765 kV Transmission Line in Wisconsin: What We Know, What We Don't Know, and Next Steps

WFU members across the state have many questions about the proposed 765kV transmission lines in Wisconsin. To support their strategy, this article contains an overview of basic information on the lines, a review of the grid and transmission approval process, an outline of pros and cons regarding the proposed transmission project, and an overview of WFU’s strategy.

Overview of BECI and MariBell Lines

“The proposed MariBell Transmission Project is an approximately 140-mile, 765 kilovolt (kV)/161 kV double circuit transmission line developed by American-owned companies, Dairyland Power Cooperative and GridLiance Heartland. It will stretch from Marion, Minn., to Bell Center, Wis., crossing through Olmsted, Mower, Fillmore and Houston counties in Minnesota, and Vernon and Crawford counties in Wisconsin. This project is part of a larger effort by the Midcontinent Independent System Operator (MISO), the regional transmission organization covering 15 states and the Canadian province of Manitoba, to maintain a resilient and flexible electric grid. This project is being developed in close consultation with landowners, Tribal Nations, local governments and conservationists. MariBell is expected to be in service by 2034.” According to Dairyland Power Cooperative and GridLiance Heartland LLC

“The BECI project is an approximately 190-mile, 765-kV project in Wisconsin connecting electric facilities in Crawford County with facilities in Walworth County before continuing to the state line. The exact connection point at the state line has not been determined because the connecting transmission line in Illinois is under development by another utility,” according to Midcontinent Grid Solutions.

MariBell and BECI constitute one line across the state with MariBell starting at the Minnesota border and being managed by Dairyland Power Cooperative and GridAlliance while the BECI line is being managed by private developer, Midcontinent Grid Solutions (MGS)

Grid 101

Large scale energy generation is handled in the U.S. by the power market called the Midcontinent Independent System Operator (MISO) which began operating in 2005. 

Although Wisconsin is only one of the 15 states MISO covers, it’s relevant to the discussion of the MariBell/BECI line because MISO has identified the need for generation and transmission, and is under the oversight of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (their identified need is summarized in the National Needs Transmission Study). 

From the large transmission routes, member utilities (e.g., Dairyland Power Cooperative, Alliant Energy) manage power input to their substations and deliver the electricity to their customers (e.g., businesses and homes). While MISO is regulated by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). Investor-owned utilities in Wisconsin are regulated by the Public Service Commission of Wisconsin (PSCW). Cooperatives like Dairyland Power and rural electric cooperatives are only regulated by the PSCW in some circumstances (including large scale transmission). 

The Sales Pitch for 765 kV Lines

The main job of MISO is to make sure that power is reliably available across their market and to ensure that costs are efficiently managed within their region. 

MISO reports that with increasing projected electricity demand they are seeing higher congestion and utility rates in the midwest. This is their main justification for the need for more lines.  To ensure their second goal of affordability, they put forth a bidding process for the expansion of their lines and took bids from multiple contractors. Under their reports, they assert that the “Tranche 2.1” set of 24 new lines will result in net monthly savings for the average Wisconsin ratepayers.

According to Clean Wisconsin’s discussions with the Wisconsin Farmers Union, although these 765 kV lines are bigger than anything we’ve seen in the state so far (175 feet tall and 180 feet of horizontal right of way on the ground), they represent a smaller footprint than arrays of smaller lines that would carry similar loads. This has not been confirmed through other sources. 

Reimbursement to the Communities Affected

Sales pitch, continued

As we’ve seen with wind and solar projects, reimbursement to communities affected by transmission projects is built into Wisconsin state policy through Impact Fees to the transmission developers. These Impact Fees are regulated by PSCW and shared between counties and townships in the affected counties. Unlike Utility Aid payments for generation projects which come to townships through state taxes, Impact Fees must be applied for and approved by the PSCW. This information was obtained through correspondence with staff at Clean Wisconsin.

Available payments are calculated to be a one-time payment equal to 5% of the total project construction cost and then annual payments thereafter of .3% of project cost.

This is graphic was created by Clean Wisconsin as an estimate of the payments to WI hosting towns, villages, and counties based on MISO initial project cost estimates

Why Are Some Environmental Groups Supportive of Transmission Projects?

Experts in renewable energy have long noted that the country’s aging electrical grid is a challenge for getting renewable energy where it is in demand. The goal is to connect under-utilized or stranded assets like wind farms in the Dakotas that don’t have transmission hooked up to get the power to major cities. For this reason as well as the general age of the grid, large transmission projects have been invested in by the last two federal administrations as necessary to improvements to the grid and have been supported by both political parties. 

Questioning Assumptions of the Sales Pitch

Beyond pushback from locals, there are significant concerns with the new transmission lines and reason to proceed with caution:

1. Questioning if MISO’s forecasts are accurate: David Pattoin of Potomoc Economics has some of the most documented concerns of MISO’s reports. He suggests that the 2024 Regional Resource Assessment:

   1. overstates the need and projections of demand growth

   2. undervalues potential of demand response, behind-the-meter generation, and firm capacity 

   3. Assumes fossil fuel retirements that haven’t happened

   4. Overstates the intermittency of renewables without accommodating for battery storage and dispatchable resources

   5. Overdependence on renewable energy

2. Likelihood of conflicts of interest: Investor-owned utilities represent regulated monopolies that have a guaranteed rate of return on equity that is significantly higher than average debt. In simpler terms, that means that utilities can make money by over-investing in large projects that accrue high returns on equity.

   1. Since 2021 utility bills have increased by 40% in Wisconsin while 15% of those bills pay directly for the profits of the investor owners of investor-owned utilities.

   2. Experience across the state by WFU members highlights that utilities do not support behind-the-meter generation like rooftop solar, although this is widely agreed by many to be the preferred generation, it is not advantageous to utilities to have customers become providers of the product they sell. This leads to underinvestment in distributed generation opportunities.

How Can Locals Interact with the PSCW Process to Make Change?

Because these large projects are considered in the public interest, the Public Service Commission of Wisconsin (PSCW) preempts local zoning ordinances. NOTE: this supersedure of state authority over local control is also the case for other public interest projects including cell towers, energy generation, and more. High-voltage transmission lines of 100 kV or more must receive a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity (CPCN) from the PSCW before being built. This requires an application process that can take up to a year for review after the full application is submitted. 

This application process has multiple comment periods and a legal intervention method for stakeholders to engage and make changes. NOTE: comment periods and intervention are not considered effective options to fully stop a project; at best, they commonly make improvements to projects based on local and expert input.  To learn more about this process, you can visit the PSCW website on public participation. 

As of September of 2026, no application has been filed for the MariBell or BECI projects. To prepare for that time, here are some tips provided by University of Wisconsin - Department of Extension on engaging through comments and testimony: 

• Identify yourself and your relation to the docket/project.   

• Be specific about your concern.

• Explain the basis for your opinion and knowledge. 

• Propose an alternative.

• Use the comment periods - don’t comment before the application/CPCN is filed

How Can Locals Work Outside the PSCW Process to Make Change?

Beyond just working within the identified comment periods and intervention of the PSCW, local leaders can advocate for community protections and benefits through negotiation of a contract which goes by many names but is often called a Community Benefits Agreement (CBA). 

Negotiating a CBA can help communities ensure that specific areas of concern are addressed and investments beyond the minimum standard are made by the developer. As organizers work to halt projects, WFU strongly encourages leaders to also prepare a list of their priorities and find pathways to communicate with developers if the project does proceed. Leaders across the state call this the belt and suspenders approach. 

More information on CBA’s as well as a database of existing CBAs in the United States is available through the Columbia Law School Sabin Center.

Wisconsin Farmers Union Policy on Energy Transmission

While WFU acknowledges that some grid updates and potential expansions may be necessary to keep energy accessible, affordable, and reliable to Wisconsinites, we demand oversight of the utility monopolies to ensure that efficiency, demand response, and distributed generation are fully analyzed for feasibility by third-party contractors without financial stake in the development of projects. 

Beyond advocating for study of feasible alternatives, WFU supports the state adopting Integrated Resource Planning (IRP) in order to allow for a systemic review by the state for need and planning within the state. 

WFU’s transmission policy is robust and can be found on pages 39 - 46 of the 2026 policy book and you can find our policy brief on transmission online. 

WFU Strategy to Support Members

• Comment to the PSCW: WFU will be taking direction from members to develop a comprehensive letter to the PSCW to address member concerns and identify potential solutions or alternatives. Comments and ideas can be submitted to Director of Conservation & Stewardship, Tara Greiman.

• Continuing Advocacy for Energy Efficiency: WFU staff continue to advocate for distributed generation and efficiency programs in the state as well as for incorporation of Integrated Resource Planning to the PSCW. 

• Programming: Conservation & Stewardship staff can assist with delivering local programs to help organize around transmission and energy topics in the state. These programs can focus on education to lay a foundation of understanding to help community members engage strategically and effectively or can go to the next step of facilitating conversation between local stakeholders to identify and support action items. To provide context and strategize next steps with members, a webinar of this information and member experience with intervention was held for members on September 10, 2026. The recording is available here. 

• Chapter Network: WFU members across the state are organizing around this topic. If you are interested in getting updates from members or giving updates on what’s happening on the ground locally, you can contact your local chapter or the State Office. 

---

Wisconsin Farmers Union is a member-driven organization. If you have comments, concerns, or questions regarding transmission, energy, or stewardship, please contact Tara Greiman tgreiman@wisconsinfarmersunion.com 715-492-0329