Aug. 20, 2026
DE SOTO, Wis. — An unusual thing happened on the stage of a packed Retreat Sportsmans Club on Monday evening where five political leaders spanning different ideologies joined local residents to answer questions about a proposed high voltage transmission corridor through the Driftless Area.
The proposed infrastructure project consists of the MariBell Transmission Project and its eastern continuation known as the BECI project. The MariBell segment is an estimated $900 million joint venture between La Crosse based Dairyland Power Cooperative and GridLiance Heartland, a subsidiary of NextEra Energy Transmission. The project seeks to build a 140 mile double circuit line carrying both 765 kilovolts and 161 kilovolts of electricity from Marion, Minnesota, to Bell Center, Wisconsin. The developers anticipate submitting their formal application to the Public Service Commission of Wisconsin in the fall of 2026. The commission holds the ultimate authority to approve the project and select the final route.
The public town hall meeting was moderated by attorney Erik Olson of Eminent Domain Services in Madison. Olson led the panel of state and federal leaders through a series of questions submitted by local residents. The discussion led to some areas of disagreement and some areas of agreement.
What Actions Have Leaders Taken So Far?
The first question focused what the leaders had done to date either in support of or in opposition to the MariBell transmission line project?
State Senator Brad Pfaff detailed his legislative efforts to hold utility companies accountable. He highlighted a bill he introduced to redirect utility siting priorities to protect private property.
“I have introduced legislation to hold utility companies accountable,” said Senator Brad Pfaff. “The legislation that I have introduced, cosponsored by State Representative Tara Johnson, says that it tells the utilities, You are not going to go across farmland and forest that you do not currently have a right of way. Follow existing utility infrastructure right of way. That is number one. The second thing that the piece of legislation does is that when it comes to fragile and unique landscapes like we have, bury the wire.”
State Representative Tara Johnson of the 96th Assembly District highlighted her work with local constituents on the issue and her deep sympathy for impacted landowners.
“This is probably the number one issue that I hear from constituents,” said Representative Tara Johnson. “Every day in our office, phone calls, emails, this is the topic that fills the calendar for those appointments.”
State Representative Travis Tranel, a dairy farmer representing Crawford County and portions of Vernon County, discussed the technical challenges of energy reliability and Act 40. He argued that transition policies are forcing utilities to replace consistent energy generation with distant sources.
“Does anybody know the difference between baseload and intermittent power?” asked Representative Travis Tranel. “Baseload power is power that you need all of the time. We have made a policy decision in this state and in this country to switch to more intermittent sources of power, wind and solar. When you switch to wind and solar, you generate it further away from where it is needed. When you do that, what happens? You have to move the power. And that is why we have proposals like this 765 line.”
3rd District US Representative Derrick Van Orden, who lives in the Retreat area, agreed that the federal government must focus on increasing baseline power within the country rather than transporting electricity over long distances.
“The longer you have to move power from one place to another, the more power you lose,” said Van Orden. “That is why you have these 250 foot tall monstrosities running through farmland. So we are trying to increase the base load so when you flip your light switch on, it works. So that means we are trying to increase our reliance on nuclear energy, clean burning coal energy, and clean burning natural gas.”
Eminent Domain
The second topic addressed the use of eminent domain to seize private land for projects that primarily serve private tech corporations such as massive data centers.
Pfaff declared his opposition to taking private land for corporate profit. He reiterated that existing public infrastructure corridors should be utilized first.
“Follow the existing infrastructure,” said Pfaff. “We have public infrastructure throughout this state, state highways, interstate highways. I know they may curve and wind and bend, but the thing is that we do not have to take away private property.”
Tranel sharply criticized the state utility regulatory system and the guaranteed 10 percent rate of return that encourages companies to build expensive infrastructure.
“The utilities are so arrogant in the state of Wisconsin that they wanted to pass a piece of legislation that they referred to as ROFR,” said Representative Travis Tranel. “Basically, said if you are an incumbent utility in this state and somebody orders a transmission line, you get a right of first refusal on it. Now, you might think that means that they get to match whatever the most competitive bid is. No. It meant that they get to build the line with no bid.”
Johnson echoed Tranel’s criticisms of the utility profit model. She suggested that the state should reconsider how utility services are structured.
“I would agree with my colleague, Representative Tranel, that that 10 percent guarantee for utilities is demotivating for making good decisions on the part of utilities,” said Representative Tara Johnson. “And perhaps Representative Tranel and others on the stage today would join me in saying maybe this is a point at which we return to state run utilities.”
Van Orden strongly condemned the taking of private land for the benefit of a single private corporation. He noted that he is exploring federal legislative options to increase energy competition and reduce ratepayer costs.
“No way in hell should we be using this eminent domain to take people’s private property so a single company can profit,” said Van Orden. “That is just not okay with me. It is fraudulent.”
Dr. David King, an independent candidate for governor, argued that the power of decision making must be returned directly to the citizens rather than corporate interest groups or unrepresentative officials.
“The power is in the hand of we, the people, not the elected officials,” said King. “You are their boss. We gotta start acting like it. And James Madison said it this way, Knowledge will always govern ignorance. So if they keep the information from us, we are ignorant to the information, and they get to govern us and tell us anything.”
Bury The Line
The discussion then turned to the environmental and financial trade offs of burying the transmission line versus placing it overhead.
Pfaff argued that his proposed legislation represents a balanced approach that protects fragile resources even if underground construction carries a higher initial cost.
“I introduced legislation to say let us bury this where we can,” said Pfaff. “We bury it where we can, especially in fragile landscape like we have here.”
Tranel expressed caution about burying high voltage alternating current lines, citing agricultural concerns like stray voltage. He argued that the true solution is generating electricity closer to where it is used rather than moving it across the state.
“Generate power where you use it, and then you do not need to move it all around the state, and you also do not need to ruin rural landscapes,” said Tranel. “The solution is not that hard.”
Viroqua Mayor Krista Browne argued that the financial costs cited by developers fail to account for the true ecological and community damage. She noted that large scale infrastructure permanently disrupts local watersheds and karst geology.
“I do not think that it is actually costing us more to bury it because I think if we talk about true costs, it is costing us more in ways wider than money to do the primary route or the secondary route or any of the routes that are proposed across Wisconsin,” said Browne. “The costs of loss of land, the flooding that will happen, right? There is a lot of negative externalities to these decisions, whereas burying it might cost more money upfront, but the corridor is there.”
Van Orden pointed out that burying the line through the Driftless Area is extremely difficult due to the local topography and the Mississippi River.
Public Service Commission and Regulatory Process
Under Wisconsin law, the commission functions as a quasi judicial body that decides whether to issue a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity based on the evidence presented in a formal case docket.
Senator Pfaff criticized the recent handling of commissioner appointments, pointing out that the state Senate has been bypassed in the review process. Pfaff noted that out of the three current commissioners, only one had served for an extended period of time while the other two were never formally confirmed. He argued that this lack of confirmation deprived lawmakers of the opportunity to question the appointees about their positions on massive utility dockets.
“They never were had the opportunity in order to be brought in and asked a bunch of questions on where they would stand on these issues,” said Senator Brad Pfaff. “And that’s the whole point, is who’s next to public service commission? I guarantee you, I am having, we will be having conversations with those appointees, and you guys should, how we look forward to projects like this in future projects.”
Dr. King, argued that the executive appointment power of the governor is a direct tool to protect rural communities. King pledged to use his authority as governor to ensure that future nominees are committed to representing the public interest rather than corporate utilities.
“We have two PSC positions that the governor can appoint somebody that’s there for the people and not their pockets,” said Dr. David King. “James Madison said it this way, Knowledge will always govern ignorance. So if they keep the information from us, we are ignorant to the information, and they get to govern us and tell us anything.”
Data Centers
Van Orden proposed that data centers should be relocated to federal military bases such as Fort McCoy to protect private farmland.
Van Orden outlined a set of conditions and requirements regarding what he will and will not accept when it comes to siting data centers and major transmission infrastructure in the region.
“First and foremost, there must be local buy in,” said Congressman Derrick Van Orden. “If the people in that community do not want it, it does not go, period.”
Second, the congressman strongly opposed any industrial development that destroys productive agricultural acreage, arguing that the unglaciated region’s fertile soil is irreplaceable.
“You cannot cover up our black dirt,” said Van Orden. “Those are one and two.”
The third requirement focuses on protecting area utility customers from carrying the financial burden of massive infrastructure builds. Van Orden insisted that developers must guarantee that local electrical rates will not rise to subsidize commercial projects.
“No increase in your rates,” said Van Orden. “The ratepayer protection is written in that.”
Fourth, Van Orden addressed the immense cooling needs of hyperscale facilities. He stated that he would not accept any data center that depletes local groundwater and instead demanded the use of modern closed circuit cooling systems.
“You have to use closed loop cooling systems,” said Van Orden. “Your vehicle uses a closed loop cooling system and does not leak antifreeze the whole way, so they must do the same.”
Finally, the congressman addressed noise pollution, stating that local residents should not have to endure the constant humming of cooling fans.
“We do not want to hear them,” said Van Orden. “We do not want to see these things.”
Rather than forcing these massive developments onto private properties, Van Orden proposed a public private partnership to utilize restricted federal lands. He explained that his office recently contacted the Department of War to explore placing data center campuses on large military reservations.
Van Orden argued that federal military bases solve the environmental and local conflicts. Siting the data centers behind secure gates would eliminate local noise and visual concerns, protect prime agricultural soil, and shield rural ratepayers from cost shifts.
“We have got Fort McCoy, one of the largest military reservations in the entire nation, and there is two different 500 acre plots, but when it is done, you would never know it is there,” said Van Orden. “And I think that is a very equitable solution to make sure that everybody’s needs are met.”
Van Orden closed by reminding the audience of the strategic national security concerns regarding artificial intelligence and data centers. He argued that the US must stay ahead of foreign adversaries while protecting local landowners.
“The Chinese Communist Party understands that whoever wins the AI war either wins the next war or we prevent the next war from happening,” said Congressman Derrick Van Orden. “And I spent my whole adult life at war, training other people for war or training for war myself, and the last thing that I want is that. So, we have to stay ahead of this these days.”
Browne spoke passionately from her personal experience of having her Iowa County property impacted by a cell tower, which eventually forced her family to relocate. She urged urban electricity users to understand the real impact of their energy demands on rural neighbors.
“This line is too close to for my comfort to Viroqua,” said Krista Browne. “And that is the city. This is not what we do to neighbors. We need to help those people empathize with this feeling that you all have.”
King warned that the health of local children and families must not be sacrificed for industrial progress. He pledged to use the executive appointment power of the governor to reform the Public Service Commission of Wisconsin.
“Billions of dollars is not worth your health or your children’s health,” said Dr. David King. “I travel the state because I care. And it is about you right now, it is not about me, it is about you.”
Senator Brad Pfaff spoke directly about the influence of big tech executives on energy policy, arguing that a small handful of billionaires should not be dictating decisions that reshape rural landscapes.
While he emphasized that he wants the United States to lead the technological race and “not concede any of this to China”, he stated that the public is entitled to transparency from the leaders of these massive corporations. He specifically called out “tech bros” and executives such as Mark Zuckerberg, Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos, and Sam Altman.
Pfaff argued that if these corporations plan to build massive, energy-intensive data centers on productive American farmland and draw heavily on fresh water, they have an obligation to explain what they are doing.
“They need to start answering questions about what is happening,” said Pfaff. “What is the future of AI? … Because if we’re going to be talking about building massive data centers on farmland, using fresh water, needing electricity, moving that electricity hundreds or thousands of miles, then we need to hear from them about what this is all about”.
He concluded by asserting that rather than having “five billionaires driving this policy,” energy development must involve a collaborative conversation among local, state, and national governments to ensure that citizens are included rather than bypassed.
The organizers of No765 closed the meeting by encouraging residents to stay engaged as the fall 2026 application deadline approaches. Information on the regulatory timeline and landowner rights can be accessed on the internet at the No765 website.
Add comment