Attorneys debate effect of towers in power line trial

Published 10:10 am Friday, March 6, 2026

Attorney for property owners say the three towers, up to 190 feet tall, would ‘destroy’ views, while Idaho Power Company’s lawyer tells jurors that ‘subjective’ issues don’t determine fair compensation

BAKER CITY — The question of how much the presence of three metal power line towers, 162 to 190 feet tall, affects the value of a property is the central issue in a lawsuit involving a parcel in Baker Valley, attorneys told a jury in Baker County Circuit Court Friday morning, March 6.

David Auxier, representing landowners Mark and Savannah Kerns, and Tim Helfrich, attorney for Idaho Power Company, gave closing arguments to a 12-member jury.

The seven-man, five-woman jury started deliberating around 10:30 a.m. The trial started on Monday, March 2.

The jury will decide only one thing — how much Idaho Power must pay the Kernses for building the Boardman to Hemingway power line across the couple’s 1,050-acre property at the east edge of Baker Valley, about 5 miles northeast of Baker City.

At least nine jurors must agree on the amount, Judge Matt Shirtcliff told the jury.

During his 15-minute argument, Auxier told jurors that “this case is about the towers.”

Auxier, who represents the Kernses along with Baker City attorney Drew Martin, said the construction of those towers, which is underway, “basically ruins” the property the couple bought in 2021.

Auxier said the towers and power lines will have a “serious visual impact” marring the view west to the Elkhorn Mountains, including from the site where the couple has considered building a home.

“Nobody wants that, and that’s being completely ignored by Idaho Power,” Auxier said.

He conceded that the power line doesn’t preclude the Kernses from building a home on their property.

But Auxier told jurors that the towers in particular, and their effect on the view, would discourage anyone from wanting to build a home.

Auxier told jurors the situation, in which Idaho Power is using the legal authority known as condemnation, or eminent domain, to acquire easements across the Kernses’ property, “reminds me of the old Soviet Union.”

The company, Auxier argued, is implying with its offer to pay the couple $27,810 that the only effect on the property’s value is within the easements for the power line, access road and construction areas. Those areas total about 25.5 acres, or around 3% of the total parcel.

Auxier said it’s “absurd” to think that once a person steps outside the easement, the effect of the power line goes away.

He told jurors it’s “patronizing” to pretend that the power line, which Idaho Power wants to finish by the end of 2027 or early in 2028, affects only the portion the company is using.

“This is what bureaucrats do,” Auxier said.

He argued that the power line will “destroy” the “highest and best use” of the couple’s property — building a home and recreation.

He told jurors that “just compensation” for the Kernses is $215,694, an amount that includes the value of the easements — about $17,500, which the two sides don’t disagree about — and about $197,000 for the diminished value of the rest of the parcel.

That figure is based on testimony from appraiser Benjamin Ward, a witness that Auxier and Martin called and who contends the construction of the power line reduces the value of the property by 25%.

“Don’t check your common sense at the door,” Auxier urged jurors.

In his 57-minute argument, Helfrich chastised Auxier for comparing Idaho Power to the former Soviet Union.

“There’s no reason to be vilifying Idaho Power Company,” Helfrich told the jury. “These are your fellow citizens. It is simply wrong.”

Helfrich pointed out that the decision about compensating the Kernses “is not going to be decided by a Communist bureaucrat, it’s going to be decided by a jury.”

Helfrich argued that using “subjective” matters such as views of the Elkhorns to determine compensation is “irrelevant” despite what he termed Auxier’s “eloquent description.”

Helfrich emphasized to jurors that even with the power line in place, the Kernses could build a home, continue to use the property to graze cattle, and use their land for any other purpose so long as it doesn’t conflict with Idaho Power’s operation of the power line.

He noted that power lines, once built, “basically sit there,” and that Idaho Power would not use the property often.

Helfrich also noted that there is an existing power line through the property, which was built in 1955.

Helfrich argued that Ward’s conclusion that the B2H project would reduce the value of the Kernses’ property by 25% is not trustworthy. He noted that Rouke Aboubacar, the property appraiser Idaho Power called as a witness, studied about 16 pairs of properties, one of which had a power line through it and one without. Aboudacar concluded that the presence of a power line has no effect on a property’s value, Helfrich told jurors.

He pointed out that the current power line has 10 towers on the Kernses’ property, although these are shorter, at about 70 to 80 feet, than the towers that will be built for B2H.

Helfrich told jurors that the Kernses “are nice people,” but he urged jurors to consider Aboubacar’s conclusions rather than the subjective issues that he said Auxier used in his argument.

“Don’t let these kinds of emotional arguments be part of your analysis,” Helfrich said.

In a 4-minute rebuttal, Auxier told jurors that the presence of the towers — what he called the “aesthetic value, absolutely relates to the fair market value” of the property, the value that determines how much Idaho Power should pay the couple.

Auxier described the towers as “gargantuan.”