March 15, 2026
By TIM HUNDT
VERNON COUNTY, Wis. – The Vernon County Conservation and Education Committee unanimously approved a resolution Thursday, March 12 formally opposing the construction of the MariBell Transmission Project in the Driftless Area.
The proposed project is a joint venture between Dairyland Power Cooperative and GridLiance Heartland to build a massive high voltage transmission line. The line would carry 765 kilovolts of electricity on steel towers up to 200 feet tall from Marion Minnesota to Bell Center Wisconsin. Developers expect to submit a formal application to the Public Service Commission of Wisconsin by the summer or fall of 2026. The state commission holds the ultimate authority to approve or deny the project and select the final route.
At the Vernon County Board of Supervisors meeting on March 19 the board is expected to review up to three different resolutions representing different strategies for how local government should fight the utility companies.
DRAFT OF PROPOSED RESOLUTION
VERNON COUNTY, WISCONSIN
RESOLUTION NO. 2026‑15
A RESOLUTION OPPOSING THE PROPOSED HIGH‑VOLTAGE TRANSMISSION LINE THROUGH VERNON COUNTY AND THE DRIFTLESS AREA
WHEREAS, Vernon County lies within the nationally recognized Driftless Area, a uniquely fragile landscape defined by steep ridges, cold‑water trout streams, karst geology, and highly erodible soils that are particularly vulnerable to large‑scale infrastructure disturbance; and
WHEREAS, the proposed high‑voltage transmission line would require extensive clearing, construction corridors, blasting, and long‑term maintenance that would fragment wildlife habitat, disrupt agricultural lands, and permanently alter the natural character of the region; and
WHEREAS, Vernon County’s agricultural economy depends on productive farmland, livestock operations, and regenerative farming systems that could be adversely affected by land fragmentation, easement restrictions, soil disruption, and concerns regarding electromagnetic field (EMF) exposure to livestock; and
WHEREAS, Vernon County is home to one of the largest Amish communities in Wisconsin, whose farms and homesteads lie within the proposed transmission corridor and whose religious practices do not utilize electricity, and the placement of a high‑voltage transmission line across their properties would impose infrastructure from which they receive no benefit while restricting land use and disrupting traditional agricultural operations; and
WHEREAS, property owners face potential declines in land value and long‑term uncertainty, and Vernon County’s tourism economy—driven by its scenic beauty, trout streams, outdoor recreation opportunities, and rural character—would be negatively affected; and
WHEREAS, Vernon County is currently engaged in watershed restoration and dam decommissioning efforts within the Coon Creek and West Fork watersheds, and the cumulative impacts of additional large‑scale infrastructure development must be carefully considered;
NOW. THEREFORE. BE IT RESOLVED,
That the Vernon County Board of Supervisors formally and unequivocally opposes the high-voltage transmission line within Vernon County and the Driftless Area, finding that this region is not suitable for such development and that the project poses substantial risks to public health, safety and welfare, as well to the environmental integrity, agricultural viability, economic stability and cultural resources.
Supervisor Mary Henry authored the resolution presented to the conservation committee which unequivocally opposes the project. Her draft states that the region is not suitable for the development and that the project poses substantial risks to public health environmental integrity and the agricultural and tourism economies.
During the meeting Henry detailed her efforts to lobby state officials and warned that rural areas are being targeted to feed power hungry tech developments.
“I brought up those concerns,” said Henry. “Locals have gotten involved and they have been able to stop some of these data centers from popping up when that land has already been bought.”
Henry argued that officials need to look at the entire picture of environmental degradation including the risk of herbicide runoff from the cleared utility corridors entering local watersheds that are currently undergoing dam decommissioning.
“When you are looking at one you better think of the whole big picture because it is a huge problem that we are being faced with in our state,” said Henry. “They want what we value so highly, our resources and our beauty and our four seasons.”
Henry also announced she had been working with state lawmakers Tara Johnson and Brad Pfaff on a legislative bill to establish new siting priorities for mega transmission systems. The bill would force utilities to maximize the use of existing highway and railroad corridors or bury the lines underground before cutting new paths through rural landscapes.
“I feel like we have got to get something is better than nothing to be proactive,” said Henry. “If we wait for every county to get something on the books we might be too late.”
Supervisor Dave Eggen expressed support for Henry’s aggressive approach noting it was a more polished version of his own desires.
“Getting back to preventing this power line,” said Eggen. “My resolution was stay the hell out of Vernon County. Mary’s used much more finesse.”
The outright opposition approach contrasts with a separate strategy developed during recent General Government Committee meetings. During those sessions supervisors debated whether demanding detailed information from the developers would be a more effective legal strategy than simply saying no.
Supervisor Wayde Lawler had previously argued that an information request creates a necessary paper trail for state regulators to review.
“A request for information is a reasonable request,” said Lawler. “If we immediately put ourselves in the hardest corner we can find which is to say absolutely not under no circumstances I think that is much easier to dismiss out of hand.”
Local energy researcher and potentially impacted landowner Rob Danielson attended the conservation committee meeting to help supervisors understand how the different resolutions fit into the overall regulatory timeline. Danielson explained that an information request resolution forces the developers to respond to specific concerns on the public record before their application is finalized.
“The information request resolution is really aimed at putting the developer on notification that there will be various standards of information that will be required for the county to get the information that they need,” said Danielson. “In the end we do not have statute at this point to oppose a transmission line as a municipality or county on the basis of whatever we want to say.”
Danielson warned that the timeline is accelerating and the county must prepare to formally intervene in the state proceedings. Intervening gives the county legal standing to submit expert testimony and demand documents during the review process.
“You can do both,” said Danielson. “You can ask for information request and future preparations for intervention or helpful to know for the county to know that information.”
The county board will debate the merits of both the outright opposition resolution and the information request resolution at their upcoming meeting. Neighboring Crawford and Richland County’s have already unanimously passed an information request resolution demanding the utilities provide detailed routing maps and environmental mitigation plans.
We appreciate you following this topic and keeping us informed. Thanks