The Plot Thickens...

As the FERC period for comment has ended lots of people have many questions about where we go from here.  I tell those people continue to grow our army with the truth…that is where we go from here.  Get the word out and wait for the marching orders.  We are not going anywhere.  We know how to fight and plan to.  As defenders of the Constitution (particularly the 5^th amendment) we won’t go quietly, that is a promise.

When revisiting some of the key phrases and words of the FERC and Ameren as of late, we must remember the truth that shadows these words and get the word out.

In a press release right after the first of the year from Jeff Green of Ameren addresses how swiftly Ameren is working to seek a solution for the “encroaching structures” built on the “Ameren Missouri-owned strip of land surrounding the Lake’s shoreline.

“The new FERC order clarifies the agency’s position regarding structures within the Project Boundary – an elevation-based, Ameren Missouri-owned strip of land surrounding the Lake’s shoreline.”

This statement from Ameren is offensive.  They double speak to the public over and over again.  They continually refer to the project boundary as property they own “fee simple”. ( Fee simple, by the way, means absolute ownership.)  Yet, they have NEVER paid a penny of taxes on this property and do not intend to.  Yes, you read that right.  On a recent radio debate between Jeff Green and myself on 2/2/2012 (  go here to listen:  http://www.krmsradio.com/mp3/FEB-2012-SHOWS/dircast.phpine ) we had the discussion on whether Ameren has ever paid taxes on the “Ameren Missouri-owned strip of land”.  He admitted that they do not because it is something that your deed says you, the property owner, have to do.  He is right.  However, what he failed to remember is that the part of the deed above  the part about the taxes says that you have the right “to use the surface of said lands, whether submerged or not, for any and all purposes what-so-ever, including the erection and maintenance of improvements thereon.”  As a condition of this easement it goes on to say you cannot interfere with the maintenance or operation of the dam and that you must pay your taxes on said improvements and lands.  Yet, isn’t it funny how Ameren has the power to take  one part of a deed and tell you that you have to abide by that part (the part about you paying their taxes), however, they can negate the part about what you get in exchange for paying those taxes (the easement that has been enjoyed for decades). 

See, even Ameren acknowledges to the FERC in their January 15, 2012 request for a boundary line amendment that they ALLOWED for those successors and assigns (you and me) to access and CONSTRUCT (gasp) in the project boundary. 

If you take the time to listen to that radio show I mentioned above you will find it interesting that Jeff Green argued with me that the easement did not mean “build” anything in the project boundary.  Someone may need to tell him to read Ameren’s own words in 2.1 of their request for the boundary amendment because it clearly spells out the FACT that UED (Union Electric) conveyed its ENTIRE OWNERSHIP INTEREST IN PORTIONS OF THE PROPERTIES BELOW VARIOUS ELEVATIONS…..(Most notable)UED RESERVED AN EASEMENT FOR THE BENEFIT OF ITS SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS TO ALLOW ACCESS AND CONSTRUCTION WITHIN THE PROJECT BOUNDARY.  Thus making any notion of an "encroachment" not possible because those structures constructed were ALLOWED to be there!!!  Ameren says so in this document.

Read it here: http://www.ameren.com/sites/aue/lakeoftheozarks/Documents/AmerenBoundaryAmendmentApplication-AppendixA.pdf

2.1 Fee Acquisition

UED purchased entire tracts of undeveloped and predominantly agricultural property. As the Dam and reservoir construction were completed, UED conveyed its entire ownership interest in portions of the properties below various elevations to UELP for the operations of the Project. In this conveyance, UED also granted UELP flooding easement over the remainder of its retained property. Significantly, and subject to certain limitations, UED reserved an easement for the benefit of its successors and assigns to allow access and construction within the UELP Property or Project boundary. Under an order from the Securities & Exchange Commission, UED sold the remainder of the property outside of the project boundary to private owners (UED's successors in title) subject to the flooding easement granted to UELP and conveyed to those successors the rights retained to allow access and construction on the lands within the Project boundary; however, such uses are subordinate to Project purposes.

Did you get that?  Ameren, of all things, mentions the FACT that they allowed access and construction within the project boundary.  Gasp.  They mentioned that FACT twice!  Twice in one paragraph!  So if they ALLOWED construction is there even such thing as an “encroachment”?  The answer is NO!

Why did they finally fess up to this you ask?  Because Ameren had not been forthcoming with these very relevant facts prior, the FERC looked like the Big Bad Wolf when they ordered the removal of 4500 structures, including homes, removed from the project boundary they were led to believe Ameren owned.  The public was outraged, thus the politicians in Washington, DC went on a head hunt.  Ameren went on record many times saying that they did not realize people were building in "their project boundary", but somehow that apparently was not that believable to the FERC.  When you look at how the FERC shredded Ameren in November of 2012 with an order they first scolded Ameren and forced them to tell the truth because things were not adding up for the FERC :

http://www.ferc.gov/media/news-releases/2011/2011-4/11-10-11-factsheet.asp

Factsheet:November10,2011
UnionElectricCompany
Docket No. P-459-310/Osage

“Over many years, Ameren failed to carry out this obligation. Ameren’s repeated failure to properly implement the terms of its license has allowed matters to get to the point where it does not even know exactly what structures have been built within the project boundary and whether they were authorized. FERC recognizes that Ameren’s failures have left local property owners in an extremely difficult position.”

The FERC goes on to say:

“Whatever property rights that owners have in lands within the boundaries of the Osage Project, whether conferred by deed, lease, easement or other conveyance, have not been and will not be altered by FERC’s actions today. Nothing in this order affects any previously issued valid permit authorizing a non-project use of project lands or waters.”

So the FERC acknowledges that “whatever property rights that owners have in lands within boundaries of the project (project boundary), have NOT BEEN and WILL NOT BE ALTERED BY FERC’S actions.  They make a point to say that NOTHING IN THIS ORDER AFFECTS ANY PREVIOUSLY ISSUED VALID PERMITS AUTHORIZING A NON-PROJECT USE OF PROJECT LANDS OR WATERS.”

So, the key word in the sentence here is “valid”.  What does the FERC consider “valid”?  Do they acknowledge the FACT in 2.1 that Ameren by their own admission in their words ,” reserved an easement for the benefit of its successors and assigns(you and me the property owner) to allow access and construction within the UELP Property or Project boundary”?   How much more “valid” does one get than Ameren acknowledging that this right was conveyed by their predecessor and has been enjoyed for decades as spelled out in the DEEDS? 

In the next edict of the FERC to Ameren they say:

“For structures without valid deeds, permits or easements, Ameren must determine whether they interfere with the Osage project. If they do, Ameren must take some action, such as redrawing the boundaries of the project, so those structures no longer are sitting on project lands. This would put them outside of the project boundaries and therefore outside of FERC jurisdiction. “

The question you ask?  What do they mean by “interfere with the Osage Project”?  Do they mean interfere with the operation and maintenance of the dam?  Or do they leave subjectivity to the interpretation of this sentence to Ameren?  Pretty vague if you ask me.  However, the FERC says Ameren MUST take some action!!  They say that Ameren must take those properties out of the project boundary and outside of the FERC jurisdiction. 

So as you start to get the warm fuzzy feeling about the FERC and how nice they are to watch out for you, we are jolted back to reality and left feeling confused yet again when Ameren makes a statement such as this in a recent press release:

“The proposed boundary change does not change current property ownership.”

Like I said, don’t breathe a sigh of relief just yet.  Understand that Ameren means their current property ownership, not yours.   Clearly by ignoring your easement, calling your home an "encroachment",  and “letting” you pay the taxes on “their” project boundary your rights have been changed.  Make no mistake about that.  Whether legal or not, that is where our opinion differs from Ameren.  We believe that Ameren has violated our 5^th amendment to the Constitution in taking the property from us that they need in order to implement the SMP.  However, we have not been compensated for the property we pay our taxes on and fairly compensated for the taking of the rights that our deeds have entitled us to for decades.    

In a recent article illustrating that Ameren has a LOAN in the hundreds of millions of dollars on the project boundary in your back yard, understand that Ameren cannot give away or change the rights on something they do not own.  They do not have that authority because they do not own that ground to change current property ownership.  This further complicates an already devastating situation here at our lake.  Ameren never brought this information to light.  An attorney found this information in a search.  When asked about the LOAN ON THE PROJECT BOUNDARY Ameren officials have admitted to it.

Read about the loan on the project boundary here:  http://lakebusjournal.com


There are petitions out there right now demanding the 660 contour and the respect for our property rights by acknowledging our deeds of record.   We want the 660 with quit claim deeds, and deeds of release from Ameren's bank.  That is the only way to know the property you pay taxes on is really yours.  We plan to gather thousands of signatures and have an incredible start.

Look for a link to the petition at www.lakeareaconservativeclub.org.  Also, you will find petitions at Lake Office Supply on highway 5 in Camdenton next to Save-A-Lot.  We have foot soldiers that always have them on their person, and you can always call Cliff for a location near you.  We have a game plan.  We are not going away.  We will stand united to protect our Constitution and what is ours.