Dairyland and Gridliance outline Marybelle transmission plan through Houston County; residents press easement and siting concerns

Dairyland Power Cooperative and Gridliance Heartland presented details of the Marybelle transmission project to the Houston County Board, describing a double‑circuit rebuild that would place a 765 kV circuit above an existing 161 kV line along much of the current corridor.

Clady Wood, identifying herself as “manager of regional transmission projects,” told the board the project was direct‑assigned to Dairyland by the Midcontinent Independent System Operator and that Gridliance Heartland is a partner. Jessica Hewitt of Gridliance Heartland said the design calls for a new steel lattice structure carrying the higher‑voltage circuit above the rebuilt 161 kV line.

Gridliance said the project would require state and federal permits, including a Minnesota PUC certificate of need and a separate routing permit. Presenters said the certificate of need filing is planned for early 2026 and a route permit application for September 2026; they estimated construction could start in 2031 with the line placed in service around June 1, 2034.

Presenters described engineering and siting tradeoffs: tower heights are expected to be about 150–200 feet (design target kept under 200 feet to meet FAA guidance), typical right‑of‑way widths are roughly 100 feet and may expand to as much as 250 feet after micro‑siting, and voluntary easement acquisition is the planned approach. Gridliance said staff are contacting landowners through mailings, social media and voluntary open houses and that a GIS station will be available at January workshops so landowners can view parcel‑level corridor proposals.

Gridliance projected local economic benefits and tax revenues, saying the project could bring hundreds of construction jobs and, conservatively, could “infuse approximately $400,000,000 in tax revenue into Minnesota over the lifespan of the project.” The company also said a 765 kV backbone can carry power equivalent to multiple smaller circuits and therefore reduce total land use compared with multiple parallel corridors.

County residents and commissioners pressed presenters on immediate impacts: whether the existing 161 kV line would be removed (yes), how cell towers and nearby airports would be addressed (FAA consultants are evaluating specific segments), whether structures would impede farming operations (presenters said easements are paid by the acre and that they will seek to avoid interfering with agricultural activities), and whether eminent domain might be used. Presenters repeated that the company’s preference is voluntary acquisition and that eminent domain is a statutory power that would only apply if a permit and route were authorized by the state.

Presenters emphasized micro‑siting—property‑by‑property adjustments to avoid homes and minimize impacts—and agreed to revisit the landowner mailing schedule after county feedback that some notices arrived during harvest. They also said environmental, cultural and tribal resource reviews are part of the permitting process and that the Minnesota PUC and other permitting authorities will review multiple routing options before any final route is approved.

The presenters encouraged landowners to attend an informational open house set for early January, to contact Doyle Land Services (the right‑of‑way contractor identified by presenters) if they receive outreach, and to submit written comments to the project record during the PUC permitting process.

What happens next: presenters said public outreach and micro‑siting will continue through the winter; formal PUC filings are planned during 2026, and any landowner comments submitted during the administrative record will be considered when route decisions are made.