Posted on 11/20/2014 11:34:43 AM PST by Bettyprob
LINCOLN, Neb.— For all the angst and anger over the Keystone XL pipeline in Washington, the project’s fate may lie here in Nebraska, where disgruntled landowners are challenging a state law that officials used to approve the pipeline’s path through their property.
After the U.S. Senate rejected a measure to approve the project Tuesday, Republicans who will control the chamber in January said it would be one of the first items on their agenda next year. A more immediate hurdle, though, is the Nebraska suit, which encompasses much of the legal and emotional core of the battle over Keystone.
“I worry that members don’t know there is a pending lawsuit that could take this whole thing back to square one in Nebraska,” said Heather Zichal, an energy consultant who was a top energy and climate adviser in the White House until about a year ago.
The Nebraska Supreme Court is expected to rule in the coming weeks on the case.
Earlier this year, a lower-court judge sided with a trio of landowners who said the state’s Public Service Commission, not the governor, has the authority to allow TransCanada to use the power of eminent domain to build a pipeline beneath their properties against their wishes. The state’s Republican attorney general, Jon Bruning, argues that the law does give the governor such power for certain major pipelines, including Keystone XL. About 200 miles of the 1,179 mile-project would run through Nebraska.
“Our goal is to make damn sure that our legislature and governor follow our constitution,” Randy Thompson, one of the landowners who is suing the Nebraska attorney general, said in an interview at his home outside of Lincoln, Neb.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
The idea of a foreign company having the power of eminent domain over Americans' private property doesn't sit right with me, pipeline or no.
They are building pipelines all over our area to hook up to the Barnett Shale wells. Granted they are not the diameter of the Keystone, but 6 months after they lay the pipe, you would not know it was there if it were not for signs on the fences.
I wish they would lay one across our place so maybe I could get a tap.
Would it help?
Unless, of course, the landowner want to keep his property.
I have family in this area.
It is ranch country, and they are very concerned that the pipelines will leak and the clean up end up being on the land owners.
That has happened before when some of the smaller pipelines and refineries went under.
To be honest, they are very cautious about any easements out there. To much history and to little water.
As long as the follow the laws regarding eminent domain, there need be no excessive court court costs and no delays.
True, as would any Eminent Domain rule.
My recommendation ensures the landowner has the ability to improve his technical and economic, if not emotional, situation.
Sometimes it gets dragged out when there is sufficient public opinion or other influential impacts.
I worked an expansion of Florida Gas Transmission that went near Disney World. We couldn’t dare allow a compressor station to actually look like a compressor station, even though it was not on Disney Property. To much influence on local politicians.
This project has more attention than it ever should have.
I should have added, with eminent domain claims, it is always a delay over a mutual settlement for easement. When you go to court, you still take the chance you are going to lose.
Unless the state in which the easement is being sought has a “quick take” process.
I never had any experience with that, but then with my role, that part was essentially always over before I got involved. I only would learn about the long drawn out problems that could effect compressor/pump station locations.
“Quick take” allows the condemning authority to place the amount of their best and final offer in escrow, to file some court documents, and hen take immediate possession of the property or easement.
A court date for final determination of value is scheduled, but the project is not delayed.
The risk to the condemning authority is that the court may award a higher amount then the best and final offer.
I have only used it once in my career, to obtain a utility easement from the lone hold-out along the route of a badly needed sewer force main. After everything was settled, I think we ended up paying about $2,500 more than the amount we put in escrow - but we probably saved 9 months on our construction schedule.
I know some really hate the idea of eminent domain. But without you have environmentalists buying 2 inch wide strips of land shutting down all major projects.
Unfortunately.
Yes.
I consider easement/land acquisition, with its occasional condemnation of private, an unpleasant but necessary part of my job.
Fortunately, over the years I have had excellent luck negotiating easements and fee simple acquisitions from reluctant owners. Most of the time I have been able to avoid outright condemnation.
Or even: ...private PROPERTY...
Couldn't you just stick a pair of mouse ears on it and call it a day?
;-)
You would swear it was a residential house, driving by.
There’s at least one sewage pump station in Virginia Beach, Virginia disguised as a house.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.