Columbia City Council Work Session on Transmission Line Needs - February 9, 2026
Columbia City Council Work Session on Transmission Line Needs - February 9, 2026
The City Council held a work session on February 9, 2026, to discuss the need for a new 161 kilovolt transmission line connecting the Perche Creek substation to the Grindstone substation. The session focused on two proposed routes, their cost estimates, historical context, and the risks of inaction. Council did not vote but agreed to seek feedback from the Water and Light Advisory Board before providing direction.
Discussion Items
- Utilities Director Aaron Keyes presented the necessity of the transmission line to ensure safe, reliable, and cost-effective power for Columbia, supporting residential, commercial, and industrial customers, as well as importing renewable energy. He stated the need will only grow with city growth and electrical load increase.
- Two routes were detailed by Electric Engineering Supervisor Eric Wirtz:
- Voder School Nifong Grindstone route (green, former Option A): estimated cost of $34.9 million, co-located along existing roadways, 0.5 mile longer than the alternative.
- Chapel Hill route (blue): estimated cost of $56 million, co-located with an existing 69 kV line requiring pole replacement and significant undergrounding of distribution lines; the route cuts through parking lots, front yards, and backyards.
- Updated cost estimates were provided by Black & Veatch at a 90% confidence level for transmission work; distribution costs are less certain. Undergrounding the entire line would cost 5–8 times more.
- Remaining bond authority totals $29.8 million, with an additional $3.5 million available from other bond funds, leaving a $1.6 million gap for the Voder School route or a $22.7 million gap for the Chapel Hill route. Issuing bonds would require rate increases beyond planned annual increments.
- The project's history was reviewed: proposed in 2013, a 2016 public hearing led to a pause, and the Integrated Electric Resource and Master Plan task force (2019-2022) recommended the Chapel Hill route. Staff recommended the Voder School route as the most cost-effective and reliable option.
- Council members discussed aesthetic concerns, property value impacts, health worries, and the need for redundancy. The Chapel Hill route was noted to be less redundant since it follows the same corridor as an existing line. Staff clarified that load shedding remains a small but growing risk, and delays increase future costs and project duration (8–10 years).
- A closed session was held to discuss specific risks and load shedding contingencies. Upon return, staff answered questions about relationships with neighboring utilities (MISO, SERC) and the remaining bond funding.
- Council discussed next steps: choosing a route and initiating the public improvement process (multiple public meetings, a public hearing, then design). Some members suggested waiting for the Water and Light Advisory Board's feedback, which will be presented at the February 16 regular council meeting.
Key Outcomes
- No formal vote was taken; council reached consensus to wait for the Water and Light Advisory Board's recommendation on February 16 before giving staff direction on which route to pursue.
- Staff will present a communications plan and a history roadmap for the project at the next council meeting.
- City Manager noted that feedback from the Advisory Board will be heard during staff comments on February 16, after which council will provide direction on proceeding with a public improvement process for the transmission line.
Meeting Transcript
Oh okay, there we go. All right, since it's a work session, I don't bang the gavel, so I apologize for you me not banging y'all into order. But I will go ahead and call our February 9th, 2026 work session to order. We have one major item on our agenda, which is the discussion around our transmission line needs. Um, and then we have an opportunity to go into closed session. I will make a note that if we go into closed session, council will go into another room outside of this room so y'all can hang out here because we can then come back to this room to continue open session before we end the meeting. So I just say that for those of you who are sitting in the audience or watching online to come back in so that you know we are going to come back to this space. All right, so I'm gonna go ahead and kick this over to Aaron Keyes, our director of the utilities. So, Aaron, take it away. Well, good evening. Uh again, I'm Aaron Keys, the utilities director. I have a number of staff with me here tonight. Uh Gwen Korches, our assistant director for electric, David Storvick, our electric engineering manager, and Eric Wirtz, our electric engineering supervisor. And we are here to talk about the transmission line project. So, why does Columbia need this transmission line project to continue to provide safe, reliable, and cost effective power to the City of Columbia electric customers. We need a 161 kilovolt transmission line that connects Perchese Creek substation to grindstone substation. The need for this transmission line will not go away. The need for the transmission line project will only continue to grow as our city grows and as our electrical load grows. The transmission line will benefit all customers of Columbia, residential, commercial, industrial. The transmission line will benefit the importing of renewable energy, and it will benefit long-term reliability. The dozens of other routes and options that have been studied provide less reliability and have significantly more costs than the two that are proposed. Staff does not believe that load shedding or rolling blackouts are an acceptable solution. Load shed will always be a potential, even with a new transmission line. We acknowledge that load shedding is a small risk at this time, but that risk continues to increase with the difficult conditions in energy markets, very significant power supply challenges in Missouri, and overall lack of electric infrastructure in our state. So when a severe cold snap or hot spell happens and our system has to shed load, many of our residents will be impacted. And once that single issue resolves, and then customers demand that we fix that problem, it will take about eight to ten years and be more expensive than it is now. Our staff takes a lot of pride in providing the best possible and most reliable solutions for our community that we're serving. And we'd like to do so before an event like that occurs. Staff recommends the Voder School Niphon Grindstone route as the most cost-effective, efficient, reliable, and overall best option to construct. There are people unhappy with that proposed location and the and the impacts. That will not change. It doesn't matter what location gets chosen. Wherever we locate this transmission line, there will be some people unhappy about the location and the impacts. Staff is evaluating costs and risks. This project is for the reliability of the entire Columbia system, including our residential customers and our commercial and industrial customers that provide the jobs and services for this entire community. This project also impacts all of our closest electric neighbors, the University of Missouri, Fulton, and Boone Electric and Central Electric. In 2024, staff revisited with council a request to proceed with a transmission line project from Perchy substation to grindstone substation. At that time, staff was directed to update the cost estimates for Voter School NIFON Grindstone route and the Chapel Hill route. To provide a reasonable estimate, the consultant had to perform some significant design work to develop the construction of material costs. We are here tonight providing these estimates. Knowing that we have some council members that were not part of the last council work session, we plan to provide a short historical summary prior to discussing the difference between the two routes. It is our hope tonight that you will direct us to proceed with a transmission line route. Directing us to proceed means that we will restart the entire public improvement process, including public meetings and a public hearing. Staff understands that no amount of public meetings or public hearing is going to bring consensus, but we're recommending the route that reduces the most risks and is the most cost effective and reliable solution. We have the ability and the information to go into a closed session this evening if you wish to go over the specific risk to our system since there's a few members that may not be aware of those. So now I'm going to turn it over to Eric Wirtz, our engineering supervisor for electric to go over the history and discuss in more detail each of the options and the estimates. Hello, my name is Eric Wirtz. I am a professional engineer. I've been with the city for 12 years in March, and this print transmission line project has been in my area of discussion for that entire 12 years. So I'm very familiar with most of the aspects of this project.
openpublica.com