Some Sutter County rice farmers and other Mid-Valley residents were far from enamored Monday with making 150-foot-tall electrical transmission towers a new regional crop.

At a town hall meeting in Marysville to hear public comment, the Transmission Agency of Northern California got a skeptical, if not downright frosty, reception to two of its alternatives for a new transmission line.

About 50 people attended the meeting in the Yuba County Government Center, many of them owning land in Yuba or Sutter counties the proposed transmission line would cross.

Power routed through the lines would not directly benefit the Mid-Valley.

"Why are you stepping on the people that are already here?" asked Mike Shannon, a Sutter County rice farmer who noted that the decision process for where the transmission line will take future housing development plans into account. "You've not made one notation about the agricultural industry."

The three proposed lines would each go through mostly rural and agricultural areas. A central one would go near the Sutter Buttes, a western one would hug the foothills near Interstate 5 in Colusa County, and an eastern option would come through central Yuba County before jutting west near 40 Mile Road.

Gary Bell, another Sutter County rice farmer, said the central route made little sense because it would cross the highly visible Sutter Buttes and a wildlife preserve.

He added, "If you give us $10,000 for the right of way on our property, it means nothing."

Officials with TANC and the Western Area Power Administration emphasized that the process for selecting a transmission route is in its early stages, with no final decision to be made for at least two years.

"We could get to the end of the process and decide it isn't going to work," added Bryan Griess, an assistant general manager with the tran mission agency.

But that didn't seem to placate many of those who attended the meeting, all of them with concerns about the central or eastern routes.

Farmers had concerns the new towers would make cropdusting their fields dangerous if not impossible, while others said they hadn't received much, if any, notification that the lines would cross their land.

Pam Clifton, a Sutter County resident who lives near the Buttes, said she barely got notice before an initial deadline to make public comment, since extended.

"We're very concerned that there are a lot of people who will be crying after the fact when they just didn't know," she said.

A Plumas Lake homeowner worried that even if the new lines were only nearby, they'd drastically harm the value of her property.

And Frances Hofman, a south Yuba County ranch owner, said officials with TANC and WAPA weren't being forthcoming with information.

"I think going through my land with three parallel lines already is inexcusable," she said. "We're entitled to get leftovers in this process, and that's what we're getting: leftovers."

The transmission line, wherever it's built, will require rights of way the length of two football fields, and will have both towers and substations.

Construction isn't supposed to start on the line for several years, if it's approved at all.

What's Next

• May 31: End of public comment period on the environmental impact report/ environmental impact statement for the transmission line.

Comments can be submitted to Mr. David Young, NEPA Document Manager, Western Area Power Administration, Sierra Nevada Region, 114 Parkshore Drive, Folsom, CA 95630; by fax to 916-353-4772; or by e-mail to TTPEIS@wapa.gov.

• Spring 2010: Draft EIR/ EIS released, followed by further public comment period

• Spring 2011: Final EIR/ EIS released.

Contact Appeal-Democrat reporter Ben van der Meer at 749-4709 or bvandermeer@appealdemocrat.com