To Lease Or Not To Lease. That Is The Big SCARY Question.

Do you wonder why Ameren's recent response to the FERC order from July of 2011 was a request for "clarification"? Well, if you realize that on June 8, 2009, the FERC put out an order that was an "ORDER CONDITIONALLY APPROVING CONVEYANCES FOR NON PROJECT USE OF LANDS", (the document is located on the side bar if you would like to review it in it's entirety; look for FERC ORDER June, 2009) then it could appear that Ameren wanted to make absolute certain and have complete clarification that the FERC intended for Ameren to honor the ORDER from 2009 to LEASE BACK PRIVATE PROPERTY OWNERS HOMES TO THEM before it turned the lake on its ear with the idea of pushing leases for "encroaching structures".

Taken directly from
FERC Order issued on June 08, 2009


#4. Page 2:
Ameren is proposing to grant conditional lease agreements to the eight single family dwelling property owners with buildings either totally or partially in the project boundary. However, we understand that these eight buildings have been in this location since the 1960s, and it was recently discovered that these were located in the project boundary.

Unbelievable. Some 50 years later there is some huge revelation and now all rules are changed? I wonder if Ameren can show with specificity that they have paid the tax bill on all eight of these structures for the past 50 years? If not, it can be fairly assessed that there should be an adverse possession claim for these properties based on the fact the taxes have been kept current by property owners through "tacking" for 50 years.

#12. Page 3

....A vegetative buffer along the shoreline would provide a visual buffer for lake users from the development. Providing more of a buffer would benefit the water quality of the lake and provide mitigation for the location of these properties, and their lawns, and associated development inside the project boundaries.

There would be required ,as a condition of this lease, a visual buffer so lake users would not be bothered by having to look at these houses. It would be at the property owners expense and full obligation to protect the lake users from having to look at these homes that have been there for 50 years. The Commission believes the priority should be to protect those "lake users" while keeping their utmost responsibility to the overall public who use the lake for recreation. At the same time they promise to potentially infringe on private property owners by ruining their views, impeding their private access, and giving them no say in what their preferences might be on how they want their lots to look because the FERC "does not allow for the interests of private property owners to override the public use and enjoyment of project lands and waters" according to them in their own words.

The order goes on to instruct Ameren to prepare and file a shoreline vegetation and erosion control plan and to ensure that the licensee is not stepping outside of the very specific guidelines Ameren will have to follow in order to "manage and control" said properties. The FERC, by way of the order, says Ameren will have these rights when it comes to the property being leased.

#14. Page 4

1. Grantor reserves the right of ingress and egress for project operation and maintenance, and to affect the premises by flowage.
2. Grantee would ensure that the structures are maintained in good repair...

3. Grantee would cooperate with all federal, state, and local laws ordinances and regulations.

In reading the FERC order and the request for rehearing from Ameren, the directive of leasing and managing encroaching structures is used over and over again. With leases come yearly fees. Make no mistake this will cost private property owners big. And with the FERCs recent press release telling us that it had no intention to adversely affect private property owners....then it must be asked what they consider private property owners to be if owners who have paid taxes on residences since the early 1960s do not make their radar. We are all in trouble if these homeowners somehow do not count.

FERC does grant "conditional" approval of the leases. However, UNDERSTAND what happened to those property owners who had leases on Crescent Bar Island in Washington state....

FERC has just order the removal of 400 condominiums and is not willing to renew their leases. Based on the happenings in the state of Washington and their experience with how leases can go bad when dealing with FERC know this should never be an option for owners at Lake of the Ozarks, know that you have rights as private property owners. There is a magnificent document called the Constitution that governs us and has for years, the fifth amendment is powerful. Read it. Inscribe it in your heart. And, then do not let anyone talk you into "leasing or managing" something that is already yours. Stand united. Get educated. Know the truth.