request. If you’re going to start making exceptions now, you’re going to have some big problems later."

Ray Tucker, Second District, and Dave Hillier, Third District, repeatedly attempted to point out that granting GRE a conditional use permit to construct the transmission line is subject to a specific condition that requires the company to acquire easements for its route.

 

Daryl W. Franklin, county planner and zoning administrator, also pointed out, "When Alliance Pipeline Co. requested a conditional use permit to build a portion of their natural gas pipeline across a southwestern portion of the county, they had not acquired all the land they needed at the time and a permit was granted with a similar condition attached."

Hartson also said having 70-foot tall, 450-feet apart steel electric transmission poles and lines on one’s property will adversely affect the value of the property.

Agreeing with Hartson was Levy, a Lansing Township farmer along whose land a portion of the transmission line route will run and who is the chairman of Lansing Township Board.

"I don’t look forward to farming around the poles," he said.

GRE’s Ostrum said seeking a conditional use permit before acquiring the easements is not unusual.

He said the meetings with landowners "take time, because of the negotiations that take place.

Ostrum also said having an electric transmission line run across one’s property doesn’t diminish the value of that land substantially. "Devaluation is subjective in the eyes of the beholder," Ostrum said.

"Our feeling is its a permitable project with conditions," Ostrum said.

Glen Jacobsen, legal counsel to the county board, attempted to allay the opponents’ concerns and pointed out GRE is seeking to use an existing corridor route with its conditional use permit request.

"This action does not grant any property rights to anyone. That still has to be negotiated," Jacobsen said.

However, Hartson responded that to allow the conditional use permit to be issued before GRE acquired the easements was "the denial of our equal rights under the law."

Weness, a LeRoy area real estate agent, reiterated what she told the county Planning Commission and that was that electric transmission poles and lines do, indeed, diminish property values and restrict the future sale of the land.

Hartson has been an outspoken critic of tax increment financing plans in the city of Hayfield as well as Austin. He also has criticized the Hayfield Board of Education on spending matters and since the start of the GRE project, he has had questions and complaints to make throughout the process.

On Wednesday, his opposition was able to convince the commissioners not to act on the GRE conditional use permit request.

Cummings made the motion to table action and Hillier seconded it before all five commissioners voted "aye."

The commissioners will re-examine the proposed GRE corridor and reconvene on the matter at 10:30 a.m. July 25.

That’s only four days before the 60-day time limit to act on a conditional use permit request expires, according to Tucker.

"If the board doesn’t act by July 29, the CUP is automatically granted and there’s nothing nobody can do about it," Tucker said.

Both Tucker and Hillier said they believed the GRE request met the criteria of the county Planning Commission for a conditional use permit.

Hillier said he thinks citizens’ interests are protected.

"I do think that the conditions with the permit protect the residents who are affected, the taxpayers out there," Hillier said.