Excellent Post Register editorial written by Rebecca Casper.

Idaho Falls' city leaders cannot be content to wait and see whether a federal appeals court allows it to move forward with the North Loop power project, writes Rebecca Casper.
As a west side resident of Idaho Falls, I've watched with interest the proposed North Loop expansion of the city of Idaho Falls' power grid. In light of recent federal court decisions, I've concluded the city must formulate an alternative to the current western route, a Plan "B."
The purpose of the North Loop project is to connect two city substations -- one on the west side with another on the east side -- with high-tension power lines, traversing about 18 miles. There is no doubt we need to upgrade the infrastructure undergirding Idaho Falls city power. Currently, on days of high power demand, we're risking brownouts or worse.
That is unacceptable. Ours is a growing city. Dependable, affordable power is not just an advantage, it is critical as we compete for and attract relocating businesses and desirable development.
The North Loop project has drawn particular opposition from county residents on 35th West. A group of impacted property owners, under the aegis of the Alliance for Property Rights and Fiscal Responsibility, have sued in federal court to block the use of eminent domain.
Last September, Judge Winmill, the chief federal judge in Idaho, ruled against the city of Idaho Falls on a summary judgment, stating the city lacked the power to condemn property outside its boundaries (much of the project is in the county). As the losing party, the city of Idaho Falls was ordered last week to pay $72,000 in legal fees to the prevailing property owners. Currently, the city is pursing an appeal with the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.
The ultimate result of the city's appeal is uncertain. But given the adverse decisions at the district court level, it is distinctly possible the city may not prevail. This is why we need a backup plan.
Our city should move aggressively to develop alternatives to the disputed west-side portions of the project. Obvious options include choosing an alternative route or possibly partnering with Rocky Mountain Power on a regional power grid. All reasonable options should be on the table. Citizens and those impacted must be willing to find a solution. Sans a solution, we can surely expect decreased service, increased costs or both.
Eyes throughout the state are watching to see how our energy issue will play out. If we can't come together to address a problem that is in all of our best interest to solve, it doesn't bode well for other, more complicated energy infrastructure problems facing the state and region.
One thing is clear: Our city's future could be put in jeopardy by an adverse court ruling. Waiting until the 9th Circuit decides the issue is risky. Developing Plan "B" is the smart thing to do.
Casper is a mother of four, Ph.D., community volunteer, adjunct faculty at EITC and owner of Omnia Strategies, a political and professional consulting and strategy firm. You can reach her at rcasper@byu.net.