******VERY LATEST DEVELOPMENTS******

We are very pleased to inform our membership that ATI/First Energy has filed the formal application for a preferred and an alternate route to complete the transmission system from Springfield to Delaware.

At an initial reading, it appears that they have chosen routes well to the west of our township. Both the preferred and the alternate routes run along Rt. 42 and well to the west of it, respectively.

The only issue with the filing that we have identified thus far is that the alternate route still impacts several Township properties in the northern portion of the Township where the proposed wire crosses the river.

For that reason, after extensive conversation with team members, it is our position that we very firmly support the preferred route as the obvious best choice of the two. It is our sincere hope that the OPSB will also realize the merits of the preferred route, and that it will be approved.

The filing today includes a multitude of different documents, several of which are 200 pages in length.   Fortunately the maps themselves are straightforward enough that most of us can see we are clear of both proposed routes. Those that are still in harm's way in the alternate route will still receive our full support until this matter is settled.

Now, to the maps. The first is the preferred route, indicated by a red and black segmented line.

This is the alternate route, indicated by a black and purple segmented line. Note that it bows out significantly to the west from Rt. 42.

We can only speculate as to the reasons First Energy decided to spare our Township the tremendous loss of property value and visual beauty a new transmission line would have brought. Those of us who are spared that loss are truly grateful.

As of this morning, there has not been a formal application posted by First Energy to the Ohio Power Siting Board site.

The drafting of legislation to give homeowners and property owners "rights" in the approval process has begun in the Ohio House of Representatives.

Here is a recent article published in the Springfield News Sun mentioning our fight for legislative changes for our fellow Ohioans. Interesting the reporter ends her discussion stating there has been no opposition by Clark County residents, but she fails to mention that in Clark County, the new lines will be placed on utility structures already in existence.

http://www.springfieldnewssun.com/news/springfield-news/utility-line-plan-draws-protests-1362826.html

We are watching the Siting Board web site closely and will report to you as soon as we have any new information. There may actually an interval of time between the filing of the application and the availability of seeing it posted, considering the time required to scan 850 pages.

Our organization is constantly reviewing public records and documentation concerning utility projects and the granting of permits by the Ohio Power Siting Board. Here is a citation where the application by a utility company was withdrawn when the State Supreme Court reversed the decision by the Ohio Power Siting Board granting a permit:

Case # 08-0281-EL-BGN

http://dis.puc.state.oh.us/CaseRecord.aspx?CaseNo=08-0281-EL-BGN

State Supreme Court decision

http://dis.puc.state.oh.us/TiffToPDf/A1001001A11L22B52723B46853.pdf .

Your NoNewWires Team

One of the disheartening realities we discovered when this challenge first became known to us was that there is no representative of the private property owner on the Ohio Power Siting Board. Consequently, there is virtually no way for the affected property owner to know how much, if at all, their input is considered in the Board's decision making process. To all of us who were present when this revelation was made, that fact seemed unbelievable, and it still does, since the property owner takes the lion's share of the hit when their property is crossed.

However, today, we are excited to report that the process to insure a balance of power between the utility companies and the private property owner has begun!

We look forward to actively supporting and following the progress of this important change, and reporting it to you as it unfolds, so stay tuned.

In other news, there is still no formal filing of a preferred route by First Energy. Stay with us on this as well.
 

Today, 4/23/2012, ATSI filed a statement that they anticipate filing the formal application "as soon as April 26, 2012", and project January, 2013 as the possible start date for the project’s construction. They claim the application, when filed, will be at least 850 pages.

To read the entire document, here's the link:

http://dis.puc.state.oh.us/TiffToPDf/A1001001A12D23B33711H46562.pdf

Also, they are requesting 3 waivers:

1. Waive the requirement that the preferred and alternate route have no more than 20% in common. They claim that they will use existing structures for the first leg of the line, which is 20 miles long and connects E. Springfield to the London substation. The second leg is 40 miles and connects the London substation (which will be upgraded to a substation and transmission station) ultimately to the Tangy Substation, includes Concord Township and involves the placement of new wooden poles.

2. Waive the requirement that construction cannot begin in less than a year after the formal application is filed (if a permit is granted). They want to start construction Jan. 2013.

3. Waive the requirement to supply wetland and stream data in a paper format. They will provide some paper format to the OPSB and upon request. They state that this data will be available electronically and on the docketing section of the OPSB web site.

In other developments, we now can report that there is positive progress being made toward legislation to alter the process by which utility companies will deal with land owners, including a comprehensive list of changes to the law governing such matters. We are supportive of this legislation and look forward to having further good news for the many residents who have expressed strong feelings about the way the process is currently conducted.

Hi Neighbors, 

So far we have seen no filing of the formal application with the Siting Board. We will post that information here whenever it becomes available.

Meantime, here is a link to a  recent WCMH video of what is happening with AEP in another part of Delaware County:

http://www2.nbc4i.com/news/2012/mar/26/5/neighbors-upset-aep-after-hundreds-trees-cut-down-ar-979049/

Although emails have been quiet, we are still working hard to encourage First Energy to confine their proposed transmission lines to existing corridors. Let me know of any questions or suggestions that you have about how we are progressing.

We are continuing to receive signatures on our petition. Please encourage everyone you meet to visit www.nonewwires.org and sign our petition.

 Concord Township Residents,
(From Tom Prestera, 3/8/2012)

So far, there has been no formal application filed with the Ohio Power Siting Board. I have been busy accumulating data that will help us prepare to defend against the placement of this transmission line through our community. I have found a paper by an appraisal group from Montana that has reviewed much of the literature regarding the effects of high voltage transmission lines, (HVTL) for the last several decades throughout our country. They quote different studies, and point out some major flaws. There is a very useful discussion about property values, the effects of transmission lines and the importance of "property perception" by a well-informed buyer.

It is a 21 page report, but well worth the time it takes to read it. Even if you are not directly impacted by this possible route through our community, the report will give you a deeper understanding of the challenges your neighbors may be facing.

Interestingly, the report even talks about our friends at C.A.R.E. in Geauga County, who are also opposing First Energy.

Here's the link to the report:

http://www.concernedcitizensmontana.net/Publish/Appraisal.groupone.pdf

HOW MANY IS TOO MANY?

We have recently learned that First Energy already has two existing routes that could be used to fill their current needs.

We've frequently heard the question from our community and the communities west of us, "Do we know if FE has lines extending in the direction of the proposed new transmission line?" . . .  and the answer appears to be a resounding "yes".

The following text is directly from the Ohio Power Siting Board case# 08-524-EL-BNR April 15, 2008

Link: http://dis.puc.state.oh.us/TiffToPDf/A1001001A08D17A95109J31585.pdf

The operating characteristics of the Tangy Transmission Substation and connected

transmission lines will not be affected by the Tangy Transmission Substation

Expansion Project. The Tangy Transmission Substation Expansion Project will add

one 345/138 kV transformer for added reliability. The Tangy Transmission Substation

provides 345/138 kV and 138/69 kV transformation for the following connected

transmission lines

1. Cardington - Tangy 69 kV

2. London-Tangy 69 kV

3. E. Springfield - Tangy 138 kV

4. Crissinger-Tangy 138 kV

5. Kirby-Tangy 138 kV

6. Delaware - Tangy 138 kV

7. Marysville-Tangy 345 kV

8. Hyatt-Tangy 345 kV

MORE PRESS

Delaware County Commissioners questioned First Energy's Tim Suter about the route decision in a March 1 meeting. Here's an account of that meeting from The Delaware Gazette:

http://delgazette.com/2012/03/commissioner-urges-further-discussion-on-power-line-issue/

RECAPTURING OUR RIGHTS AS PROPERTY OWNERS

When NoNewWires started this journey, we uncovered several surprises. Very concerning was that the “input” into the decision making process is almost entirely from the power company itself, and that virtually no representation for the property owner was present on the OPSB “board”.

Further down the road, other discoveries were made. Several township residents related personal experiences with the power company in which they were told that power lines would have no negative impact on land values. Others were told that plans to run lines had been cancelled and not to worry about existing easements. Residents were refused maps of proposed routes through their own land. And most disturbing were the reports from landowners who knew nothing about the plans until they got a letter announcing the power company would soon be on their property surveying!

The realization struck home that the current law is stacked completely in favor of the power company. Add to that the fact that some politicians receive huge contributions from power companies and you have the perfect storm for total abuse of the little guy, the property owner.

Tom Prestera put the notion on the table that the laws need to be changed to reflect the interests of property owners who will suffer the most loss from new power lines. When this idea was first aired, it seemed to resonate. Other township residents began making additional suggestions that would inject transparency and fairness into the process.

What resulted was a list of proposals which would virtually “remake” the way power companies propose and obtain rights of way. Rather than hinder progress, the suggestions would enhance the process to guarantee that the very best decisions are made, with full representation of the individual property owner and the affected community as a whole.
 

To date, here are the proposals that have been made:

1. All utility companies proposing major projects must advertise their public information and times of public information meetings with all major newspapers in every community affected, and every elected public official must be notified in these communities as soon as a project is planned.

2. All property owners that are expected to receive a “survey entry letter” from the utility company must be notified by registered and regular mail well in advance of any public information meetings that are scheduled.

3. The OPSB or some environmental agency must collect information independent of the utility company. The data that the staff of the OPSB currently uses to make their independent decision is based on utility company supplied data, which is a gross conflict of interest.

4. An independent agency must determine how much revenue is lost to the community by the devaluation of personal real estate and must use this figure to help determine the optimal route with the least impact on a community’s net value.

5. Utility companies must be held negligent and liable for any misinformation that they disseminate to concerned or affected residents. (Example: one resident that owns approximately 200 acres was told "not too worry, no projects are being planned for 10-20 years.")

6. There absolutely should be no funding of any phase, branch etc. between the OPSB and utility companies (if this occurs).

7. The utility should be required to share with affected landowners the map detail showing the crossing as soon as those maps are developed, (or) when the survey is scheduled, whichever occurs first.

8. A certified copy of the minutes of all meetings between OPSB and the utilities must be posted on the internet within 48 hours of the meeting being held. As a regulatory body, neither PUCO nor the OPSB should be meeting "in private" with any entity which they regulate.

9. Require that all information (surveys, ecological information, soil tests, etc.) be made available to the landowner at the same time as it is presented to the Power Company.

10. Require the Power Company to notify the landowner at least 2 weeks in advance and be given the option of 3 dates to choose from when requesting access the a landowners property.

At NoNewWires we are very interested in the thoughts of all our residents. If you or someone you know has any further ideas to help improve the process, please share it with us and we’ll add it to the growing list. Click the "Email Us" button at the top of this page.

Best wishes,

Your NoNewWires Team

MORE PRESS FOR OUR CAUSE- This Week article: Click HERE

LIBERTY TOWNSHIP RESOLUTION- Click HERE (pdf format)

CONCORD TOWNSHIP RESOLUTION- Click HERE (pdf format)

                  ANOTHER WELL-ATTENDED MEETING!

The meeting on Wednesday, January 25th was yet another indication of the interest and concern that has spread across Concord Township and beyond. By a show of hands, about half the attendees were "new" to our meetings. Most concerning, however, was the realization that several residents had right of ways sold on their property and were unaware of it. We urge all property owners to review their documentation for any recorded easements that may have been sold prior to their purchase of their property.
Dozens of excellent questions were raised by audience members. The meeting was attended by Delaware County Commissioners Board President Dennis Stapleton as well as a news crew from WCMH-TV. (Click HERE for the TV report.)
 

UPDATE

On January 5th, a few of us sat down with several First Energy personnel in a meeting arranged by Ms. Kim Wissman, Executive Director of the Ohio Power Siting Board.

Present from NoNewWires was landowner and Concord Township Trustee Bart Johnson, myself and Dr. Tom Prestera, who was participating via speakerphone. Also present was Dennis Stapleton, President of the Delaware County Commissioners.

The meeting started on a strange note, as First Energy's attorney began by advising us that they didn't want the meeting recorded. One can only wonder what problem there would be in having an accurate record of what was said.

During the lengthy session, Bart asked why First Energy would consider coming straight across private land when an existing right of way (with existing structures) could be used. The answer was familiar; that they needed three routes to propose to the OPSB. Bart also asked if they were leaning in a particular direction on any of the three possibilities, and they said they couldn't reveal that information.

I asked when they would have a decision, and the answer was “late February or early March.”

They brought with them several large maps indicating the proposed route through Concord Township. These were presumably the same ones displayed at the public meetings. I asked for digital copies of the maps but was refused. They told us they didn't want information passed out that might later be changed. I found that confusing, because they'd displayed the maps at the public meetings without any worries about future changes. Anyway, it was clear they'd not allow us to have the maps, so that was that.

Tom Prestera laid out a large amount of data regarding electricity usage for the past ten years, which indicated usage was trending downwards, not upwards. He asked First Energy how they could justify new lines when usage was actually decreasing. The answer was a highly detailed technical explanation which I really needed a recording of to review it, but we couldn't do that.

All in all, the meeting didn't accomplish much. We still don't know which route they will take, or even prefer. We still have only an estimate of when we'll know, certainly not a date. And we really don't know why they're even considering a route that would cause so much destruction of property values.

A couple of afterthoughts: Dennis Stapleton has been with us through much of this, and he is engaged, concerned and helpful, even though he doesn't have a magic bullet. His understanding alone is comforting, and Bart, Tom and I are very appreciative of his presence.

Kim Wissman has been open, approachable and willing to spend time listening to our concerns in a way you'd not expect from a public official.

And finally, just before leaving for the meeting, I had a call from a township resident who was very upset about the threat of property devaluation. They used a term I found interesting, saying they felt like a victim of financial terrorism. On the drive downtown, I thought about it and I can understand why someone would say that. Terrorism is random, like having someone draw a line on a map, and you're on it. A completely unexpected event that could permanently rob a family of something very dear, suddenly and without provocation, is a bit like terrorism. I told the caller we were doing all we could to make sure that didn't happen.

 We'll keep you posted on further developments.

Dave Boyers
NoNewWires.org

AN OPEN LETTER TO CONCORD TOWNSHIP RESIDENTS[1]

Through the efforts of NoNewWires.org, many Concord Township residents are now aware that some of our land is under the threat of possible “taking” by First Energy for a 138KV power line.

The word “taking” as used in this context is not some nebulous concept; it is a very real term. It is the label used to describe the legal action used by utility companies when they force landowners to sell right of ways through privately owned property. In our attempt to piece together where we believe the new power line may be placed, we have identified about 110 properties in our township that will be most impacted by this line.

At NoNewWires.org we are in constant contact with people in Geauga County where landowners recently faced a similar threat. We learned from their experience that payment offered to landowners for right of ways was frequently only a small percentage of the loss in value by having power lines run over their land. In one instance, fifty acres were crossed and the owner was offered only $5,000, but his resale value on all that acreage dropped by many times that amount.

Worse yet, if landowners refuse to accept the offer made by the utility, they will probably be sued by the utility under the law of eminent domain. At that point, landowner's options are few. If they want to fight the “taking”, they will need legal representation, and many people feel the only way that may prove effective is by demanding a jury trial.

In that situation, the landowner's attorney must demonstrate to the jury that the loss in value of the property is far greater than the payment the utility company is offering for the right of way. This argument is based in part on the fifth amendment to the U. S. Constitution, requiring property owners be given just compensation, which in modern legal interpretation usually means “fair market value”.

In an effort to quantify the potential loss in value by the installation of power lines, we contacted several local realtors with actual property selling experience in Concord Township. Responses from those interviewed ranged from “Serious loss in value” to “I wouldn't bother listing property with wires.” One young man thought even the threat of power lines represented a material loss of value.

In the last few weeks we have heard from many residents that they also have sought counsel and decided to demand a jury trial should they become a “taking” victim. If the number of those who agree continues to grow at the current rate, it may have a material impact on First Energy's decision to come through our land.

Best wishes for a Wire Free New Year,

Your NoNewWires.org Team

http://www2.nbc4i.com/news/2011/nov/29/5/neighbors-fighting-first-energy-over-proposed-tran-ar-845758/

http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/local/2011/12/13/power-line-plan-energizes-residents-opposing-routes.html

http://www.thisweeknews.com/content/stories/delaware/news/2011/11/18/resident-asks-county-to-help-fight-power-line.html

http://www.snponline.com/articles/2011/12/20/olentangy_valley_news/news/ovdelpower_20111220_1013am_1.txt

http://ohiocitizen.org/?tag=firstenergy&paged=2

http://video.nbc4i.com/v/49729471/power-line-fight.htm

Here are some of the poles installed and waiting for cables in Geauga County. Imagine these running next to, or even through your property. Then imagine ever trying to sell it and having prospective buyers take one look and get back into their cars.

Several local realtors and developers we've interviewed have told us they cannot overestimate the damage transmission lines do to the value of property. Some say they won't even bother to list homes with wires nearby.

Tuesday, December 13th, NoNewWires enjoyed great exposure by Columbus media. We were given a headline story on Section B of the Columbus Dispatch, and  extensive coverage on NBC, ABC and FOX (local) television news. We'd like to thank all of the media who are helping us to build a cohesive, unified movement against the loss of beauty and value in our township.
 

Thanks to the tireless efforts of Greg Ackers, Bev Dodson, Cecelia Zaniewski, Virginia Farneman, Alan Fermier, and Tom and Dazanne Prestera, we gathered over 250 new signatures for the petition!

THANK YOU, CITIZENS OF CONCORD TOWNSHIP, FOR AN EXCELLENT TURNOUT!
The people of Concord Township are passionate about property values and scenic beauty, and they proved it. Folks lined up twenty deep to sign our petition. Several politicians joined the discussion and offered their guidance and support.

Want to Help With the Effort? Click HERE for a petition (.pdf) you can print and circulate. Thank you!

What about the health effects of high voltage transmission lines? Turns out the debate is far from settled. Click HERE for a FAQ.

PLEASE READ!

At NoNewWires.org, we work hard to get the word out and explore a wide range of approaches through which we hope to eventually protect property values and the scenic beauty of Concord Township.

Aside from the actual labor of encouraging residents to join and support the cause, there is also a considerable out-of-pocket expense involved. To date, that entire expense, the signs, the web site and all other costs have been born by a small group of very dedicated people.

If you can help us with a donation, please make your check payable to: FOCT, and send it to 6842 Dublin Road, Delaware, Ohio 43015

Please note: NoNewWires.org is strictly volunteer, Any donations help cover ONLY mission-required out-of-pocket expenses.

Thank you,

Your NoNewWires Team

180 Yard Signs In Place!! Get Yours (while supplies last)- Click HERE.

NEW: Pre-written Letters (in MS Word)
Here's a letter to the PUCO. Print it, sign it & mail it. (& customize it if you want to!)
Here's a letter to several other influential individuals, ready to print & use.

We're off to a great start, with our bright yellow signs all over Concord Township at intersections and in yards and along roads. With the signs out, several people have asked for contact information, so here it is:

At First Energy, you can call  Mr. Jeffery Moshier at 330 384-4953. You can request an aerial view of your property if it is in the path of the new proposed power lines. If your land is involved, we would appreciate your forwarding the image to tomprestera@gmail.com. With additional data points, we can "fine tune" our master maps and get information to other property owners who may not be aware of the proximity of the proposed new wires.

Property owners may make comments directly to the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio, (PUCO) at:
Public Utilities Commission of Ohio, Todd Snitchler, Chairman
180 East Broad Street, Columbus, Ohio 43215

Also, there is good reason to understand the Ohio Power Siting Board, (OPSB), who they are and what they do.
Here's a link:
http://www.opsb.ohio.gov/opsb/

And to understand the process through which power lines become reality, visit the OPSB Siting Process Flow Chart here:
http://www.opsb.ohio.gov/emplibrary/files/OPSB/flowchart.pdf

The OPSB has an excellent "contact us" page, available here:
http://www.opsb.ohio.gov/opsb/index.cfm/Contact-Us/

NOTE: Remember when communicating with anyone regarding this situation,
always include the case number, which is #11-4884-EL-BTX

New feature added! Click on the "Gallery" button above and see scenes from our township where the new wires may run.
Better yet, send us your own photos if your land is threatened by First Energy's proposed new wires. There's a link on the page.

Directly above where these three beautiful bucks are standing will run a new 138KV power line.
The bucks may stand there another time, but with poles and wires, the scene will not be nearly as beautiful.

THE CHALLENGE WE FACE

First Energy Corporation and American Transmission Systems have proposed a 138,000 volt power transmission line, which would be constructed on 80-100 foot poles through Concord Township, generally southwest to northeast.

As proposed, the system will require clear cutting a sixty-foot right of way on both existing easements as well as new easements which will be purchased from landowners. Those who do not feel First Energy's offer to purchase easements is adequate will face forced sale through eminent domain.

The new route will cut through farms, parks and home sites in areas of Jerome Road, Merchant Road, Concord Road and Dublin Road on the west side of the river, and continue east across the river onto Bean Oller Road and Bunty Station as well.

You can help immediately by signing our Petition, and proclaiming your support of our cause. You can get and display one of our special YARD SIGNS to tell others you support us, and show them how they can help, too.

We're a small group of property owners, working hard to urge First Energy to utilize existing right of ways along State Route 42, and abandon any plans that require acquisition of new easements in Concord Township.

So that is our challenge- to protect and preserve, through every legal means at our disposal, the property rights, the scenic beauty, and the land values for each and every Township Resident.