Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Elbert County staff recommends denial of Xcel Energy’s 48‑mile transmission route; hearing continued after hours of public comment

3655416 · June 3, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Elbert County planning staff recommended the Planning Commission recommend denial of Xcel Energy’s permit and special‑use applications for a 48‑mile, 345‑kV transmission line through the county, citing unresolved fire‑protection and infrastructure questions; the commission continued the hearing to June 4 for more information.

Elbert County planning staff recommended the Planning Commission recommend denial on Tuesday of Xcel Energy’s application for a major 1041 permit and Special Use by Review (SUR) for a 48‑mile, 345‑kilovolt double‑circuit transmission line in the county, saying key questions about wildfire risk, proof of fire protection and potential burdens on local services remain unresolved.

Stephanie Blachoviak, a certified land‑use planner with SWCA Environmental Consultants hired by Elbert County, told the commission: “Based on review of the application materials, review by applicable Elbert County departments and outside agencies and consideration of the approval criteria, staff recommends the Planning Commission make a recommendation of denial for the EXCEL Colorado Power Pathway major 1041 permit application.”

The planning commission opened a quasi‑judicial public hearing on applications identified as the ExCEL Colorado Power Pathway 1041 permit and SUR. After roughly three hours of staff and applicant presentations and more than two hours of public comment, the commission voted to continue the hearing to 6 p.m. on June 4 so commissioners can ask follow‑up questions and obtain additional information before making a formal recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners.

Why staff recommended denial

Staff told the commission it found the applicant had met some technical criteria—such as obtaining property rights, protecting water quality and certain sustainability measures—but had not adequately addressed several items tied to public safety and local capacity. Among the outstanding issues staff cited were lack of executed fire prevention and safety agreement forms from Kiowa Fire Protection District and Big Sandy Fire Protection District; unresolved comments…

Already have an account? Log in

Subscribe to keep reading

Unlock the rest of this article — and every article on Citizen Portal.

  • Unlimited articles
  • AI-powered breakdowns of topics, speakers, decisions, and budgets
  • Instant alerts when your location has a new meeting
  • Follow topics and more locations
  • 1,000 AI Insights / month, plus AI Chat
30-day money-back on paid plans