Armed U.S. Marshals Enforce Eminent Domain

https://www.popularresistance.org/armed-u-s-marshals-enforce-eminent-domain/

New Milford, PA – The land of the free got a little smaller this week when cutters from Williams Partners Company began clear-cutting trees on the Zeffer-Holleran property, readying it for construction of the Constitution pipeline. Five acres of the property were condemned under eminent domain to build the natural gas pipeline.

A dozen Pennsylvania State police and heavily armed U.S. Marshals escorted scores of tree cutters to remove hundreds of sugar bush maple trees from the property. The Marshals carried AR-15 assault weapons and wore bullet proof vests.

But when the cutters began tree removal they encountered trees with U.S. flags activists had painted on them. Activists stood out of the way during the cutting but held large signs spelling “People Not Pipelines.”

As land owner Megan Holleran watched the tree removal she kneeled in silence as the maples fell. “They made a very clear demonstration today, that all of their talk of dealing with landowners with respect and fairness couldn’t be further from the truth. They refused to see us as people and brought guns to our home,” she said.

Her mother, Catherine Holleran said, “We were shocked. I don’t know what in the world they thought they were going to encounter,” she said in response to the militarized force. “Nobody was giving them a hard time,” she said.

The Hollerans were joined by over a hundred environmentalists and supporters from the region in the month-long delay of the project. Nearly a thousand more supported them with donations of money and supplies, according to land owner Catherine Holleran. Calls of encouragement came from countries around the world, including France, Chile, Australia, according to Megan Holleran.

Vera Scroggins, a resident of Susquehanna County, railed against the builders, calling them “bullies” responsible for “raiding land and destroying property for profit.” Scroggins also rebuked Pennsylvania Governor Tom Wolf for being “nowhere to be found” when the people of Pennsylvania needed him most. “Our state has become a corporatocracy – where are our elected officials?” she asked. She documented the cutting with video and photographs.

The Hollerans have owned the 23-acre tract since 1950, when Megan Holleran’s grandfather bought it to start the Harford Maple Syrup business. Losing the hundreds of sugar bush maple trees will effectively end 90% of their business.

Cabot Oil & Gas Company and Williams Partners applied for permission to build the 124-mile project in 2013. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) granted the first approvals to cut trees in Susquehanna County in January of this year. However, no permits have been issued to begin cutting in New York. The 30″ pipeline is planned to run from Susquehanna County, PA to Scholaire County, NY, 24 miles of which runs through Pennsylvania.

Williams representatives and tree cutters first showed up at the Holleran property on February 11th, but the Hollerans and about 30 supporters, asked them not to begin cutting. The Williams official called State police, but police refused to enforce the permit, so the cutters left. But on February 19, a Federal Magistrate called the Hollerans into court, ordering them to comply with the order to cut.

The $683 million Constitution pipeline has been at the center of a growing regional resistance in Pennsylvania against hydraulic fracturing infrastructure, also known as “fracking.” Thousands of miles of gas pipelines have already been approved and permitted across the nation by FERC. Since 2009, when the fracking boom began ramping up in the Northeast U.S., over 9,000 fracking wells have been drilled across Pennsylvania. Susquehanna County sits on top of the Marcellus coal belt, the source of natural gas from fracking.

Environmental Group Sues Federal Agency for Alleged Conflict of Interest

http://www.njspotlight.com/stories/16/03/02/environmental-group-sues-federal-agency-for-alleged-conflict-of-interest/#

In its suit against FERC, the Delaware Riverkeeper Network claims the review and approval process for pipeline projects is fundamentally flawed

Maya Van Rossum, Delaware Riverkeeper

Ratcheting up a fight against the expansion of natural-gas pipelines, the Delaware Riverkeeper Network yesterday filed a lawsuit against the federal agency that oversees construction of such projects.

In a lawsuit filed with the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, the group claimed that the review and approval process for pipeline projects by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission is infected by structural bias.

The lawsuit is seeking fundamental changes to the agency that — the group asserts –would make it accountable and consistent with democratic governance. The lawsuit alleges the bias is based on the agency’s financial structure, which recovers the full cost of its operations through the charges and fees assessed on the industries it regulates.

“Because FERC gets its funding from the big companies it is supposed to be monitoring, it has become, perhaps inevitably, a corrupt, rogue agency,’’ said Maya van Rossum, the Delaware Riverkeeper and the leader of the Delaware Riverkeeper Network.

The lawsuit is the second action taken against the commission by the organization this year. In January, it asked the General Accountability Office to initiate an investigation into FERC, saying it has approved 100 percent of the gas pipeline projects that have come before it, the highest approval rate of any independent federal agency.

The issue is politically volatile in New Jersey, where at least 15 pipeline expansion or new projects are in various stages of planning and construction. Most have been met with widespread opposition because some projects intersect private property while others cut through environmentally sensitive areas, some of which have been preserved with public money.

Others, however, have welcomed the pipelines because they have helped lower heating costs for hundreds of thousands of customers, taking advantage of plentiful and cheaper supplies of natural gas found in Pennsylvania and other nearby states.

The Riverkeeper Network has been in the forefront of opposition to one of the more controversial projects — the PennEast pipeline, a proposed 118-mile conduit that would cut through parts of Pennsylvania and New Jersey. Critics say it will run through forested land, cross hundreds of bodies of water, and affect 55 acres of wetlands. It also would impact many homeowners because the approval process could give the company the power of eminent domain.

PennEast recently filed an application for the project with the Delaware River Basin Commission because a portion of the proposed pipeline would run under the Delaware River, the source of drinking water for millions in Pennsylvania and New Jersey.

In its federal lawsuit, the Riverkeeper Network said by the nature of its financing, FERC faces a conflict of interest because such projects constitute a big portion of its income.

The organization is seeking a declaration that FERC engages in a biased process, one that deprives DRN of due process and causes irreparable harm. It also wants its funding structure declared unconstitutional and to prohibit the exercise of eminent domain for such projects.

The Riverkeeper is still awaiting a decision by the GAO on whether it will investigate the federal agency, van Rossum said.

Disputed Maple Trees in Susquehanna County Being Cut

Disputed Maple Trees in Susquehanna County Being Cut

They’re not kidding when they say “heavily armed US Marshalls” – check out the video.

http://player.ooyala.com/iframe.js#pbid=f9babf3a1fd64fbb82916ce9d76ffcfa&ec=t2YjRoMTE68Orr1avKBVIX6WkVX7IGes

NEW MILFORD TOWNSHIP — After protests and court action, an area of maple trees in Susquehanna County is being cut down to make way for a gas pipeline.

The Holleran family and their supporters watched as chainsaws cut down trees Tuesday morning near New Milford to make way for a natural gas pipeline.

A court order cleared the way for the Williams company to cut down the trees so the company could build its natural gas pipeline.

Protestors watched as the trees came down. The hills of New Milford Township echoed with the sound of chainsaws and trees hitting the ground.

The property is owned by Megan Holleran who fought to try to stop this from happening.

“Perhaps, mistakenly, I was hoping for a little more compassion and obviously, I should have known better,” said Holleran.

Holleran says the pipeline is killing her trees and her livelihood. She points out this section was the only one where her family tapped maple trees, to make maple syrup.

The Williams company received permission from the courts to do this through eminent domain. The Holleran family’s hands were tied.

A Williams spokesman claims the pipeline company did have compassion that Holleran said was lacking.

“We were able to reroute the pipeline, still on their property, but in a way to minimize the overall impact,” said Michael Atchie, Williams public outreach manager, adding it was the best they could do.

Because a federal court approved the cutting of the trees, heavily armed U.S. Marshals, along with state police, were on hand to keep the peace.

Other than some shouts, the sides stayed apart.

The trees may be down, but Megan Holleran has not given up the fight. She promises more court action.

“If this pipeline doesn’t get built, and they caused all this damage to our property for no reason, there are certainly things I can do then,” Holleran added.

In the meantime, all she can do now is watch and receive the support from her friends.

The natural gas pipeline is designed to deliver Marcellus shale gas to New York and New England.

Gas pipe through park worries Hinesburg

It sounds like these VT residents need to keep an eye on their township leaders when they meet in “executive session”.  It brings to mind some former Delaware Township committee members having secret meetings with PennEast.

I wonder what planet this resident hails from?  We have solar in our yard & love it!

One resident spoke in favor of the pipeline at the recent Selectboard meeting. Ray Mainer said the natural gas line would be preferable to alternative energy sources.

“Nobody wants solar or wind towers in their back yard,” Mainer said.

http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/story/news/local/2016/02/29/gas-pipeline-geprags-park-hinesburg/81005600/

HINESBURG – An alarm sounded recently for some Hinesburg residents when they heard that a slice was about to be taken from a valued town park and used for a Vermont Gas Systems mainline. The land would be appropriated through eminent domain.

About 30 people attended a Selectboard meeting earlier this month to learn more and, for most, to voice opposition to the plan.

The topic had arisen before. Vermont Gas filed an application with the Public Service Board in December 2012 for the Addison Natural Gas Project, which includes six miles through Hinesburg.

In early 2014, Vermont Gas Vice President of Regulatory Affairs Eileen Simollardes spoke with townspeople about the route the main pipeline would take through an easement on the western side of Geprags Community Park. The Selectboard then drafted an unsigned agreement with Vermont Gas.

The alarm went off this month when residents observed work on the pipeline was progressing near the northern boundary of Hinesburg, and they were unsure what was in the agreement concerning the park.

Hinesburg Conservation Commission Chairwoman Alison Lesure said the commission questions the right to take land that is already in public use and serving the public good.

Residents also learned at that Feb. 15 meeting that the Public Service Board had scheduled a hearing for Friday for the eminent domain request — and they had only until Feb. 17 to file a motion to intervene, which would permit them comment to the board. Many said they were frustrated by the short notice.

Fueled by frustration, a group of residents hired an attorney to ask the Public Service Board for an extension of time to intervene.

The effort proved successful. Last week, Rachel Smolker, one of the advocates for an extension, said she was notified the request was granted. Motions to intervene could be filed until Friday. No new date for the hearing was set.

Vermont Gas Systems’ main pipeline, part of the Addison Natural Gas Project, is planned to extend through the park with a 50-foot-wide easement that would be 1,987 feet long and occupy a total area of about 2.3 acres within the 85-acre park.

“The agreement and the negotiation of it had been an executive session matter,” Hinesburg Town Administrator Trevor Lashua said, referring to proceedings that take place behind closed doors. “The commencement of the eminent domain process with the Public Service Board makes the agreement public.”

The complete agreement is posted on the town website, http://www.hinesburg.org. Selectboard Chairman Michael Bissonette said, “The agreement has been dormant because it was wrapped up in discussion at the regulatory level about whether the pipeline would proceed.”

The Public Service Board in early January declined to reconsider the Certificate of Public Good for the Addison project, allowing Vermont Gas to move ahead with plans.

Eminent domain

The eminent domain procedure is needed because a covenant governs what should take place in the park.

The town received the land from the estate of Dora Geprags, who died in 1989. The covenant with the deed states that the land “shall be used only as a public park or school or for public recreational or educational purposes, and the Town of Hinesburg shall properly maintain and care for the property.”

Nancy Baker, who has lived in Hinesburg for 30 years, said she visits Geprags Park two or three times a week. She’s one of many residents who speak out as unofficial protectors of the park when they believe it is threatened.

They express varied reasons for concern about the pipeline and the park. Baker said she hikes, goes on bird walks, takes her granddaughter sledding and has helped with maintenance.

Families value the park for outings. Geprags contains two miles of hiking trails. It’s home to about 50 species of birds, including the golden-winged warbler. And the park is the site of a sledding hill named in memory of Conservation Commission member Ted White.

Rachel Smolker, a biologist, ecologist and Hinesburg resident, said, “I want to ensure that places like Geprags Park, which is habitat for the rare golden-winged warbler and many other species and recognized as a National Heritage site, are not damaged, especially for the purposes of putting in a fracked gas pipeline.”

One resident spoke in favor of the pipeline at the recent Selectboard meeting. Ray Mainer said the natural gas line would be preferable to alternative energy sources.

“Nobody wants solar or wind towers in their back yard,” Mainer said.

Wood is impractical and produces toxins in the air, and burning oil emits sulfur and is dangerous to transport, he said.

Mark LaBarr, conservation program manager with Audubon Vermont, said Vermont Gas asked him to be involved when the company and the town of Hinesburg were drafting the potential agreement in August 2014. The resulting “warbler clause” states that no work would be scheduled from April 15 to July 31 to avoid disrupting nesting golden-winged warblers. (Photo: Courtesy Mark LaBarr)

Agreement incentives

The potential agreement for an easement through the park includes incentives for the town and for the park’s nesting bird inhabitants:

•Mark LaBarr, conservation program manager with Audubon Vermont, said Vermont Gas asked him to be involved when the company and the town of Hinesburg were drafting the potential agreement in August 2014. The resulting “warbler clause” states that no work would be scheduled from April 15 to July 31 to avoid disrupting nesting golden-winged warblers.

Shrubs would be planted on the edges of the easement corridor; $1,000 would be paid to support the plantings; $1,000 would be donated to Audubon Vermont for its studies in the park; and Vermont Gas would work with the town Conservation Commission’s concerns about the corridor.

•The local gas-distribution network, now serving the village area, would extend to North Road near Richmond Road, with the ability to serve two mobile-home parks.

•Vermont Gas’ low-income rate discount would be available to Hinesburg customers.

•Vermont Gas’ energy-efficiency services would be available to homes and businesses along the gas lines.

•Hinesburg would receive $75,000 to use at the town’s discretion.

What’s next

When the eminent domain hearing is held, agents for Vermont Gas Systems and the town would sign the agreement if both parties approve it as it stands.

Still unclear is when work might start in the park.

“We are still in the process of finalizing our construction plans for spring and summer. We will be doing pre-construction activities in the coming weeks and months,” said Beth Parent, the company’s communications manager.

LaBarr said he met last month with a Vermont Gas representative. Some brush cutting might be done before the warbler nesting season, but he expects the company to honor its plan to avoid the nesting period.

LaBarr said he is neither for nor against the pipeline. “We want the park to continue to be ideal habitat for the golden-winged warbler, whether or not the pipeline is built. If it is, we will work with Vermont Gas, and if it does not, we will help the Conservation Commission to manage the habitat.”

Tennessee Gas Pipeline files with state DPU, seeking survey access on private property

http://www.gazettenet.com/news/townbytown/greenfield/21230999-95/tennessee-gas-pipeline-files-with-state-dpu-seeking-survey-access-on-private-property

CONWAY — A spokesman for the company which wants to build a natural gas pipeline through western Massachusetts said it is requesting survey access — not the power of eminent domain — to private land for the potential project.

Richard N. Wheatley said Tennessee Gas Pipeline Co., a Kinder Morgan subsidiary, has filed a petition with the Massachusetts Department of Public Utilities under a state statute allowing natural gas and electric companies to request authorization to conduct such surveys on private property. Wheatley said the request results from Tennessee Gas Pipeline wanting to work in a timely manner.

The spokesman said the petitions Tennessee Gas Pipeline filed with the DPU in late January list roughly 500 private landowners in Massachusetts.

Meg Burch, the chairwoman of the town’s ad hoc pipeline task force, this week told members of the Conway Select Board that Tennessee Gas Pipeline has filed for eminent domain in an effort to steamroll the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s review of the proposed pipeline. However, Wheatley said this is not true.

Some at this week’s Select Board meeting expressed discomfort about the news relayed by Burch.

Select Board member Jim Moore said the money corporations are spending to lobby for the pipeline project concerns him.

“It really bothers me, in terms of who we are as a nation,” he said. “It’s sort of like the king of England and his guys who were bullying the colonies. And, now, we’ve got big international corporations who are bullying all the people who are in the way.”

There are six public comment hearings on the pipeline request scheduled in Massachusetts, including in the Greenfield Middle School auditorium at 7 p.m. March 30.

Wheatley told The Recorder eminent domain cannot be acted upon without a certificate of public convenience and necessity, which is what the company seeks from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission for construction.

“Eminent domain is our last resort,” he said, adding that Kinder Morgan never pursues it unless all other options for land easements have been unsuccessful. “All we’re seeking is survey access to see if land is suitable for the right of way.”

Feds: Rover pipeline’s impact on habitats could be lessened

This project is in Ohio.

http://www.cantonrep.com/article/20160222/BUSINESS/160229893/?Start=1

Building the Rover natural gas pipeline would harm the environment, but existing laws and regulations, coupled with steps recommended by federal regulators could reduce the impact to acceptable levels.

That’s the conclusion reached by Federal Energy Regulatory Commission staff in their draft environmental impact report for the proposed pipeline.

Rover would cross southern Stark County, and parts of Tuscarawas and Carroll counties, with dual 42-inch-diameter pipelines and ship 3.25 billion cubic feet of natural gas a day from the Utica and Marcellus shales to markets in the Great Lakes, Midwest, Gulf Coast and Canada.

RECOMMENDATIONS LISTED

FERC staff filed the 450-page draft report, plus numerous supporting documents, on Friday.

The report asked the commission to require 55 specific safeguards if the commission approves Rover and two related projects.

The measures address noise and dust control; Rover’s use of eminent domain; tree clearing; protection of rare wildlife and wetlands; and impacts to homeowners and farmers along the route.

For example, the report said Rover should monitor crop productivity for up to five years following pipeline construction, and needs to hire local contractors to install or repair field drain tiles that are damaged or rerouted due to construction.

FERC staff also requested Rover document its response to landowner complaints about increased premiums or cancellation of homeowner’s insurance as a result of the pipeline project.

ECONOMIC IMPACT

The report said building Rover would have “minor positive impacts” in terms of jobs, taxes and other economic activity.

Rover plans to employ up to 14,225 workers, half of them local hires, along the entire 510-mile project. Construction would take up to a year and a half.

An average of 2,600 workers would be assigned to the 190-mile dual mainline that crosses Stark, Tuscarawas and Carroll counties.

But permanent employment would be low locally — three workers at an office in Stark County and four workers at a compressor station near Leesville in Carroll County, according to the report.

When it comes to pipeline easement offers, experts say read the fine print

http://www.mcall.com/news/local/watchdog/mc-penn-east-offers-011916-20160222-story.html

As Arthur Dent surveys his Kidder Township property with the meticulously landscaped garden surrounding the in-ground swimming pool, he has a hard time picturing 250 feet of natural gas pipeline cutting through his backyard oasis.

PennEast Pipeline wants to run the piping between Dent’s fiberglass pool and septic mound, and offered Dent and his wife, Leonie, $11,890 plus an additional $3,000 for damages that could occur during construction.

It’s not just the money that concerns Dent, but also the fine print in his offer.

“It looks like they can come in whenever they want and add additional structures,” Dent said.

Dent is so frustrated, he said he wishes PennEast would just buy his entire property so he can move.

“You see what they are going to do, and that’s not where we want to live,” he said.

Dent is among more than 500 property owners who have begun receiving offers from PennEast to purchase permanent easements for its planned pipeline that would carry natural gas from Wilkes-Barre to Mercer County, N.J.

Easements are legal documents that grant access to property to a nonowner for a specific purpose. In this case, PennEast is making offers for access to the properties, with the right to replace or alter the size of the pipeline and install additional utility lines, including fiber-optic cables, data acquisition, telecommunication lines in the same easements, according to offers shared with The Morning Call.

Using that easement, PennEast could then sell off the rights for thousands of dollars, legal experts said.

“What’s equally, or possibly more important, than the compensation for property in these cases is negotiating a robust easement agreement that provides protection going forward,” said Carolyn Elefant, a former attorney for the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, which is in charge of approving interstate utility projects such as PennEast’s.

Requests to install additional utility lines in the right of way are standard in most pipeline easement agreements.

But these agreements would give PennEast more rights than it would lawfully acquire if it were forced to use eminent domain, said Elefant, now an attorney in Washington, D.C., who represents landowners potentially affected by the pipeline.

Besides provisions about future lines, legal experts said property owners also should pay close attention to property appraisals and damage compensation.

When easement negotiations break down, the law gives utilities the right to use eminent domain to take properties for projects that benefit the public good.

In the case of utilities, eminent domain would limit the easement to the project under FERC consideration. In the case of PennEast, that would be a single pipeline.

Still, having easements for future lines has its advantages for utilities.

“If a landowner does not retain those rights,” Elefant said, “the pipeline can sell them off, potentially for tens of thousands of dollars.”

She noted that fiber-optic cable companies “will pay a considerable amount of money to be able to lay cable in an easement.”

Further, Elefant said, it’s easier to install additional pipelines in an existing right of way than to find another route and start from scratch.

The MB Line, a 17-mile extension built in Maryland by Columbia Gas Transmission, was installed in or adjacent to existing right of ways, she said.

Another Columbia expansion, The East Side Project, used existing right of ways to install 9.5 miles of pipeline in Chester County and 9.5 miles in Gloucester County, N.J.

In such cases, she said, the compensation for a second line is minimal — “largely for damages and remediation rather than for the property value.”

Standard contract language

PennEast’s application is pending FERC approval. The company hopes to receive approval this year so it can begin construction and be operational by 2017.

The company is not planning to construct another pipeline, but includes language on additional lines in initial contract offers as standard practice, said Patricia Kornick, a spokeswoman for PennEast.

“If a landowner is not comfortable with certain provisions in the initial easement agreement — or wants to add provisions — PennEast encourages landowners to discuss their preferences with the PennEast land agent,” she said.

More than 50 landowners have signed offers since October, when PennEast began sending them to the about 565 landowners along the pipeline’s 118-mile route, said Simon Bowman, head of land acquisition at PennEast.

Monetary amounts in offers shared with The Morning Call vary and include payment for damages such as the removal of trees, for temporary right of way and for the permanent easement where the 36-inch-round pipeline will be buried.

PennEast is working with Western Land Services, a Tunkhannock, Wyoming County, land management company, which is making offers to landowners and negotiating on PennEast’s behalf.

The company looked at the value of neighboring and similar properties to make offers to landowners, Bowman said.

“What is best for both the landowner and us is to have a bilateral negotiation where we can talk with the landowner and offer them a premium value,” Bowman said. “If it goes [to eminent domain], it involves a lot of cost and additional time.”

Property owners interviewed by The Morning Call said the provision allowing easements for multiple lines was among the items that immediately drew attention when they received offers in the mail.

They said monetary offers don’t seem to begin to cover the value of their land or the damage it would incur, let alone any issues caused by future lines.

Guy Wagner, who owns Wagner Farm in Lower Nazareth Township, said he was offered $72,000 for a permanent easement and $29,000 for damages across 10 acres of his 100-acre property.

“The land won’t be able to be farmed efficiently anymore. The pipeline will cut right through the center of it on a diagonal. They don’t care how much damage they do to it,” Wagner said.

Jeff Porter, an owner of Porters’ Pub in Easton, hired an attorney to review his contract.

PennEast is offering Porter $6,660 to install 31 feet of pipeline on a sliver of the three-quarter acre property Porter purchased in Durham Township, Bucks County, where he hopes to open a cafe. Of the $6,660 PennEast is offering, $3,000 is specified to cover damages.

Porter’s property, which borders the Delaware River, is on Route 611, about 9 miles south of Easton. Porter said it is the last property PennEast has to cross before the pipeline passes under the river.

“I know for a fact my property would be worth less if I have this pipeline running through it. It’s going to depress the value a lot more than $6,660.”

His attorney, David Juall of Durham, is a member of the Concerned Citizens Against the Pipeline group.

Juall said property owners like Porter should question appraisal values. Juall has seen several contracts and is concerned none of them includes a formal appraisal of the landowner’s property, or lists the criteria for how the company determined the value.

A typical appraisal includes how much the land is worth in its current state, and how much it would be worth once it has an easement running through it.

PennEast’s offers only provide a monetary figure and do not outline how the company came up with the valuation.

Carl Engleman, a Reading attorney representing nine landowners, said property owners should seek the advice of an attorney.

“I am advising [my clients] not to sign without negotiating an addendum to the contract first,” he said. “With the deals I negotiate with my clients, I make sure the easements are exclusive easements, meaning the only thing that can go in the ground is an underground pipeline, nothing else, unless it is necessary for safe operation of the pipeline.”

Engleman believes the amount of money PennEast is offering is a decent starting point, but the offers do not adequately compensate landowners for the harm they are going to suffer.

For example, those with agricultural property could stand to lose multiple years of crops when their land is disrupted, Engleman said.

Dave Messersmith, an educator and pipeline expert for the Penn State Cooperative Extension in Wayne County, said the viability of farmland after the pipeline installation depends how the company handles the soil during installation.

It takes about three years before soil can start generating crops again because it is compacted during construction, Messersmith said.

Messersmith said it’s common for a pipeline operator to pay full crop damage during the year of construction and then some percentage over the next couple years after the site is restored.

Eminent domain

Utilities usually will send a final offer to property owners still without signed contracts. If the property owner declines the offer, the company will file suit against the hold-out landowners, Elefant said.

The lawsuit will ask the court for the right to take property so the company can begin construction of the pipeline. It will also ask the court to settle damages.

Whether landowners wind up better off going to trial, Elefant said, “that depends.”

A Philadelphia County judge recently ruled that a lawsuit trying to stop Sunoco Pipeline from using eminent domain on its Mariner 2 project in southern Pennsylvania can proceed, according to The Philadelphia Inquirer.

The Clean Air Council, one of the plaintiffs, argued that since the natural gas the pipeline would carry would end up overseas, it would not benefit the public good. Thus, the company would not be a utility, rendering it unable to use eminent domain.

But Elefant cautions that negotiating an easement might yield the landowner more in the long run. There is no guarantee how much money the court might award if it goes to eminent domain.

“Although I can pretty much guarantee that the pipeline’s offers up front will be far too low, in some instances they can be negotiated up to a point that they might be worthwhile when weighing the costs and benefits of trial,” she said.

PENNEAST EASEMENT OFFERS

What: PennEast Pipeline has filed an application with the Federal Regulatory Commission to build a 118-mile natural gas pipeline from Wilkes-Barre to Mercer County, N. J.

Easements: It has begun making initial offers to acquire permanent easements from the approximately 565 landowners along the path. Easements are legal documents that grant access to property to a non-owner for a specific purpose.

Initial offers: Besides money for the easement and to cover damages from construction, the company wants easement rights for future utility lines, including fiber-optic cables, data acquisition and telecommunication lines in the same easements.

What’s next: Landowners can negotiate, accept or reject offers. With rejected offers, PennEast could acquire easements in court through eminent domain.

Gas pipeline protesters disrupt PSB hearing

http://www.wcax.com/story/31265184/gas-pipeline-protesters-disrupt-psb-hearing

MONTPELIER, Vt. – Protesters opposed to a natural gas pipeline took their complaints to state regulators Friday.

The group from Rising Tide filled the hearing room at the Public Service Board and sang and chanted, disrupting the board’s hearing on an eminent domain case. That process is being sued to condemn a handful of properties along the pipeline route where Vermont Gas was unable to negotiate easements with landowners.

The 41-mile pipeline will carry natural gas to communities in Addison County. The protesters say the state should not be allowing more dependence on fossil fuels.

“This is people putting their foot down. Sitting down in front of a line of officers, armed officers, and singing, despite the fact they have been threatened to be arrested,” said Jane Palmer of Rising Tide.

“I think it’s of symbolic value for sure. But whether it ultimately sways the hearts and minds of people making decisions. I don’t know,” landowner Terrence Cueno said.

The protests continued despite a heavy police presence, but there were no arrests. The Public Service Board moved to consolidate the pending eminent domain cases at a future hearing.

Be sure to pick up the Bucks County Herald this week

We made the front page & the front page of the Living Section is fully devoted to the easement ripping event at the Fisher farm last week.  You can view it on line, but it’s easier to look at the hard copy, plus it’s free!

http://www.buckscountyherald.com/

D.C. lawyer helping New Jersey residents fight gas pipeline speaks in Back Mountain

http://timesleader.com/news/local/513218/d-c-lawyer-helping-new-jersey-residents-fight-gas-pipeline-speaks-in-back-mountain

DALLAS — A lawyer with a Washington, D.C.-based law firm representing a New Jersey residents group organized to stop the PennEast Natural Gas Pipeline spoke on Tuesday to a local group with the same goal.

Attorney Steven Richardson, a partner with Wiley Rein, addressed members of the Back Mountain-based Gas Drilling Awareness Coalition about his work to assist HALT PennEast (Homeowners Against Land Taking) in its fight against the the pipeline.

PennEast wants to construct a 36-inch diameter, 118-mile natural gas pipeline starting in Dallas Township and extending to Hopewell Township, New Jersey. The company applied to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to acquire the private property through which the pipeline would traverse.

Richardson said the firm is interested in this pipeline fight because “a private company using eminent domain to take people’s land offers a lot of legal questions that are not fully settled in the law.”

“Contrary to PennEast’s public relations spin, we intend to prove that there is no valid justification for taking our homes, farms and properties and endangering our livelihoods and families’ well-being for a pipeline that is not needed, not wanted and harmful,” Vincent DiBianca, one of the homeowners leading the HALT group, said in a prepared statement when announcing the group’s formal organization last month.

Richardson said that to acquire people’s land through eminent domain, PennEast must adequately show that the public good is behind the project.

“In New Jersey, there’s already a 53 percent oversupply of natural gas, so it’s not going to benefit the folks in New Jersey. They would simply surrender their land in a process that they do not think makes sense,” Richardson said, adding that the gas carried through the pipeline likely would be converted to liquefied natural gas and shipped overseas.

“That doesn’t lower gas prices in New Jersey,” he said. “That doesn’t lower gas prices here.”

Richardson said thousands of New Jersey residents are refusing to allow PennEast access to their properties to complete surveying or environmental studies.

Even if FERC grants PennEast applications or makes decisions in the company’s favor, Richardson said, those decisions can be appealed to the Washington, D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals. He pointed out that FERC can be and has been sued over such decisions. The Delaware Riverkeeper and other groups won a similar case in June 2014.

A question-and-answer session followed his presentation.

Mary Rodriguez, secretary for the GDAC, described Richardson as “a very knowledgeable attorney,” and hoped he might be able to help local landowners if any decide they want to fight the pipeline project.

“People should do their research on how many cases have been won or lost,” Rodriguez said. “A lot of organizations, especially Delaware Riverkeeper, are doing a lot of good with lawsuits that are already out there. You know, you don’t have a chance if you don’t fight.”