ITC Line: Genesee, Osceola, Hartland, Brighton, and Milford Townships

MPSC- Michigan Case No. U-14861, February 28, 2008

The MPSC issued an order denying a request by Hartland Township and several area homeowners for a rehearing in a case involving the construction of an overhead transmission line in Livingston and Oakland counties by ITC Transmission.

-An Opinion and Press Release, found under the MPSC filing, rejected the Hartland Township and owners’ challenge to the project. This is the final part of the proceeding with offers and the filing of the condemnation complaints for major transmission lines, which will destroy the aesthetic attractiveness to a number of communities in Livingston and Oakland Counties.

Detroit News Opinion

Detroit News, September 18, 2007

Hartland Township residents have enlisted state legislators in their battle against a plan to build overhead electric transmission lines through the county, but that's not an appropriate way to deal with the issue.

Officials in the Livingston County community and some residents have been protesting a state-approved plan for more than a year that allows ITC Transmission to install 95-foot tall power poles for the delivery of electricity to the growing area.

It is not, however, the state Legislature's job to micromanage the affairs of local communities or the companies that provide power and other services to meet their needs. That rests with the MPSC, which has already approved the project.

ITC addressed the issues and followed a MPSC request to change the route, which will add an estimated $2.2 million to the project. If forced to bury the lines, project costs will increase anywhere from $15 million to $40 million, ITC officials say. Those costs will be passed on to consumers.

-The author of this blog frequently agrees with the Detroit News Opinion page on land use. However, this time around, one is bound to disagree.

One of the few outlets we have to respond to land acquisitions is to seek relief via the legislative process. We should not be upset if the owners in this area are successful. The alternative would be no opportunity to respond to the actions taken by franchises granted by the government!