The Hampshire County Commission voted Tuesday to adopt a resolution opposing proposed regional transmission-line projects proposed to cross parts of the county and directed staff to publish the amended statement for public review.

The measure, drafted by Commissioner Mance, says the county “is not in favor as a county commission of the projects as proposed” and calls on state and federal decision-makers to consider alternatives that would reduce local impacts. The commission removed one line from the draft that would have promised to “defend” private landowners against condemnation proceedings.

Commissioner Mance presented the draft resolution and told colleagues it reflected widespread local opposition: “The overwhelming ... sentiment that I've been able to receive from our citizens is that this is not something that they're happy about.” He said alternatives could include higher-cost engineering options such as burying lines along existing corridors.

President Englund raised concern about one paragraph that would have committed the county to support landowners against condemnation hearings, saying the county’s limited finances made such an open-ended pledge impractical. Englund said the commission must avoid promising financial support it may not be able to provide.

Commissioner Bridal said he supported striking the sentence that used the word “defending” and endorsed a version that pledges support for landowners without implying a financial guarantee: “We could always ... support the landowners, their property rights against condemnation proceedings as best we could.”

Commissioner Breel moved to accept the resolution with the amendment removing the disputed clause; a colleague seconded the motion and the commission approved it. President Englund asked the clerk to work with staff to finalize the draft and make the amended resolution available to the public.

The resolution also urges the Public Service Commission to consider county impacts when evaluating permit applications; the commission did not adopt any funding commitments or direct legal action as part of the vote.

The commission’s discussion also noted the potential scale of local effects under the current proposals — an approximate footprint of several thousand acres and the expected utility tax revenue on equipment — but members said they did not see offsetting local benefits sufficient to justify the projects as proposed.

The commission did not schedule further legal or financial commitments at the meeting and left open the possibility of coordinating with other local governments concerned about the proposals.