Lawsuit by Nebraska Landowners May Decide Keystone Pipeline’s Fate (Eminent Domain)

The Wall Street Journal ^ | November 20, 2014 | Amy Harder

[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.

[Osage Orange]

Wasn’t the original Kelo case...about someone making money?

[Smokin' Joe]

If you owned property along the pipeline route would you just GIVE them the easements and land they need for the project?

No. Sell it or lease it if the terms were favorable, but not give it away.

[redgolum]

There is a reason they are very concerned. Some of those old lines are abandoned and leaking. Some are active, and have leaked in the past.

Many of those lines in the panhandle are not oil, they are natural gas. The proposed route is going through much of the “open” area.

The other thing to remember is that with the drought, water rights are once again worth killing for. Anything that remotely threatens that will be opposed.

[conservaKate]

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.

__________________________________________________________

Don’t have family...but have friends who live in the area...ranchers. And they are very concerned about any leaks that cause damage to the little water that’s available. They are conservative folks...but are not very pro Keystone at all.

For myself...I’ve always been hesitant about the taking away property from land owners. I guess there are times it has to be done...but I don’t like it used for a foreign company.