I think they're running 1M vDC.
-----
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com
<https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL><https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb><https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions><https://twitter.com/ICSIL>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From: *"Bill Prince" <[email protected]>
*To: *[email protected]
*Sent: *Saturday, February 28, 2015 2:33:14 PM
*Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] FCC Live Link
Interesting how we've come full circle on power transmission. Thomas
Edison's original "big distribution" project failed because it was
essentially a DC transmission project. Back then, they were only able
to do DC transmission a couple of miles. The advantages of AC won out.
Now that we understand the issues better, DC is coming back.
I would really like to see the thyristors that convert between AC and
DC with an operating voltage of 600,000 volts.
bp
<part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com>
On 2/28/2015 12:00 PM, Ken Hohhof wrote:
There is an ugly fight against a 500 mile high voltage DC power
line through Iowa and Illinois and use of eminent domain to
acquire the farmland.
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Block-RICL-Rock-Island-Clean-Line/133050610203359
*From:* Chuck McCown <mailto:[email protected]>
*Sent:* Saturday, February 28, 2015 1:27 PM
*To:* [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] FCC Live Link
It is a tool to be used as a last resort. You make no friends and
it ends up costing you lots of money and goodwill. But it is a
very effective tool in Utah.
*From:* Trevor Bough <mailto:[email protected]>
*Sent:* Saturday, February 28, 2015 12:03 PM
*To:* [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] FCC Live Link
I have no doubt that eminent domain has been abused all over the
country in the manner you described with the developer (that's why
I provided the link about the Missouri port authority losing their
eminent domain claim to show that MO anyhow has attempted to put
an end to that and, in effect make it harder to win any eminent
domain case). I also agree that it is much easier to win the
argument that fiber is providing a public use than a land
developer. It is also easier for the landowner to prove that your
fiber doesn't have to go through their property (unless they have
a rather large tract of land, in which case they are just stupid
not to take the money and accept the easement in the first place)
to get where you need to go. I am not against eminent domain. It's
a sometimes necessary tool. I'm against the idea that eminent
domain just makes problem people go away.
On Feb 28, 2015 12:46 PM, "Chuck McCown" <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Utilities are treated as quazi public entities before the law
and are almost universally allowed all rights accorded to
political subdivisions such as eminent domain. It is easy to
“prove” that a fiber line is needed for public use. Even our
dear President would agree that your fiber brings better,
needed, service to those poor folks at the other end of
town... That half of the argument is almost impossible to lose.
I would guess most states have that as a requirement. the
judges I have been before did not even want to step into that
argument.
Much easier to prove than a land developer taking property for
a new development and saying it will help bring jobs and
commerce to the community therefore it is needed for public
use. And you know that has happened all over the country.
*From:* Trevor Bough <mailto:[email protected]>
*Sent:* Saturday, February 28, 2015 11:37 AM
*To:* [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] FCC Live Link
The 5th Amendment just established just compensation for
eminent domain. It leaves it to the states to define what
"public use" is. And the landowner still always has the right
to argue their point that it is not going to be used for
public use. Luckily, I live in a state that puts the onus on
the condemning authority to prove the taking is definitely
needed for public use.
On Feb 28, 2015 12:24 PM, "Chuck McCown" <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>
> The 5th amendment of the US constitution took that from you
many years ago.
>
> From: Trevor Bough
> Sent: Saturday, February 28, 2015 10:30 AM
> To: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] FCC Live Link
>
>
> As a property owner, I find that idea completely terrifying.
I should absolutely have the right to say what is or is not on
my property. Working in the utility industry, I still find
that idea completely terrifying. Electric utilities typically
require at least 30' of dedicated ROW. Gas and water utilities
typically require at least 20' of dedicated ROW. Would you
like to be required to give up 70' of your front yard without
any say? You still get to mow it and maintain it, but if the
utility feels the shrub you planted will interfere with them
operating their line, they have the right to come destroy it.
I would love to have dedicated easements everywhere, but that
is the reason there is dedicated public ROW everywhere.
Honestly people would be much better off dedicating 20' to a
utility easement when they record the legal description of
their property. Virtually all utilities can fit into a single
20' easement, especially if several go aerial, they just don't
like to. In my opinion, eminent domain should be a difficult
process with a requirement on the condemning authority to
prove need and history of good faith negotiations. Just my 2
cents (probably closer to $0.10 now).
>
> On Feb 28, 2015 10:48 AM, "Mike Hammett" <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>>
>> Tangent...
>>
>>
>> I understand property rights and all, but I'd like to see
automatic approval for all ROW requests by qualified entities.
>>
>>
>>
>> -----
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>
>> ________________________________
>> From: "Trevor Bough" <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>
>> To: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>> Sent: Friday, February 27, 2015 6:56:45 PM
>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] FCC Live Link
>>
>> Apparently Missourians fight to protect their property
rights more vigorously because, here anyway, it is a lengthy
and expensive process. Landowners in MO can also be awarded
legal fees if the condemning authority drops or loses the case
of eminent domain, so it is definitely not a, "This guy is
being difficult, we'll show him." fix-all.
http://watchdog.org/88546/missouri-landowners-win-in-eminent-domain-test-case/
Looks like it wasn't always the case here though.
>>
>> On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 11:19 AM, Chuck McCown
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>>>
>>> I have done it several times. In my cases it was pretty
much the easy button. Just had to wait for the docket.
>>>
>>> From: Trevor Bough
>>> Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2015 6:21 PM
>>> To: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] FCC Live Link
>>>
>>>
>>> It's not quite that easy... You have to be authorized by
the state to be able to use eminent domain and even then it is
a very lengthy process (minimum of six months typically) and
it has to be for "public use", which a utility can qualify as,
but even after going to court for six months or more to prove
that this is necessary for the public you are still at the
mercy of the quart ruling that you are right and now have the
luxury of paying the landowner for the access. It's not some
magic automatic "Easy Button".
>>>
>>> On Feb 26, 2015 1:34 PM, "Chuck McCown" <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> If you need to cross property with your pole line or
underground line, you can do so under the right of eminent
domain. Landowner has no say so. You go to court, the judge
bangs the gavel, and voila, instant ROW. However at that
point in time the tables turn somewhat in the favor of the
landowner as you have to compensate them for what you have taken.
>>>>
>>>> That that typically ends up at a place where it became a
very expensive ROW...
>>>>
>>>> What you are talking about below is the establishment of
a prescriptive ROW through your failure to defend your
property. Another word for it is acquiescence or adverse
possession. You can certainly lose your right to defend if
you sit on your rights. So, yea, if they didn't have an
easement or court order, cut down that pole.
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message----- From: Adam Moffett
>>>> Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2015 12:27 PM
>>>> To: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>>>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] FCC Live Link
>>>>
>>>> What eminent domain actions can a utility take? My
"knowledge" on that
>>>> topic is all hearsay.
>>>>
>>>> I heard of a landowner who saw a company putting a pole
in an empty lot
>>>> that he owned across the street from his house. He
watched them set the
>>>> pole and then after the workers left he went out with a
chainsaw and cut
>>>> it down because they never asked him if they could put
the pole there
>>>> (so the story went). In his point of view, if he let
them put the pole
>>>> there, they have permanent rights to access that spot on
his property
>>>> because of eminent domain.
>>>>
>>>>> You may even have the right of eminent domain now.
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
