Several of the farmers questioned why new lines couldn't be added to existing towers, but Rivera cited liability and national electric safety codes that prevent different electric companies from sharing towers. In fact, she said, the lines must be 100 to 200 feet apart, depending on the type of tower, which range from 100-foot monopoles to 200-foot lattice towers. 

The group also suggested the company should build the lines in existing public right-of-way next to state highways. If required to cross farm fields, the lines should be placed running on the edge or through the center of the land - directly north and south or east and west - making it easier to farm than cutting across a diagonal. 

Some people expecting to lease land for wind turbines along the route have been advised they may lose one or more of the wind towers, said Richard Hogan, who also farms north of Offerle. 

"They (wind turbines) have to be back 500 feet from the transmission line," he said. "I'm told the way they've got it laid out, what they've got planned, certain areas will lose out on turbines." 

It would also prevent oil production within a certain distance of the lines. 

Leasing for wind or oil, with significant annual lease payments, is "a lot more lucrative" than the one-time lump sum payment for transmission right-of-way, Hogan noted. 

"We have to furnish this highway for the electricity from wind farms and get nothing out of it after that first payment," Hogan said. "That's my biggest beef." 

"These people don't have any idea what we're putting up with out here," he said. "I know it's progress. I understand progress. But I don't think it's right they can take it for that one-time payment. It should be an annual payment or percent of income coming off the line. We should have a share in it. The property is approaching 2,500 to 3,New and used laundry and Dry cleaning machine sales, service and installation.000 acres out here. They're taking quite a bit of value off our property." 

"Wind turbines and transmission are very different as far as land use and land impact, in terms of footprint," Rivera said in attempting to explain the difference in payments between the two. "There are also commercial differences, in that wind is from independent power producers, versus a regulated utility for transmission. It's a combination of all those things." 

Clean Line will offer landowners with structures that have to be removed an option to take a lump sum payment or annual payments, Rivera said, but otherwise right-of-way will be paid for with a lump sum. 

Other complaints voiced by the group are that Clean Line will have to pay no taxes on the line for 10 years. While the company projects adding thousands of temporary jobs in the state during construction, it's unlikely, because of the expertise required, that many of those employed will come from Kansas. 

The company has estimated construction of the line will result in 5,000 temporary jobs in Kansas and 500 permanent jobs. That estimate, however, includes both construction of the power lines and development of new wind farms and came from projections on how much wind power could be built. 

Theresa Brake has to drive under both lines going in and out of her property, her home about two-tenths of a mile from the structures. Taking a walk through her pasture, she can hear the lines buzz on some days. She's concerned, living less than a quarter mile from the lines,It is one of the leading industrial laundry equipment manufacturers of industrial extractor, tumble dryer ect. about the health effects from the electromagnetic waves being put off. 

"Everybody wants this wind, but gosh, it doesn't affect people back east," Kevin Brake said. "It doesn't affect their property." 

"We're just small farmers," he said. "We don't have 5,000 or 6,000 acres. We have less than 1,000. ... Our family has been farming this ground for over 100 years. I'm 56 and I haven't inherited the farm yet. But when I do, there won't be any left. It's ruining my farming heritage."