Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Transmission Line Routing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Sheridan County approves letter to Public Service Commission over proposed transmission line; commissioners debate easement history
Summary
Commissioners approved a county letter to the Public Service Commission asking the utility to meet with landowners and re-evaluate routing. The meeting included a dispute among commissioners about when key easements were acquired and whether to also send a separate letter to state legislators.
Get email alerts on the Transmission Line Routing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Sheridan County commissioners voted to approve a letter to the Wyoming Public Service Commission regarding a proposed transmission line installation, asking the utility to meet with affected landowners and more fully research route options.
Speaker 3 told commissioners a complaint has been filed with the Public Service Commission and that a hearing is expected in October. He said the draft letter (reviewed by county legal counsel and included in the packet) asks the utility to come to the table with landowners and to research routing impacts more thoroughly. Commissioners discussed whether the county should also ask its legislators in Cheyenne to intervene and agreed a separate letter to legislators would be appropriate if the board wants action at the state level.
The discussion included a factual dispute over easement timing and the draft’s wording. One commissioner said the easement at issue was acquired in the 1980s and disputed a sentence in the draft that suggested the easement post-dated adjacent lot purchases; another commissioner said some easements were acquired more recently and that the final easement was obtained in April (a discrepancy commissioners flagged as needing clarification). The board moved and approved the letter to the Public Service Commission and authorized the chairman to sign it.
The meeting transcript records differences in commissioners’ recollections about easement acquisition dates; the board did not resolve that factual disagreement at the meeting and directed staff to proceed with the letter approved at the meeting.

