Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Transmission Lines Public Comment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents urge Vernon County to oppose proposed 765 kV transmission line, cite land, water and emergency impacts
Summary
Multiple public commenters told the board they oppose the proposed Marybelle/765 kV transmission project, calling the need speculative, citing environmental risks and local emergency and road impacts, and urging the county to pursue legal and legislative steps; the board passed an opposing resolution and information requests.
Several residents and landowners addressed the Vernon County Board during public comment to oppose a proposed 765 kV transmission line (referred to in public comment as the Marybelle or Mary Bell project).
Rob Danielson (speaker 17), who said he is a potentially impacted landowner, called the Marybelle proposal "not a project" but a proposal based on future projections and said utility planning need estimates are "exaggerated" and "unrealistic," citing Dr. David Patton’s earlier testimony. "The need does not exist," Danielson said, urging supervisors to scrutinize utility claims.
Tim Woodhouse (speaker 18), another nearby landowner, said construction traffic and large equipment would strain township roads and local emergency services. "Any emergency resulting from that project would fall to our local and county personnel," Woodhouse said, asking who would fund training and response.
Barbara Richards (speaker 5) raised broader environmental concerns, saying the county already faces landfill methane issues, PFAS and nitrate contamination, and that large transmission infrastructure would add to environmental stress. Krista Brown (speaker 19) urged supervisors to act consistently with the county's newly stated values: "We don't do this to our farms. We don't do this to our land. We don't do this to each other."
After public comment and later debate, the board amended and passed a set of related resolutions (2026-17 and 2026-18) requesting information from utilities and other parties and then approved resolution 2026-19 opposing the proposed 765 kV line through Vernon County. Supervisors noted those resolutions are largely symbolic—because the Public Service Commission holds siting authority—but said they are a first step in multi-part local strategy that could include legal and legislative actions.
Board members discussed alternatives such as HVDC or underground corridors and urged continued public engagement as the county coordinates with neighboring jurisdictions and state legislators.
