Transmission line eminent domain fight leaves Supreme Court with no decision to make

Electric project would have stretched from OK panhandle to Arkansas

 

The Oklahoma Supreme Court decided this week on another eminent domain case involving landowners and a major transmission line.

The ruling concerned the eminent domain used by Transource as it attempted to develop the Sooner-Wekiwa Project, a new overhead electric transmission line 76 miles in length from OGE’s Sooner Substation in Noble County to Public Service Company of Oklahoma’s Wekiwa substation in Tulsa County.

The Sooner-Wekiwa Project will reportedly increase consumer access to more affordable power in Oklahoma as well as parts of Arkansas, Missouri, Texas and Louisiana. The Southwest Power Pool (SPP) awarded Transource the opportunity to construct the electric transmission line in Oklahoma to address deficiencies in the electric grid and improve consumer access to low-cost power.

In May of 2023, Transource went to Tulsa County District Court to use eminent domain to condemn land owned by Eric and Susan Pierce of Tulsa so it could obtain a right-of-way easement. A judge ruled in October of 2023, “Court finds that Plaintiff has the lawful ability to exercise the power of eminent domain.”

The three Tulsa County Commissioners appointed by the court gave an award of $40,000 to the landowners. The case was appealed to the Supreme Court but this month, Transource filed a motion to rescind the commissioners’ award.

“Transource has not taken possession of the easement it condemned across the Pierce’s property and Transource has elected to release the easement, as it will not be crossing the Pierce’s property with its electric transmission line project,” stated the company in a new court filing this month.

The filing also explained the Pierces had not withdrawn the $40,000 commissioners’ award and it remained on deposit with the court clerk.

With the Transource filing and decision not to take the land, the Supreme Court on Tuesday issued a ruling that the “appeal is dismissed for lack of an appealable order” and the “Court lacks jurisdiction to proceed.”

End of case.