Vernon County Board hears Dairyland Power presentation as opposition to mega power line mounts

Feb. 21, 2026

By TIM HUNDT

VIROQUA, Wis. — The Vernon County Board of Supervisors faced a packed room Thursday, Feb. 19, as representatives from Dairyland Power Cooperative presented details on a massive high voltage transmission line proposed to cut through the Driftless Area.

The MariBell Transmission Project is a joint venture between Dairyland Power and GridLiance Heartland to build an approximately 140 mile double circuit transmission line carrying 765 kilovolts and 161 kilovolts of electricity. The proposed line would run from Marion, Minnesota, to a substation in Bell Center, Wisconsin, crossing the Mississippi River near Genoa and traversing Vernon and Crawford counties.

The presentation followed months of growing community resistance. Previous open houses and committee meetings drew large crowds of residents and local officials who argued the project would destroy the scenic landscape, threaten health and offer no local benefits. Developers maintain the line is critical to regional grid reliability, will accommodate future load growth and will provide access to cheaper renewable energy from the west.

Dairyland Details the Need and Design

Luke Fuller of Dairyland Power Government Relations led the presentation alongside land lead Rob Maly and project manager Dylan Alitz. GridLiance representative Laurie Dunham also joined remotely.

Fuller explained that the Midcontinent Independent System Operator identified the need for the line to build an 1800 mile regional backbone. He stated that the 765 kilovolt capacity was chosen over standard 345 kilovolt lines because it is a more efficient use of land. Fuller detailed that a 765 kilovolt line carries five to six times the capacity of a 345 kilovolt line. To move the same amount of power with standard lines would require building six single circuit towers necessitating a 900 foot right of way, compared to the 250 foot right of way needed for the proposed massive towers.

Fuller also pushed back on the narrative that the power would simply fly over the county to reach urban centers. He explained that electricity from the 765 kilovolt line would step down at regional substations like North Rochester and Columbia, eventually transferring to the lower voltage lines that directly serve rural homes and businesses. He noted that the existing 161 kilovolt wooden pole infrastructure in the county was built in the 1950s and 1960s and needs to be replaced regardless.

Following the presentation, county supervisors aggressively questioned the developers, engaging in a tense back and forth regarding the project’s necessity, environmental impacts and the county’s limited authority to stop it.

Supervisor Pushback

Multiple supervisors expressed frustration over the lack of local control regarding utility infrastructure and debated how the county could effectively fight the proposal.

Supervisor Dave Eggen expressed deep skepticism about the utility’s public outreach efforts, comparing it to previous fights over cell tower placements where local control was overridden by state and federal laws.

“Get ready for a feel good experience,” said Eggen. “They’ll send the PR guys in and make everybody feel heard, and make us feel like we had an opportunity to weigh in, but in fact, it is a feel good meeting.”

Eggen asked how the developers would react if the county passed a resolution preventing the utility from entering Vernon County. Fuller responded that he would need to see the text of such a resolution, but reminded the board that the county is an arm of state government and the Public Service Commission ultimately regulates these projects. Eggen announced his intention to take formal action regardless.

“At their general government meeting in March I intend to introduce a resolution denying MISO entry into Vernon County lands,” said Eggen. “We will allow the townships affected to sign on.”

Supervisor Alycann Taylor pressed the representatives on whether public feedback or county action actually holds any weight in the regulatory process, or if the county was just participating in an exercise in futility.

“Can you tell me a time where your environmental studies where you actually changed course and didn’t disrupt the community, the ecology and the place that you were,” asked Taylor. “Or is this just a study so you’re going through the motion?”

Maly responded that while the utility engages in “micro siting” to adjust specific pole placements or access paths away from farm equipment, he could not point to an instance in his experience where an entire line was rerouted or stopped based on community pushback, though he noted Dairyland hasn’t built a line of this scale.

“So in no time have you acknowledged the disruption and then changed your course,” Taylor replied.

Supervisor David Strudthoff challenged the terminology used by the developers regarding community involvement.

“I would take out the word public input that implies that we are actually having an effect,” said Strudthoff. “You should probably just put in public information.”

Supervisor Wayde Lawler suggested that while the county might not have the legal authority to stop the project, they could still make the process difficult enough to force a route change.

“A win is us being a thorn in their side to the point that they say you know what it is easier to go along the interstate,” said Lawler. “That is a win for us.”

Alternate Routes and Land Use

Supervisors repeatedly asked why the massive line could not be routed along major highways rather than through the sensitive terrain of the Driftless Area. Fuller responded that routing all high voltage lines down a single corridor like the interstate poses a severe reliability risk, as a single severe storm could knock out all transmission for the region.

Supervisors questioned the physical footprint of the massive towers and the underlying justification for the project. Supervisor John Pedretti asked how much say an individual farmer actually has if they do not want the line crossing their property or taking up field space with concrete foundations.

“I absolutely do not want this line going across my farm,” said Pedretti. “Is there anything I can do, or you’re going to put it anyway? There’s nothing we can do as a county. It’s just going to happen.”

Fuller and Maly pushed back, emphasizing that Dairyland does not have the authority to approve the project or the final route.

“We propose two routes to the Commission,” said Maly. “They make the final choice, and also the need of the project.”

Pedretti countered that because Dairyland designs the initial proposals, they dictate where the line ultimately goes. The developers urged the board and citizens to formally intervene in the PSC docket once the application is filed, describing the PSC review as a “quasi-judicial process” where the commissioners rely on the public record.

“The most common thing that I see happen would be that an entity would intervene in the docket,” said Maly, explaining that intervening gives a county or individual legal standing in the proceedings. Maly acknowledged that while they try to accommodate farmers, eminent domain remains a factor if the state approves the route and a landowner refuses to sign an easement.

Environmental and Health Concerns

The potential ecological damage to the unglaciated region was a major point of contention. Supervisor Mary Henry delivered some of the sharpest criticism, explicitly calling out the financial motives behind the project and demanding the utility look at highly developed corridors.

“I mean, we know this is for profit. We know that we’re not stupid, and don’t make us feel like we’re ignorant,” said Henry. “We know those data centers need all of you and you want to get a part of the share of the money. We understand profit.”

Henry highlighted the specific vulnerabilities of the local watersheds, particularly regarding herbicide use under the power lines and the ongoing decommissioning of aging flood control dams.

“If you are doing a 200 to 300 foot swipe on our area, the Driftless, and then you are putting herbicides under those power lines, you are actually doing the opposite of what we need our land owners to do to hold that soil,” said Henry. “We can’t handle decommissioning our dams and putting this power structure up.”

Henry argued that the county receives no tangible benefits while bearing the burden of environmental and esthetic damage.

“I always look at the pros and the cons. I am just not seeing a pro here. I have a whole bunch of cons,” said Henry. “You haven’t given me anything to wrap my hands around in my mind to say that this is a good thing for us. No way, shape or form, health, environmentally and economically, there is nothing.”

“Can you go down the ugly interstate?” continued Henry. “It is already cleared, go down the interstate and leave our property alone. We don’t want you.”

In a recent interview, Jessica Hewitt, a project manager with one of the partners NextEra Energy explained that using the interstate as a corridor for the line is not that simple. Hewitt explained that while the preference is to use linear infrastructure, Interstates are already crowded with utilities. She argued that simply putting the 765 kV line in that corridor is impossible because there is not enough room, which would force the developers to secure an all new easement outside the existing road right-of-way.

“You’re going to have to go outside of the road right-of-way, and now you are impacting homes and businesses,” Hewitt said.

Hewitt noted that the existing 161 kV line owned by Dairyland is aging and needs to be rebuilt regardless. Building a separate line along the Interstate would increase project costs because ratepayers would pay for rebuilding the 161 kV line in its current spot while simultaneously paying for a “greenfield,” or brand new, corridor for the 765 kV line. By contrast, Hewitt was adamant that the current proposal protects structures.

“There will be no homes or businesses taken because of that route, that existing corridor being expanded,” Hewitt said

Supervisor Bruce Kilmer questioned the sudden surge in energy demand and suggested the line was secretly meant to serve massive tech companies.

“Why all of a sudden do we need this big transmission line when I haven’t seen any reliable data that shows our energy needs are going like this,” said Kilmer. “We don’t know what is going on behind the scenes that is driving this.”

Supervisor Martha Olson brought up health concerns specific to the local agricultural economy.

“We have dairy farm in this area and I know of a couple farmers who have had stray voltage issues,” said Olson. “Can you say with certainty that this won’t affect the milk production in this area for the dairy cattle.”

Maly responded that stray voltage is typically a distribution issue rather than a transmission phenomenon, but noted that the state always requires utilities to offer stray voltage testing to confined animal operations near new lines.

Citizens Voice Strong Opposition

During the public comment period, numerous citizens spoke entirely in opposition to the project, taking to the microphone one by one to detail their concerns regarding corporate overreach, health impacts and environmental destruction.

Michael Brown, a resident moving to Viroqua, urged the room to organize and file formally as intervenors rather than just submitting comments. He suggested making the appointment of Public Service Commission members an election issue.

“Dairyland is sitting here saying we don’t control the transmission lines,” said Brown. “There’s a lot of stuff you do control, you have the power.”

Monica Matos of Viroqua compared the utility’s claims of safety to historical corporate assurances regarding cigarettes, asbestos and forever chemicals. She cited medical literature suggesting low level electromagnetic fields harm flora and fauna.

“You can’t recreate an unglaciated landscape that took millions of years to form,” said Matos.

Martina Chamberlin, a former dairy farmer from Franklin Township, echoed concerns about flooding and soil degradation.

“I have never heard of a study for a long term 20 to 40 years that’s gonna put in place that this is okay for us,” said Chamberlin.

Scott Edwards of Viroqua claimed he had worked to mitigate electromagnetic fields in agriculture for two decades. He stated that the extreme low frequencies emitted by 765 kilovolt lines have been shown to collapse fertility rates in cattle and cause cancer in humans.

“These guys are in essence getting away with putting this infrastructure in and it’s a one way ticket,” said Edwards.

Sarah Bratnober of Viroqua warned the board about the next segment of the transmission project managed by a different developer called Transource Inc. DPC representatives acknowledged that little information has been released about that section of the project but they are not involved in that portion of the project. That section of the line was only recently awarded to Transource to develop the Bell Center–Columbia–Sugar Creek–Illinois/Wisconsin State Line 765 kV Competitive Transmission Project (BECI).

“It is very important that you know that the trans source segment is also going to rip through Crawford Vernon and Richland counties,” said Bratnober. “It goes from Bell Center right up past the Kickapoo reserve and right on up to Hillsboro.”

Alan Peterson, a landowner on the Bad Axe River, expressed frustration with the communication process. He stated he sent a detailed letter to Dairyland requesting information about how his floodplain property would be impacted and never received a response.

“You would think with their spirit of cooperation they’d respond to somebody that’s affected as much as I am going to be,” said Peterson.

Tim Woodhouse, a Genoa town patrolman and farmer, said a land agent told him that stopping the line was impossible. He compared the fight to the impossible task of rebuilding local roads after severe valley floods.

“Every time a flood came through the Genoa Bad Axe Valley I looked around in the morning and thought we’re never gonna get these roads back,” said Woodhouse. “That was an impossible situation, everybody rolled up their sleeves, we got the roads back.”

Toby, a resident living along the existing route, raised alarms about the lines crossing directly over homes, drinking wells and feeder trout streams.

“It is ridiculous that we would evolve and think differently than the easy route to follow current lines,” said Toby.

Upcoming Meetings

The debate over the project will continue in several upcoming forums for local government and the public.

Next, the citizen opposition group “No765line” will host a public information meeting on Sunday, Feb. 22. The event will begin at 1 p.m. at the Gays Mills Community Commerce Center (16381 Hwy 131) and will feature expert speakers on property valuation and eminent domain.

Finally, Dairyland and GridLiance will host two modified open houses in March:

• March 10: Gays Mills Community Center, 11 a.m. – 1 p.m. and 4 p.m. – 7 p.m.
• March 12: Retreat Sportsman’s Club in De Soto, 11 a.m. – 1 p.m. and 4 p.m. – 7 p.m.