On January 14, 2013, the Red Wing City Council voted to pay $1000 toward Egan's travel expenses to the group's DC kick-off meeting in Washington DC:
Motion to Approve Mayor Egan' s Travel Outside of Minnesota to Attend Mississippi River's Cities and Towns Initiative in Washington, DC Mayor Egan is a board member of the Mississippi River's Cities and Towns Initiative. They are meeting in Washington March 19 -21. Up to $ 1, 000 in funds are available to reimburse travel expenses. Approval of the Consent Agenda constitutes authorization for out -of -state travel for Mayor Egan to attend the Mississippi River' s Cities and Towns Initiative in DC.
So the City of Red Wing is paying all or part of Mayor Dennis Egan's travel to Washington DC as member of this river conservation group's board. Will he be silent about discussions of sand mining? Will he leave the room? Will he disclose the fact that he's working for an industry group that's fighting with a significant chunk of the residents of the riparian population centers in the Upper Mississippi River Basin?
Embattled Red Wing Mayor Dennis Egan told
the city council on Monday he plans to resign on April 1 and will work
in the meantime to ensure a smooth transition.
Egan, who runs a lobbying firm Egan Public Affairs,
will continue as executive director for the Minnesota Industrial Sand
Council, the job that created a firestorm of criticism about the a
potential conflict of interest earlier this month. He first announced his plans to step down on Friday.
. . .Three citizens continued to press the issue at Egan, who was also
removed from an upcoming trip to Washington, D.C., for a mayoral
conference.
That final sentence answers Bluestem's questions: he won't be going--and least at public expense.
Photo: Pretty Red Wing.
If you
enjoyed reading this post, consider giving a donation via paypal:
What's clear is that the voices of rural Minnesotans seeking legislative relief are finally being heard. One of the strong voices to testify in last Tuesday's hearing was Land Stewardship Project member Vince Ready, a farmer from southeast Winona County near St. Charles, who traveled to the state capitol for the first time.
On Tuesday, I traveled to the state Capitol from my farm in southeast
Winona County for the first time in my life. I was there with hundreds
of my neighbors and other concerned citizens to let the Legislature
know that it must act to protect Minnesota from the frac sand industry.
. . .
. . .Recently, I drove a journalist around our township, touring the
proposed mine areas for about two hours. In that time we passed just
three other vehicles. We drove past dozens of farms — many owned by
Amish — many cattle, horses and hundreds of acres of productive
cropland. The families that live here now live in a safe, healthy,
productive environment.
In
addition, a frac sand processing plant is proposed in the nearby city
of St. Charles that would be the largest in the United States.
If
the proposed frac sand mines and processing facilities start their
enterprise here, our environment and community are changed forever. What
is now a scenic, safe farming community will become a heavily
industrialized, polluted area.
We
can’t leave regulating this billion-dollar industry to rural counties,
cities and townships. We need state-level permits that work alongside
local control to ensure pollution standards are being followed that
protect the community. This concept of the state establishing a
regulatory floor that local governments can go beyond if they wish is
how many other businesses are regulated, including large-scale feedlots,
ethanol facilities and solid waste facilities.
Visit the St. Cloud Times to read entire letter.
In addition to citizen activism, there's another wake-up call for Minnesota, in the form of a long feature article in the Star Tribune by Josephine Marcotty, Minnesota draining its supplies of water. Marcotty reports:
Minnesotans have always prided themselves on their more than 10,000 lakes, great rivers and the deep underground reservoirs that supply three-fourths of the state’s residents with naturally clean drinking water.
But many regions in the state have reached the point where people are using water — and then sending it downstream — faster than the rain and snow can replenish it.
Last year, Minnesotans used a record amount of water, fueling a rising number of conflicts from the Iron Range to Pipestone.
Now state regulators, who have never said no to a water permit, for the first time are planning to experiment with more stringent rules that will require some local communities to allocate scarce water. . . .
Silica sand mining--especially the processing required to make it ready for drilling rig use--is extremely water intensive.
In addition to Schmit's bill, Rick Hansen (DFL-S. St. Paul), a suburban legislator who still owns farm and hunting land in the southeastern Minnesota of his boyhood, has introduced HF 425, which would protect wellheads and scientific and natural areas in frac sand mining areas. Schmit is the author of the companion bill in the state senate.
The bills deserve more sponsors, committee hearings, and eventual passage.
Minnesota Sands has offered to voluntarily conduct an Environmental Impact Statement[EIS]--an in-depth study that examines a project's potential affects on environmental and quality of life issues--for the proposed Dabelstein and Yoder frac sand mines in Saratoga Township. Earlier this month, the Minnesota Department of Health and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency recommended an EIS for the proposed sites.
Tonight's scheduled public hearing at Southeast Tech's Tandeski Center has been cancelled as a result.
A frac sand mining company proposing two mines in Winona County has
agreed to conduct an in-depth environmental review of the projects
voluntarily, officials said Thursday.
The decision by Minnesota Sands
comes two weeks after the Minnesota Department of Health and Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency called for an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on the proposals.
The more detailed review isn't
required by state law, so it had been up to Winona County officials to
decide whether to require one. A hearing on that question had been
scheduled for tonight, but county officials cancelled the meeting after
being notified of Minnesota Sands' decision. . . .
Well, doesn't that sound wonderful? That the company has volunteered to conduct a more exhaustive environmental review of itself? See, what good actors and neighbors the industrial sand mining industry is?
An EIS is conducted by a responsible government unit (RGU); the environmental assessment worksheets that were found so inadequate by state agencies--that was conducted by Minnesota Sands.
Not all news organizations and stakeholders in this shifting sand drama were as confused as the Winona Daily News and Minnesota Public Radio. HThe Rochester Post Bulletin reported in Minnesota Sands agrees to environmental impact statement
Winona County Planner Jason Gilman said the scope of the EIS, and
which governmental unit will do it, will be determined in a few days.
It's possible it will be Winona County but if the scope goes into
quarries that might be opened in Fillmore County, the state might get
involved, he said.
It's also possible that a processing plant could be studied as part of of the study, he said.
This is the first EIS for silica mining in
southeastern Minnesota, he said, and could set the tone and direction
for other operations. "I think this is certainly precedent-setting,"
Gilman said.
Earlier in the PB article, however, the spokester for Minnesota Sands continued the public relations offense, painting the EIS as simply a process that would make critics feel better:
"I think this EIS will remove all those concerns," he said. "They
don't know what is in the hearts and minds of the people who are trying
to get this done … this will bring everybody up to the same speed and
should answer all of their concerns."
When the smaller environmental assessment worksheet,
which can be a precursor to an EIS, was done, nearly all public comments
were negative. Opponents cited noise, the number of trucks, water
pollution and fear of silicosis as reasons they wanted at least a full
EIS. Also, the Minnesota Health Department and Pollution Control Agency
have asked for the EIS because of many of the same concerns. . . .
The full environmental study will help appease those who oppose mines, Bublitz said. "Why not just do it?" he asked.
The landowners who want to lease their land to
Minnesota Sands "are good, decent people," he said. "They respect the
land … this is their backyard."
Yeah, okay, it's all about appeasement. And motives and feelings. Right. Perhaps Minnesota Sands believes these are Environmental Appeasement Statements (EAS).
The paper interviewed an organizer for Land Stewardship Project who maintained a more clear eyed perspective:
Johanna Rupprecht, Land Stewardship Project policy organizer, said
that while Minnesota Sands asked for the EIS voluntarily, "it's clear
that because of the public pressure" the study couldn't be avoided.
She wants to make sure it is done right. "We are gong to be very vigilant and make sure it gets done right," she said.
Land Stewardship Project, which maintains a field office in Lewiston, issued a statement:
It was announced today that
an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) will be performed on the
controversial Dabelstein-Yoder frac sand mines proposed for Winona
County's Saratoga Township. While an EIS is in process, all permitting
decisions are put on hold.
Today's announcement that Minnesota
Sands, the proposer of the Dabelstein-Yoder frac sand mine facilities,
has formally "requested" that an EIS be performed on its projects
verifies what has been clear from the beginning: an EIS for a project of
this scope was necessary. This fact was reinforced most recently when
the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency and the Minnesota Department of
Health called for a full EIS of these proposed frac sand mines.
The
Land Stewardship Project is concerned that the proposers of the mines
do not understand the EIS process and their role in this process. The
latest evidence of this is a letter dated Feb. 20 to Jason Gilman,
Winona County's Planning Director. In the letter, the proposers asked
that the permitting process be tabled to "allow us to perform a
voluntary EIS." Under Minnesota law, the EIS must be performed by the
county, not the proposers. This is critical to make certain that the
study is done in a way that all potential impacts to our land, water,
air, roads and community are examined thoroughly and fairly.
It
has become clear in recent weeks that in fact these projects are not
appropriate for the community, given the strain they would put on the
environment, human health and the infrastructure. Given the proposers'
unwillingness to engage in a thorough environmental review up to this
point, the Land Stewardship Project will be watching the EIS process
very closely.
Here's the letter from G-Cubed consulting announcing that the company's decision:
While Southeastern Minnesota's bluff country from Red Wing to the Iowa border and the placid little Minnesota River from the metro to Mankato may have been strangers to the sort of divisions with which mining politics have cursed Northeastern Minnesota, a joint hearing on frac sand mining appears to have lifted that blessing.
Testimony fractured between grassroots citizens, conservationist organizations, and local government seeking regulatory relief, a generic environmental impact statement (GEIS) and representatives from the Minnesota Industrial Sand Council (MISC), a trucking company owner, the Minnesota Chamber of Commerce and the powerful "49ers" or the International Union of Operating Engineers claiming that the industry was capable of monitoring itself.
Another fracture line? The splintering of stereotyped partisan politics that place Republicans and industry in one camp, and DFLers, conservation and environmental groups in opposition.
These fault lines, with powerful interests allied on the part of MISC, may make passage of new legislation difficult, despite the overwhelming numbers of grassroots frac sand critics filling both rooms of seating for the testimony. Two buses brought 70 local citizens to St. Paul from Southeastern Minnesota.
The number of critics' testifying also dwarfed that of industry supporters. Forty-one individuals and groups signed up to speak, although time
didn't allow all to speak. Five agency staff testified, all seven pro-mining
groups and business owners spoke, and twenty-nine local government
officials, conservation group representatives, and grassroots activists signed up to speak, although time ran out.
Former state senator John Howe, R-Red Wing, spoke in favor of a GEIS; the man who defeated him in November 2012, Matt Schmit (DFL-Red Wing) is expected to introduce legislation to mandate and fund a GEIS. MPR's Tom Scheck reports that while "a statewide moratorium is on the table but [Schmit] declined to give more specifics."
Dave Frederickson, state agriculture commissioner, spoke in his role as chair of the state Environmental Quality Board, noting that the issue of frac sand mining had come up during recent citizen forums across the state, especially in the Rochester session.
Citizens had petitioned the EQB for an GEIS and given testimony for a study at a EQB meeting, and pro-mining interests had been given time at a following meeting to present their position. Frederickson said that while the board has the authority to order a study, it must also secure funding for the expensive studies from the legislature.
Representatives from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA), the Minnesota Department of Health (MDH), the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) and the Department of Transportation (MNDOT) testified about their agencies regulatory authority and concerns. New to the debate: MNDOT concern that vistas on the Great River Road--might not be so great if sight lines are disrupted by mines.
The entire hearing is embedded below; we've pulled some highlights of activist and industry testimony below.
While the highlights may seem weighted toward the grassroots side of the divide, that reflects the list of those who signed up to testify.
Grassroot opponents testify
Township and county elected officials testified that they need the state's help to negotiate the complicated regulatory issues posed by the massive new scale of industrial sand mines being proposed in their communities. This scale has created a much different regulatory environment than that which they've faced with the gravel and sand pits that now operate--usually just a few dozen acres at most.
Preble Township (Fillmore County) board supervisor David Williams' testimony was typical of this testimony. A retired lawyer who had served on the county's task force on industrial sand mining, Williams recited a litany of complex air and water quality, transportation and public health issues local government uncovered when asked to address local citizens' concerns. Williams concluded:
Recent experience seems to show that when local government decision makers cannot find answers to the questions about public health, environmental, transportation and economic issues, these decisionmakers tend to freeze. They freeze in place and they make no effort to provide real solutions on the local level. They need the scientific help from state agencies to even help them make decisions in addition to the decisions they are making for themselves.
Their testimony was underscored by Chippewa Falls WI frac sand activist Pat Popple, who shared the experience in her community where the industry got ahead of state and local government. Part of her testimony:
In Wisconsin, we have had numerous spills from several mines. Not all are reported; in fact, most of them . . .have been reported by citizens. A flood at the EOG plant while it was underconstruction. In Grantsburg, the Tiller Corporation . . .poured all sorts of things into the St. Croix River and that is now under litigation and investigation by the attorney general and other agencies.
In the Larkin Valley near Blair, WI, there was a major breach. A five-foot wall of water and sludge took out an Amish barn and other buildings. . . .and Trout Creek in Chippewa County, also reported by a citizen, a wastewater pond gave way and spilled into the creek. The land conservation in Chippewa County also helped clean up, the fine by the county of a little over $4100 will never pay to recover that creek, and the fish and trout that are in it.
Sigurd Anderson of Lake City, Goodhue County, testified that after months of meetings with citizens and local and county officials:
. . .it became clear to many of use that local and county government agencies and officials did not have the background, training, technical expertise, time, staff or monetary resources to adequately respond to the power and skill of mining companies backed by multinational energy corporations and the implied consent of federal agencies.
Anderson joined a group that petitioned the Environmental Quality Board for a GEIS because industrial scale mining isn't a good fit for the region.
Land Stewardship Project legislative director Bobby King called for rewriting the state's non-metallic mining standards and a GEIS backed by a moratorium on new mining, citing the state's experience during the process of writing the feedlot GEIS. He pointed out that state agencies and local control could work together. Local elected officials were asking for state help in permitting but wanted state regulations that would establish a floor that would still allow local government to set conditions in their permitting and to write their own zoning and land use ordinances.
St. Paul documentary filmmaker Jim Tittle, who was raised in Goodhue County and still has family living in Hay Creek Township, presented an excerpt from The Price of Sand:
Red Wing City council member Peggy Rehder also testified, presenting a resolution the city council had adopted favoring a GEIS and a moratorium.
Pro-industry testimony
The Minnesota Industrial Sand Council was represented by Aggregate and Ready Mix Association of Minnesota president Fred Corrigan, executives from Jordan Sand and Bryan Rock, and consulting geologist and civil engineer Kirsten Pauly of Sunde Engineering. Others testifying for the sand mining industry included a trucking company owner, Tony Kwilas, director of environmental policy for the Minnesota Chamber of Commerce and Jason George, the 49ers political director.
Like the mine owners, Kwilas stressed that the sand industry had been in place for over 100 years in Minnesota, with some operations on their second or third generation of family owners deeply embedded in the civic and economic life of their communities. He also noted that thesand they extracted wasn't merely used for fracking, but for abrasives, filtration systems, in glass, in tubs and sinks, and "if you're as bad a golf as I am, a lot of times, and much to my chagrin, it's used on our golf courses where my ball ends up when I hit wayward shots."
Kwilas urged lawmakers to remember that the industry provided jobs now, could provide potential jobs, and that it was important to find "a delicate balance" to promote these jobs in a struggling economy while also protecting the environment and natural resources. Greater Mankato Growth (the local chamber) has estimated that for every job created, 1.8 other jobs were generated. He concluded with the observation that those who had paid attention to agency and industry testimony would realize th at this was "one of the most heavily regulated industries that we have in this state, either through the state, through local, township, or county ordinances that you've all these folks testify . . ."
Kwilas turned the mic over to Jason George, legislative and political director of the 49ers, in a show of business and labor cooperation. About 13,000 heavy equipment operators in three states, hundreds of whom working aggregate and sand mining, are members, he said, noting that they work in permanent full-time positions paying between $25-$30 per hour with health insurance for families and pensions. 49ers working in pits also enjoy less travel time to work and more time with their families than other members who work in construction and must travel to distant job sites.
George concluded:
What you do here this session will have consequences There are complex issues to debate when it comes to sand mining as you've heard today. You've heard both sides of it. Far too often in this political climate, the answer to complex issues is a simple no. We believe a statewide moratorium or a GEIS is a simple no. I'm asking you and much more importantly, the people who are here today and the people that I'm representing are asking you, that want to make a future working in this industry are asking you, let's find a way to say yes, to find a way that protects the environment and creates these good family-sustaining jobs.
The next step
The Senate the Committee on Environment and Energy will discuss silica
sand mining bills on Tuesday, February 26 at noon in Room 123 Capitol.
Bills will be added to the agenda as they are introduced.
So far, Rep. Rick Hansen (DFL-South St. Paul) has introduced only bill on file relating to frac sand mining. HF 425
addresses scientific and natural area and wellhead easement protection
issues. Senator Matt Schmit (DFL-Red Wing) plans to introduce a bill
providing broader legislative relief before the February 26 hearing.
Watch the entire hearing here:
Photos: All chairs in the second overflow hearing room were filled with sand mining supporters and critics; several dozen people listened while seated on the floor (above). Mining workers waiting to enter committee room (below)
A glance at newspapers in Southeastern Minnesota this morning illustrates how issues related to frac sand mining aren't going away. Rather, the conflict created by the industrial scale sand mining industry continues to generate headlines and letters in the region.
The Winona Daily News, the Rochester Post Bulletin and the Red Wing Republican Eagle all serve up frac sand-related headlines.
Minnesota residents are taking concerns about frac sand mining and
other energy and climate issues to Washington, D.C., this weekend for a
rally activists say could be the country’s largest on the topics.
Eric
Nelson of Winona boarded an Amtrak train bound for Washington late
Friday morning, joining others from Minnesota communities. Nelson said
he spontaneously decided to take the trip after Winona resident Jim
Gurley opted out due to illness.
“The issue of climate change is
huge,” Nelson said. He said frac sand mining is just one of the issues
that will be discussed at the rally, with others including offshore
drilling, the hydraulic fracturing industry, global warming and more.
State
Rep. Frank Hornstein, DFL-Minneapolis, who chairs the Transportation
Finance committee and serves on energy policy committees, hopped off the
train briefly to greet 10 or so activists in Winona.
“Our message
is that climate change is an urgent issue, and we need to take action
at the state and federal levels,” Hornstein said. “Thank you, Winona,
for standing up against frac sand mining,” he added. . . .
Read the article in the Winona Daily News. An state senate committee will hear testimony about frac sand mining on February 19. For more information about the hearings from Land Stewardship Project click here.
After Monday's fiery city council meeting
that saw one critic of Red Wing Mayor Dennis Egan escorted out by police
officers, things have proceeded at a more deliberate pace in
determining how to address concerns surrounding Egan's possible conflict
of interest.
Jay Squires, Red Wing's legal counsel, has identified an
investigative firm that could examine Egan's dealings with the Minnesota
Industrial Sand Council. Egan, a professional lobbyist, agreed to
become the organization's executive director in January, roughly three
months after signing a new ordinance that essentially bans silica sand
mining within the city.
City Hall was packed Monday with citizens worried
about a conflict of interest, and three council members asked Egan to
consider either stepping down as mayor or to resigning his post with the
mining organization that represents six companies with interests in
silica sand operations. Egan refused, and says he doesn't have any
conflicts. . . .
Read the rest at the Post Bulletin. The article concludes:
Red Wing officials also voted unanimously to send a resolution of
support to the Minnesota Legislature asking for a moratorium of silica
sand facilities and for the state to conduct a generic environmental
impact statement, which could delay local projects for years.
Demand for silica sand has increased in recent years
as domestic gas and oil production has jumped, with southeastern
Minnesota becoming a hot spot for mining companies. Proposals have been
made up and down the Mississippi River based on the size, shape and
hardness of the sand, but vocal resistance has also become organized.
The current hot spots include Wabasha, Winona and St. Charles.
The embedded image of the front page of today's Red Wing Republican Eagle illustrated how the issue is dominating headlines in pretty Red Wing. Not just above the fold, but top of the page.
As you can see from the pdf below of the Red Wing Republican Eagle's letter pages, the mayor's new job at Fracsandville is dominating the discussion inside the paper as well. Like the frontpage, above the fold coverage, this copy isn't online yet either.
An "Earth Train" carrying 70 Minnesotans heading to Washington to ask President Obama and his administration to lead a clean energy transformation made an impromptu stop in Winona to meet local activists--and pick up another passenger.
Given the area's role in the ongoing grassroots fight about industrial scale sand mining, this development isn't a surprise.
In a critical test of Minnesota's approach to frac sand mining, two
state agencies have called on Winona County to order an in-depth study
of environmental and health risks associated with a cluster of proposed
mines and processing sites.
The commissioners of the Minnesota Pollution Control
Agency (MPCA) and the Minnesota Department of Health each published
formal comments this week strongly urging the county to require a full
environmental impact statement before deciding whether to approve at
least two silica sand mines proposed by Minnesota Sands LLC. The Winona
County Board will have final say on the study.
It's the first time either state agency has called for
such an in-depth, precautionary study of frac sand operations, which
have been booming in southeast Minnesota and western Wisconsin as firms
demand the sand suitable for new drilling techniques that have
revitalized the U.S. oil industry. The industry has created concerns as
well as jobs, with two MPCA commissioners noting possible contamination
of drinking water, lung disease and unsafe truck traffic.
Just down the road in Winona County, the Minnesota Proppant mine and processing complex has hit a wall of grassroots citizen resistance. As Bluestem noted in St. Charles Township and Red Wing City Council speaking truth to corporate frac sand power, over a 1000 people have signed a petition against the project--a lot of folks for a small town with a population of 3,735.
In the state senate district just to the north, State Senator Matt Schmit (DFL, Red Wing) and Tim Kelly (R-Red Wing) are paying attention.
North Star Sierra Club president Margaret Levin didn't speak at the unscheduled press conference in Winona, but responded to Bluestem's inquiries with this emailed statement:
This weekend the Sierra Club, MN350 and allies are joining a delegation of more than 200 Minnesotans who are traveling to D.C. to ask President Obama and his administration to lead a clean energy revolution that will end our dependence on fossil fuels and their devastating impact on our air, water and lands. Communities in southern and southeastern Minnesota are experiencing this impact firsthand with industrial-scale frac sand mining and processing proposals that threaten public health, worker safety, and our natural resources. The Sierra Club North Star Chapter has joined organizations across the state in calling for a moratorium on new frac sand mine proposals until environmental concerns have been adequately evaluated and addressed.
Instead of deepening our commitment to fossil fuels that will worsen the climate crisis -- and which often have greatest impact on rural and environmental justice communities -- we must instead fight for a clean energy future that will create good, family supporting jobs, clean our air and water, and improve public health.
The frac sand activists are gaining the attention of state groups; will they get their local representatives' attention?
Photos: Frac sand activists at the Winona Amtrak station (top photo,by Betty Tisel); Winona area activists Eric Nelson and Jim Gurley (left) and Rep. Frank Hornstein (right) (bottom photo).
If you enjoyed reading this post, consider giving a donation via paypal:
With the February 19 hearing on industrial frac sand mining in the Senate’s Environment and Energy Committee coming up, the editorial board of the largest circulation daily in Southeastern Minnesota is calling for a state-level Generic Environmental Impact Study of the sand mining industry.
Like sands through the hourglass, the clock is
ticking inevitably toward a full-scale, state-ordered study into the
effects of frac-sand mining upon Minnesota's roads, groundwater,
landscape, air quality and the health of those who live near the mines
or along transportation routes. That's our conclusion after the
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency and the Minnesota Department of
Health each sent letters to the Winona County Board requesting the
county order a full Environmental Impact Statement concerning two
proposed frac-sand mines. . . .
. . .The Legislature is scheduled to begin holding hearings related to
frac sand on Feb. 19, and it's possible that, by the session's end, the
state will have ordered a Generic Environmental Impact Statement on
frac-sand mining.
That would be the wisest course of action. Granted,
such an order would tap the brakes on frac-sand mining in Minnesota for a
year or two, but the alternative is likely to be an endless series of
localized legal battles about individual mines.
. . . A General Environmental Impact Statement on frac-sand mining will
fill in a lot of the knowledge gaps for cities, counties and townships,
thus, allowing them to make fully informed decisions that — we hope —
will protect our environment while allowing the safe extraction and
transport of this valuable resource.
Read the whole thing at the Post Bulletin.
Southeastern Minnesota residents concerned about this issue should consider attending the hearing. Land Stewardship Project is sending two buses to the state capitol, one picking up people along a Winona-Wabasha-Red Wing routs, while the other will transport concerned citizens from the St.Charles-Rochester area.
Here are the details from Get on the Bus! Travel to the State Capitol for the Feb. 19 Senate Hearing on the Frac Sand Issue:
We need to fill two buses on Feb. 19 to show Minnesota legislators we want meaningful action on the frac sand issue.
The first Minnesota legislative hearing on the frac sand issue is
happening Tuesday, Feb. 19, beginning at noon, in the Senate Environment
and Policy Committee, and we need a full house.
LSP plans a press conference that day at 11 a.m. in Room 125 of the
State Capitol and the hearing is in Room 107 of the State Capitol at
noon. If you want information on testifying, contact Bobby King at
612-722-6377 or bking@landstewardshipproject.org. Donations toward the cost of the buses are welcome but not required. Please pack a lunch, as no meal stops are planned.
• Bus 1: Houston – Winona – Wabasha – Red Wing bus. Contact Donna Buckbee of Houston County Protectors (507-864-2632 or tarantulaarms@acegroup.cc) to reserve your seat; this bus seats 55 people.
- 7:15 a.m. leave Houston from Barista's Coffee House. (Barista's will open early that day at 6:30 a.m.)
- 7:45 a.m. in Winona at the JC Penney parking lot (Hwy. 61 and Pelzer St.)
- 8:45 a.m. in Wabasha — City of Wabasha overflow parking lot across from Supervalu.
- 9:45 a.m. in Red Wing — Target Store parking lot just off Tyler Road on the north side of town.
- 10:40 a.m. Arrive at the Capitol.
- 3 p.m. Start the return trip.
• Bus 2: St. Charles – Rochester bus. Contact Johanna Rupprecht at LSP (507-523-3366 or jrupprecht@landstewardshipproject.org) to reserve your seat; this bus seats 42 people.
- 8:15 a.m. leave St. Charles from Amish Ovens (I-90 & Hwy 74 – park in the lower restaurant lot).
- 9 a.m. in Rochester at Walmart South
(located on Hwy 63, just north of Hwy. 52 — park in the northwest
section of the parking lot, by the retaining wall).
- 10:30 a.m. Arrive at the Capitol.
- 3 p.m. Start the return trip.
Hope to see you there.
Photo: A frac sand mining protest in Winona.
If you enjoyed reading this post, consider giving a donation via paypal:
The Red Wing City Council will have an independent investigator
gather more facts surrounding Mayor Dennis Egan’s involvement with the
Minnesota Industrial Sand Council.
City Council members voted
Monday to initiate the investigation, to be done by someone outside the
city organization. The issue was put before the City Council because of
concerns about a conflict of interest raised by members and the
community, Council President Lisa Bayley said. . . .
City attorney Jay Squires said right now there is no legal conflict
of interest. Council members generally agreed, but some said perceived
conflict is key.
“What I see is the public confidence has been so
severely shaken,” Bayley said, adding “I just don’t see how these two
positions are compatible.”
“My main concern is one of perceived corruption,” said Hay Creek resident Amy Nelson, a member of Save the Bluffs. . . .
. . . Council members said while there likely is not a legal conflict of interest right now, there are other concerns.
“I do not believe this has come down to a legal conflict, but I believe
it has come down to an ethical conflict,” Council member Mike Schultz
said.
“We have a significant perception of conflict of interest,
whether or not it indeed meets the legal definitions,” Council member
Peggy Rehder said.
It's understandable that the City Council is thinking about instances in city governance--say appointments to the town's economic development commission or port authority where the sand mining industry might have interests. Bluestem wonders how things will work for Mayor Dennis Egan when he shows up to lobby,since he's not inclined to choose between his livelihood or being mayor.
Local governments' struggles with industrial-scale sand mining continue to make news in Southeastern Minnesota, with St. Charles Township and Red Wing generating the headlines.
St. Charles Township: "crystal clear" no on Minnesota Proppant frac sand processing
There can be no question now. The people
of St. Charles Township have spoken. And now the chairman of the
township board has spoken. Minnesota Proppant's proposed sand-loading
rail facility is not wanted.
Jim Ruhberg, chairman of the township council, spoke Tuesday
night at the St. Charles City Council meeting, telling the city's
leaders that the township — from its residents to its township board —
is against the project.
"We will side with our residents and say we oppose
this project," Ruhberg said. "Everyone who has come forward has spoken
against it, and we feel this represents the majority of our residents.
We agree with the wishes of most of our residents and oppose this
project." . . .
But the City of Charles might have a lot less wiggle room after Tuesday night's meeting. Todd reports:
Ruhberg asked St. Charles Mayor William Spitzer if he had any
questions regarding the township's feelings. "Does that clarify our
position?"
"Crystal clear," Spitzer said. "Thanks."
. . .Half a dozen residents also spoke out against the
project, including representatives from Concerned Citizens for St.
Charles, a group that has collected 1,055 signatures asking to city to
adopt a resolution forbidding the processing, loading and mining of
silica sand.
Winona County's St. Charles, home to 3,735 according to the 2010 census, promotes itself as the gateway to
Whitewater State Park.
Red Wing supports state-wide efforts to study & mitigate effects of frac sand mining
Here's the resolution that the City Council of Red Wing is sending to the Minnesota Legislature Note that Mayor Egan, who is lobbying for the Minnesota Industrial Sand Council, recused himself from signing the Resolution.
Here's the signed resolution; Frac Sand Mayor Dennis Egan had to recuse himself:
Watching Red Wing's city council meeting stream live last night helps Bluestem understand the sentiments expressed in Winona Daily News editor Brian Voerding's signed editorial, Our view: What is Red Wing’s mayor thinking?:
As Winona County continues to trudge through the frac sand debate and
every associated issue, we should be thankful at least for this:
Our elected officials haven’t done anything nearly as stupid as the ones north of here.
Red
Wing mayor Dennis Egan was recently hired to lead a lobbying group for
the frac sand industry. He doesn’t think it’s a conflict of interest to
be the mayor of a town that has dealt with and will continue to deal
with the processing, trucking, shipping and other businesses leaping at
the chance to handle the dusty gold companies are digging out of
southeast Minnesota and western Wisconsin mines.
Clearly he doesn’t think much at all.
Even
if he chooses not to vote on a single issue or permit related to frac
sand, he’s still nothing more than a lobbyist lawmaker—which should be
an oxymoron.
We never thought we’d be in a position to praise our elected officials for steering clear of frac sand interests.
But
then again, it has proved impossible to define just how alluring a boom
industry can be to people responsible for regulating it. In Buffalo
County, for example, the long-time zoning administrator turned in his
resignation and signed on with a frac sand development company not long
after companies began crossing the county line. Without his leadership,
the county is still struggling to figure out how to deal with the
industry. . . .
The editorial board at the WDN has been fairly pro-sand, so this isn't a good start for the Minnesota Industrial Sand Council, although Bluestem is beginning to think we should cheer its hiring of the Red Wing mayor.
Nothing else seems to have stripped the blinders from the public's eyes about the realities of this industry--not even the eyesores it creates on a lovely working landscape.
Since Dennis Egan, the Mayor of Fracsandville and Red Wing, promises that the Minnesota Industrial Sand Council is all about "best practices" in the industry, let's take him at his word.
What we're seeing with this hiring is what corporate mining interests believes is a "best practice."
Certainly, the general public and the rest of Red Wing's elected officials don't agree with Dennis Egan and the MISC about what's "best" for Southeastern Minnesota. Star Tribune staff writer Tony Kennedy reports in Mayor's new frac sand job ignites debate in Red Wing:
Minnesota's frac sand debate spilled into City Hall here on Monday
night, with citizens pledging to recall Mayor Dennis Egan and the City
Council launching an investigation into his involvement with a
sand-mining trade group and lobbying organization.
At an intense City Council meeting attended by about 50 people who
applauded the harshest rebukes of the mayor, two City Council members
directly asked Egan to resign as mayor or step down as executive
director of the Minnesota Industrial Sand Council. He steadfastly
refused either option, saying he has no conflict of interest that can't
be managed on a case-by-case basis by recusing himself from city action
on sand-mining issues.
"I deeply care about Red Wing,'' said Egan, who was elected in
November to a four-year term before he went to work for the sand
council.
But Council President Lisa Bayley said Egan's post with an industry
that has encountered public opposition in its plans to expand
sand-mining operations in Minnesota has taken a negative toll on the
city and could hurt economic development.
"The public confidence has been so severely shaken,'' Bayley said. "What we have here is a pretty massive inherent conflict.''
Council Member Michael Schultz drew applause when he asked the mayor,
"Do you want to be the mayor of Red Wing or the executive director of
the sand council?'' . . .
The council voted 7-0 to hire the investigator.Kennedy also notes that the City Council will ask Minnesota Attorney General Lori Swanson's office for some advice:
The council also agreed to ask the Minnesota attorney general for
guidance on the legal structure and possible grounds for a petition
drive that Red Wing resident Dale Hanson pledged to pursue as a way to
remove Egan from office. Hanson said a recall petition needs a minimum
of 1,900 signatures to prompt a citywide vote in which Egan, a former
Red Wing Chamber of Commerce president, could be ousted.
Bayley asked Egan to choose between
his role as mayor and executive director of the sand council. She said
the city shouldn't need to spend money to investigate the mayor's
position with a lobbying group.
"A week and a half ago, we didn't
even know about this issue. I really kind of resent being put in this
position that we're the ones being made to make this call," she said.
"We'll do what we can within the limited confines of state statue and
our code of ethics and go from there and really just keep a open mind
about how we go forward."
Bluestem thinks that this added financial burden to the City of Red Wing underscores the costs of frac sand mining to communities and individual property holders. We should thank the newborn Minnesota Industrial Sand Council for its ability to peel back discourse to its core as swiftly as its members are able to strip the lovely bluffs and farmland of Southeastern Minnesota.
Baier closes:
Although the city is currently
considering any sand mining proposals, residents like Marlene de Boef
questioned Egan's ability to balance the two jobs.
"If you are mayor, you are mayor
everyday, all day. You are the face of Red Wing for the outside world.
And you can't say. 'Well, this afternoon, I am not going to be mayor,'
because the perception is, you are mayor all the time," de Boef said.
It's unclear how long the city's
investigation into Mayor Egan's position will take. A group of citizens
has also started to gather signatures for a petition to recall the
mayor.
The price of sand just got more transparent, and we can all thank the Minnesota Industrial Sand Council and its fearless leader, Red Wing Mayor Dennis Egan, for that early valentine.
Photo: The sun shines down on pretty Red Wing (above); a 2012 slurry slip into the St. Croix River (below).
If you enjoyed reading this post, consider giving a donation via paypal:
The recent developments surrounding the mayor of Red Wing and his
employment with the sand mining industry as a paid lobbyist are
extremely troubling. It matters not how you feel about the issue of frac
sand mining or the use of hydraulic fracturing to harvest gas and oil;
the distressing concern at hand is both a matter of law and one of
integrity.
I cannot claim to be an expert in the matter of
conflict-of-interest issues. But, during the dry-cask storage debates of
the early ‘90s I was accused of having a “conflict of interest” because
of my employment with NSP.
The resulting lawsuit was hauled in
front of the Minnesota Supreme Court, where the legal opinion rendered
by Chief Justice Kathleen Blatz absolved me of any conflict. In the
opinion of the court, the conflict standard was not met due to the fact
that I was not making any financial gain — not in retirement payouts or
medical plans or hourly pay, nothing. Also, the outcome of the overall
nuclear debate, whether or not to shutdown nuclear power in Minnesota,
did not impact my employment with NSP.
Neither of these instances holds true in Dennis Egan’s case.
I have heard Egan’s reasoning for not stepping down as mayor. His reasoning is simply ridiculous. . . .
. . . Egan should either immediately resign as
mayor of Red Wing or void his contract with the sand mining industry.
Not to do so is unethical and a breach of public trust.
Read the rest at the Red Wing Republican Eagle, including the part about how Egan is giving the profession of lobbying itself a black eye. Buzz kill.
Between the unprecedented call by state agencies for Winona County to draft a frac sand EAW and outrage over the hiring of Red Wing Mayor Dennis Egan to lobby for the Minnesota Industrial Sand Council (MISC), momentum is growing for state-level action on the problems posed by the growth of industrial-scale sand mining.
The headline in the Star/Tribune that the Mayor of Red Wing is going
to work for the frac sand mining industry was a revelation. Red Wing is
near the heart of the frac sand mining proposals that are popping up in
the hills and valleys of southeastern Minnesota.
The mayor, Dennis Egan, will be lobbying at the legislature for an
industry sand council heavily involved in frac sand mining. Whether
this might be a conflict of interest, for a local official to work for
an industry that is seeking local government permits, is being looked at
by the Red Wing City Council.
This revelation came on the heels of another in the same newspaper
over the weekend that shows the frac sand industry uses it’s money and
promises of jobs to get some local jurisdictions with tough regulations
to get annexed by jurisdictions more favorable to allow lax restrictions
on frac sand mining. So a local sand mining ordinance that restricted
hours of operation, required air monitoring and inhibited location of a
mine from nearby residences, might see these regulations loosened when
annexed to an adjacent community. . . .
Read the rest at Conservation Minnesota. The non-profit environmental group's boards engage a range of the state leaders from across the political spectrum; Bluestem is pleased to see it pay attention to frac sand mining.
Many people were outraged at the gross conflict of interest embodied
in Egan’s stances. . . .
instead of immediately and publicly expressing their outrage, they
quietly prepared for much more effective action . . .
Since Land Stewardship Project maintains an office in Southeast Minnesota to work with area farmers, farm workers, and local food consumers, it had skin in the game early on. In Great Minds Think Alike on Mines: Comments Call for an EIS on Frac Sand, Johanna Rupprecht looks over the developments in Winona County:
Public comments submitted as part of the environmental review process
for two proposed frac sand mines in Winona County overwhelmingly call
for officials there to follow the law and order an Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS).
Land Stewardship Project members, other local citizens, state
agencies and scientific experts submitted a total of about 75 comments
on each mine. The comments pointed out the many serious inadequacies in
the Environmental Assessment Worksheets (EAWs) prepared on the proposed
Yoder and Dabelstein mines, and called for the much more in-depth EIS,
which must be ordered if the EAW process shows a project to have the
potential for significant environmental impacts.
An EIS fully analyzes all aspects of a proposed project and explores
alternatives that would prevent or mitigate major environmental harm,
including not building the project. Under state law, no permit for the project could be issued while an EIS is in progress, and the costs of the EIS must be covered by the project proposer.
Many comments, including those submitted by the commissioners of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) and Minnesota Department of Health (MDH),
point out that the two mines are in fact part of a much larger project
which triggers a mandatory EIS. Both agencies’ letters note that the
Yoder and Dabelstein mines in Saratoga Township, together with the
several other mines proposed by the same company (Minnesota Sands, LLC,
also doing business as Minnesota Proppant, LLC) in the immediate area,
would total well over the 160-acre threshold for a mandatory EIS on
non-metallic mineral mining projects.
As both the Star Tribune and Minnesota Public Radio News have
reported, the commissioners also call for proposed frac sand processing
activities to be examined in the same EIS as part of the same project.
This would include Minnesota Proppant’s plant proposed near St. Charles,
which, if built, would be the largest frac sand processing and rail
transport facility in North America.
Read the rest at LSP's site. Objections to expansion of industrial-scale sand mining aren't confined to the Mississippi River corridor. Lynn and Darla Austin tell the editors of the Mankato Free Press in Silica sand plant not good for Mankato:
They want to build a 14-story silica sand (frac sand) processing plant north on Third Avenue, 1 1⁄2 miles from Highway 14. . . .
Mankato and the surrounding area are listed in the Top 100 Places to
Live in the United States. We feel building a plant like this within two
miles of Mankato — or worse, having the city annex them — would be a
detriment to the health of our citizens and future families looking for a
place to live.
The plant would be located in a valley which is known for swirling
winds. They are proposing having outside stock piles up to 70 feet tall.
It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to know that sand is going to blow. . . .
Google “silica sand mining or processing plants in Minnesota or Wisconsin.” It will chill you to the bone.
When one plant is permitted in an area they are like dandelions, you’ll
never get rid of them . . .
We don’t believe it’s an equitable tradeoff for our environment and the loss of its neighbors’ quality of life.
Read the entire letter at the Free Press.
Finally, Minnesota Representative Rick Hansen (DFL-South St. Paul), Greg Davids (R-Preston) (Davids had his name stricken from the bill on Monday, February 11)and Frank Hornstein (DFL-Minneapolis) have introduced HF 425, filed under the description "Scientific and natural area and wellhead easement protection area
acquisition funding provided, bonds issued, and money appropriated."
That doesn't tell the incurious public that it's a bill related to frac sand mining. The text of the bill (references to mining in italics):
1.6 Section 1. RESOURCE PROTECTION IN SILICA SAND MINING AREAS. 1.7Subdivision 1.Scientific and natural areas.$....... is appropriated from the bond 1.8proceeds fund to the commissioner of natural resources to acquire land or interests in land 1.9as scientific and natural areas under Minnesota Statutes, section 84.033, in the areas 1.10of the state with industrial silica sand resources likely to be mined, as identified by the 1.11commissioner, in order to protect unique hydrological features, including calcareous 1.12fens, springs, and trout streams; endangered or threatened species of plants or animals; 1.13and unique geological features. 1.14Subd. 2.Wellhead protection.$....... is appropriated from the bond proceeds 1.15fund to the Board of Water and Soil Resources to acquire permanent easements that will 1.16prevent industrial silica sand mining in wellhead protection areas, as defined in Minnesota 1.17Statutes, section 103I.005, subdivision 24, in the areas of the state with industrial silica 1.18sand resources likely to be mined, as identified by the commissioner of natural resources. 1.19The board must consult with the commissioner of health to prioritize the easements to be 1.20acquired. 1.21Subd. 3.Bond sale.To provide the money appropriated in this section from the 1.22bond proceeds fund, the commissioner of management and budget shall sell and issue 1.23bonds of the state in an amount up to $....... in the manner, upon the terms, and with 2.1the effect prescribed by Minnesota Statutes, sections 16A.631 to 16A.675, and by the 2.2Minnesota Constitution, article XI, sections 4 to 7.
Essentially, this is an attempt to protect sensitive areas and wellheads in the area. While Hansen represents a near suburb of St.Paul, like Davids, he owns farm and hunting land in Southeastern Minnesota.
There's a resolution online that the body will consider to support Senate bills that urge a state-wide GEIS for frac sand mining; if adopted, the document will be sent to the Minnesota Senate Environment and Energy Committee meeting on Tuesday, February 19, noon, in Room 107 of the State Capitol.
But that discussion probably won't provide the fireworks.
It'll be the consideration of Red Wing Mayor Dennis Egan's new job lobbying as the executive director of the newly formed Minnesota Industrial Sand Council (a division of the Aggregate & Ready Mix Association of Minnesota).
As it turns out, the editorial board of the Rochester Post Bulletin aren't the only ones calling for Egan to step down as lobbyist or resign as mayor.(Read the PB's call at Our View: Red Wing mayor shouldn't serve two masters).
In a critical test of Minnesota's approach to frac sand
mining, two state agencies have called on Winona County to order an
in-depth study of environmental and health risks associated with a
cluster of proposed mines and processing sites.
The commissioners of the Minnesota Pollution Control
Agency (MPCA) and the Minnesota Department of Health each published
formal comments this week strongly urging the county to require a full
environmental impact statement before deciding whether to approve at
least two silica sand mines proposed by Minnesota Sands LLC. The Winona
County Board will have final say on the study.
It's the first time either state agency has called for
such an in-depth, precautionary study of frac sand operations, which
have been booming in southeast Minnesota and western Wisconsin as firms
demand the sand suitable for new drilling techniques that have
revitalized the U.S. oil industry. The industry has created concerns as
well as jobs, with two MPCA commissioners noting possible contamination
of drinking water, lung disease and unsafe truck traffic. . . .
Central to the debate is whether the proposed Dabelstein and Yoder mines
in rural Winona County should be considered "connected'' to at least
three other proposed frac sand facilities within a 5-mile radius,
including sites in Fillmore County. The cluster could also include a
major processing and rail load-out facility near St. Charles. A group of
investors is pushing that project, but the group hasn't formally
applied for a permit. . . .
While no formal application has been made, a draft EAW by Minnesota Proppant appeared, then vanished last year, in apparent violation of the state's data practices law. On December 9, 2012, Sarah Squires reported in the Winona Post article, MN Proppant environmental data exposed:
A planned development on the edge of the city of St. Charles could
become the largest frac sand processing and transportation plant in the
nation. Minnesota Proppant's plans include a rail spur, sand processing
facility, and a six-mile underground pipeline that would bring sand to
the site.
The development proposal has drawn sharp criticism from nearby
residents, who fear the plant could change the character of the rural
setting and create large volumes of semi-truck traffic in the area.
While Minnesota Proppant has yet to formally apply for any of the many
permits needed to begin construction at the site, it has begun an
environmental review called an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW).
The company submitted some data for the EAW to Winona County in
October, but attempted to redact the information shortly after, asking
that the county consider the data to not be public, nor release it to
any citizens. After Winona County officials sought an opinion from the
state about whether the data should be considered public, it released
the information to the Winona Post last week. [emphasis added]
The information in the EAW draft in question is incomplete. EAWs
require answers to more than 30 questions related to environmental
effects, and other project details, and many of the questions in this
document are unanswered.
Bluestem has obtained a copy of that incomplete draft and posted it online (see embed below). Reading the draft answers some of our questions about earlier reports about St. Charles city council meetings in which it was difficult to understand why citizens were upset--and why they were making certain claims about the Minnesota Proppant project. (This is the St. Charles project that Kennedy brings up in his article.)
In a city council chamber packed with men, women and children, several St. Charles residents pleaded with the board to immediately ban all silica sand mining, processing and transportation within the town.
"We are not asking for due diligence," said Dan Hursh, a local resident. "We are asking for action."
Hursh said he had hoped the council would not just vote to keep Minnesota Proppant's silica sand processing and transportation project from becoming a reality. He also hoped the council would vote to stop any future silica sand projects within the city. "I am amazingly disappointed."
And why was he so disappointed? Todd reports that the mayor of St. Charles played possum about the Minnesota Proppant project, despite massive local opposition:
Travis Lange of Concerned Citizens of St. Charles said his group has collected 939 signatures, which represents 51 percent of the turnout in St. Charles from November's election. Lange said responses from those signing the petition show 80 percent of residents don't want the project.
The problem with the group's request, Mayor William Spitzer said, is there is no proposal before the city. The Minnesota Proppant project would be built in St. Charles Township, meaning the township and Winona County have jurisdiction over the project. "We're monitoring the situation at this point," Spitzer said. "I still think we need a lot of questions answered."
Oh, wherever did hundreds of citizens get the idea that the City of St.Charles might have jurisdiction over the massive frac sand processing facility proposed for St. Charles Township? And why did their concern motivate hundreds to sign the petition? Where's this stuff coming from?
Public records and earlier meetings. Those sillies.
In southeastern Minnesota, another sand company's annexation proposal has caused an uproar in St. Charles. The company controls a large site in the township of St. Charles. Even though the township is hostile to the project, company officials want the neighboring city of St. Charles to annex the land and issue an operating permit.
"There's so much money to be made ... they are just persistent," said Jim Ruhberg, chairman of the township board.
Page 13 of the draft EAW notes that Minnesota Proppant's proposal is based on annexation of the township by St. Charles:
This project plan has been based on the property being annexed into the City of St.Charles and being zoned Light Industrial. This zoning designation and the proposed facilities are compliant and per the Comprehensive Plan of the City and County.
. . . a group of neighbors on Cherokee Road oppose the project, voicing
concerns about declining home values, as well as possible traffic
delays, health problems and environmental effects such as sand spills.
Spitzer said the city council approved an
environmental assessment worksheet Tuesday night, which will look at the
facility's impact on traffic and the environment. The next step would
be to annex Farm2Rail's property into the city so it would have the
benefits of sewer, water and police services like any St. Charles
resident, Spitzer said.
Given that history, perhaps Spitzer might better ask himself why people would believe his statement that nothing's on the table. Nothing except the project's history, and his own statements about annexation back when other owners were pushing it.
And that takes us back to the concerns about connected projects that the latest Kennedy article in the Strib raised. The draft EAW (below) notes on page 11:
The project described herein covers all aspects of mining and processing industrial silica sand
from clearing the overburden to transporting the raw material, processing it for specific buyers
and loading rail cars for shipment via railroad. The development of other property near the
processing facility and trans-load facility are limited to manufacturers or other sand users which
may develop existing and proposed commercial/industrial zoned lands within the City of
St.Charles.
Outside of the City of St. Charles, future stages associated to this development will be mining of
the silica sand material for the processing facility. The silica sand formation (St.Peter
Sandstone) that this proposal will extract from extends throughout southeastern Minnesota in
great quantities. However, only those locations where it is easily accessible are currently
economically feasible. The slurry injection station described in this project is located amongst
the greatest sources of the high grade sand found near the surface in southeastern Minnesota. Its
location to other potential sand sources was deliberate to allow for phased development of other
sand mines.
There have been recent expressed interest in developing silica sand quarries from this same
formation within a mile of this site and at least two quarry applications are pending and subject
to EAW’s declarations. . . .
No wonder the citizens in the area and in Goodhue County are feeling overwhelmed and asking for relief from the state. And with Red Wing Mayor Egan taking a job as the executive director of the Minnesota Industrial Sand Council, it's no wonder why some of the peasants down in the driftless region are looking mighty unhappy.
The story started on Friday, with Charley Shaw's dramatically-titled article, Sand storm heads toward Capitol, in which readers learned that Red Wing Mayor Dennis Egan, a lobbyist by profession, had been hired by the new Minnesota Industrial Sand Council, a part of the well-established Aggregate & Ready Mix Association of
Minnesota.
. . . Red Wing City Council President Lisa Bayley, a lawyer, said she has
received many "complaints, questions and concerns'' from residents about
the mayor's new job as a paid advocate for an industry that is at the
forefront of local ferment. . . .
. . .Egan's decision also occurs as debate rages up and down the
Mississippi River corridor over the sand boom. In the past four years,
more than 100 mines and processing facilities have been permitted in
Wisconsin and Minnesota in a rush largely controlled by local units of
government.
Bayley said the council will discuss the matter Monday at a regularly scheduled meeting.
"If the facts are as we think they are, it could prove to be a very serious matter,'' she said, declining to elaborate.
Forty-seven comments have been left on the online story, which ran on A1 above the fold in the print section on Wednesday. The comments are overwhelmingly negative toward the mayor's actions.
Dennis Egan, the City Council and the citizens of Red Wing certainly have some things to work out.
Egan might decide that being Mayor of Fracsandville isn't worth the wages for the consternation he's causing those who elected him Mayor of Red Wing--and he could resign as Executive Director of MISC.
A third option: take the sand and run, resigning as Red Wing mayor.
It might be that everything is resolved and the city attorney returns an opinion that all is a-okay, and Red Wing's voters agree.
But, if the council discovers cause for removal--or the residents say enough is enough--what options remain?
The City of Red Wing charter is online, and that document outlines the process for removal and recall.
Remain, Removal or Recall?
Red Wing's City Charter is online here. It's possible that the Red City Council could remove the mayor from office on a two-thirds vote if it found cause after following the process in the city charter:
Section 2.05 Removal
Every elected officer may be removed from this office by vote of two-thirds of the City Council, provided that such official shall not be removed except for cause, after having been furnished with a written statement of the reasons therefore and after being given a reasonable opportunity to be heard in his/her defense. The City Council shall fix a date for a hearing on such charges not less than ten (10) days after notice to the accused officeholder and shall have authority to compel the attendance of witnesses and to request any necessary records and papers. In the event the office holder neglects to appear to answer the charges or the City Council finds that the charges are sustained and provide sufficient cause for removal, it may, by two-thirds vote, declare the office vacant. Nothing contained inthis section shall preclude the Council from establishing by ordinance criteria whereby an elected official who is absent from a prescribed number of meetings is deemed to have resigned.
If Red Wing remains angered, Egan doesn't quit his new job, resign as mayor or the council doesn't remove him, citzens still have recourse to a recall election if they're not happy with Egan's arrangements.
The City Charter allows for recall in Chapter 6. Here are the relevant sections about recall committees and petitions:
Recall
Section 6.13 The Recall
Any five registered voters may form themselves into a committee for the purpose of bringing about the
recall of any elected officer of the City. In the case of the Mayor and Council Member At Large, the
committee may be composed of registered voters from any ward of the City. In the case of all other
Council Members the committee shall consist of registered voters from the ward or wards in which
said Council Member is elected. The committee shall certify to the clerical officer the name of the
officer whose removal is sought, a statement of the grounds for removal in not more than 250 words,
and their intention to bring about this recall. A copy of this certification shall be attached to each
signature paper, and no signature paper shall be put into circulation previous to such certification.
Section 6.14 Recall Petitions
The petition for the recall of any official shall consist of a certificate identical with that filed with the
clerical officer together with all the signature papers and affidavits thereto attached. The recall petition
shall be in a form prescribed by and available from the clerical officer.
Section 6.15 Filing of Petition
Within thirty (30) days after the filing of the original certificate, the committee shall file the completed
petition in the office of the clerical officer. The clerical officer shall examine the petition within five (5)
days, and if he/she finds it irregular in any way, or finds that in the case of Council Members elected
by ward or wards that petitioners are not registered in the ward or wards said Council Member is
elected from, or finds that the number of signers is less than twenty percent (20%) of the registered
voters of the City or of the ward or wards said Council Member is elected from, he/she shall so notify
the committee.
The committee shall then be given ten (10) days in which to file additional signature papers and to
correct the petition in all other respects, but they may not change the statement of the grounds upon
which the recall is sought. If at the end of that time the clerical officer finds the petition still insufficient
or irregular, he/she shall notify the committee to that effect and shall file the petition in his/her office.
No further action shall be taken thereon. The final finding of the insufficiency or irregularity of a
petition shall not prejudice the filing of a new petition for the same purpose.
So, how many registered voters are there in Red Wing, Minnesota? According to the election results for the City of Red Wing in the 2012 general election, that's 9443 voters as of 7AM on Election Day (pdf here: RedWingVoters 2012).
Twenty percent of the registered voter works out to 1888.6 people--or about 1900 people. Note that these folks can't be any old person who signs a petition, or even any resident of Red Wing. They must be registered voters.
Granted, Minnesotans can register with ease, but the bar is fairly high here. How high is the outrage factor for Red Wing's voters? Egan received 5804 votes cast in the mayor's race, or 73.52 percent. The voters didn't know--and it's probable that he didn't know--that he'd be starting a new job as Executive Director of the Minnesota Industrial Sand Council on February 1, 2013.
Screenshot: Dennis Egan's Facebook page on Tuesday, February 5. Note that he's "from" Red Wing but "lives" in St. Paul. What sort of message is that from a mayor.
If you enjoyed reading this post, consider giving a donation via paypal:
The West Central Tribune's Tom Cherveny, one of Bluestem's favorite Greater Minnesota news reporters, contributed a fine piece, online Sunday, about local food monument, Carlson Meats. The 100-year-old business has helped feed folks from the youngest souls to the Dalai Lama.
It was a few decades ago and Chuck Carlson’s dad was crossing the Canadian border when the officer saw his Grove City address and told him: That’s the town with the meat market where he gets his best meat.
Only recently, his son’s mother-in-law was shopping for potato sausage in Phoenix, Ariz., when the man next to her felt obliged to inform her: “I know where you can buy the best potato sausage in the country. It’s a little meat market in Grove City.’’
It’s also where Chuck Carlson continues to make potato sausage according to the recipe that his grandfather made his own 100 years ago.
Chuck and Kristin Carlson are celebrating the 100th anniversary of Carlson Meats in Grove City under the ownership of the Carlson family. William Carlson purchased the business in January of 1913. He stayed with the business until his death in 1954.
His son, Willard, returned from service in World War II to work alongside him. Willard and Luella continued the business to 1983, when third generation owners Chuck and Kristin Carlson formally took over. Chuck got started in 1975, one year after marrying Kristin, the co-worker he had met at Glacier National Park. Chuck said he had returned to help out “for a while.’’
Not all of their customers arrive from locations as far-flung as the Canadian border and the Arizona dessert, but many do come a ways. Carlson Meats is one of only a couple of dozen small- to medium-sized processing facilities in Minnesota that are United States Department of Agriculture Inspected plants.
Producers of everything from buffalo and lamb to yak for the emerging local foods market rely on Carlson Meats for their processing because of it. The yak man has his pastures north of Cold Spring, where he once served the meat to the visiting Dalai Lama. . . .
One of the points Bluestem has stressed in our posts about industrial scale sand mining in Minnesota is that the local problems caused by frac sand mining are legitimate concerns for people living near the mining and processing, regardless of whether fracking itself is totally awesome or totally horrid.
Nor do we rely on documentaries about fracking or fictional movies about fracking to make points about industrial-scale sand mining. Indeed, the latter practice is as annoying to Bluestem as those who cite The West Wing (on the left) or Atlas Shrugged (on the right) as evidence. Both are fiction.
Thus when an email with the subject line "Fracking Good for Minnesota, United States" arrived from Representative Glenn Gruenhagen we opened it, to read a column he has submitted to local papers. His op-ed piece begins:
A controversy is brewing at the State Capitol on whether to end or severely restrict mining of silica sand because of the potential environmental concerns. These concerns have been inflamed by a Hollywood propaganda film "Promised Land,” filled with misleading information.
It was impossible for us--or anyone, anywhere--to do so, even had we wished.
That was months before the film was set in October 2011 and even more months before it went into production in 2012 for a limited release in the waning days of post-Christmas 2012 or the January 4, 2013 nationwide release.
Citizens in Minnesota and Wisconsin have been inflamed--not by a movie that had yet to be made and that they had no knowledge of--but by the things they have seen happening in this very real world in which they live.
They have watched local public employees charged with representing their interests with mining companies quit and work for mining companies.
They have watched boom and bust in the demand for proppants for fracking, watched the sand pile up, and neighbors employed in the industry go idle.
They have worried about their property values, their health and the future.
They have attended meetings, set up websites, written letters, made phone calls, created petitions, protested, organized, committed civil disobedience, been arrested.
They have taken photographs, written articles, made videos and shot a documentary movie produced not in "Hollywood," but in a local commercial filmmaker's studio.
They have asked their townships, their cities and their counties to enact moratoria to study the effects of industrial scale silica mining and their local officials have listened.
They have petitioned the Minnesota Environmental Quality Board for a statewide GEIS. They have submitted testimony to the EQB.
They have appealed to former state senator John Sterling Howe (R-Red Wing) andto his successor Matt Schmit (DFL-Red Wing) to ask the Governor to support the GEIS.
All of this happened before the "Hollywood propaganda film" opened.
Are some of them concerned about fracking? To be sure. Were they seeking local zoning protection in 2011 and 2012--and legislative and state regulatory relief last fall--because of a Hollywood movie that opened nationally on January 4, 2013?
Are you stupid? Are you dishonest? Both?
Photo: An anti-sand mining sign from July, 2011, via MPR (top); Aerial view of proposed mine in Goodhue County's Hay Creek Township, ca. June 2011, photo by Jim Tittle. (bottom)
If you enjoyed reading this post, consider giving a donation via paypal:
In March 2012, in Dunkerton, Iowa, Dean's traveling
speaking tour interjected graphic images of aborted fetuses at a school
assembly aimed at anti-bullying. School officials denounced the
incident, stating they had been unaware of the group's history and had
not been informed about what the speakers had intended to show. . .
YCRBUCH
was banned from setting up in front of Walmart stores after requesting
the space under a false name, according to a Walmart statement at the
time (citypages.com, May 2011).
Similarly in Newton, Iowa, a
Hy-Vee store issued a public apology for allowing the group to fundraise
in front of the store, (citypages.com, July 2012). The store's
statement said the store would not have allowed the organization to set
up shop if the store had been aware of the group's history and said the
group had claimed its was a suicide prevention organization.
But to Krystal Leigh Widner, the organizer of the tabling in front of the New Ulm Walmart, spreading conspiracy theories or anti-gay messages aren't the problem. It's private business asking the Street Team to leave their customers alone, she tells Moniz, that's a sign of the country going the wrong direction:
Krystal Leigh, one of the organizers at the booth, said she had only
set up after getting approval from a store manager. She said the group
was completely unaware of the Walmart policy and called the ban an
infringement of free speech rights. She argued this was symptomatic of a
larger trend of the United States going down the wrong path.
A
spokesperson for the ministry also claimed to not know about the ban,
but declined to comment further until he had time to research it.
The
items being sold were various CD, video and graphic novel versions of
Dean's book "My War," along with items related to Dean's radio show,
"Sons of Liberty." The booths are aimed at preaching the organization's
ministry and operates as a major fundraiser for Dean's organization.
Okay then.
Photo: A Walmart employee (right) asks Krystal Leigh Widner to stop fundraising and leave corporate property in New Ulm. Photo by Josh Moniz, via the New Ulm Journal.
If you enjoyed reading this post, consider giving a donation via paypal:
This afternoon, Moniz was on the scene when a fundraising "Street Team" from toxic metal preacher Bradlee Dean's You Can Run But You Can't Hide youth "ministry" was tossed from the entrance of the Walmart in New Ulm, Minnesota.
The review came days after Dean's controversial (and stricken) opening prayer questioning President Barack Obama's faith at the beginning of the Minnesota House session in which the body was to take up the bill putting the constitutional amendment restricting the right to marry to opposite gender couples.
Dean notoriously filed a defamation lawsuit against Rachel Maddow and the Minnesota Independent. At last report in July 2012, Dean was ordered to pay their legal fees, although the case may still lie dormant in the system.
Finally Moniz tweets:
Doesn't look like I'm getting anymore comment from Walmart, "You Can Run But You Can't Hide" tonight about the New Ulm incident #stribpol
Back in December, Bluestem wrote that in Representation Rod Hamilton to defend rural Minnesota against his own worst fears, that you were positioning yourself as the Republican lead to warn rural Minnesotans about how much Democrats in Minneapolis hate us, especially those who are tillers of the soil and the keepers of livestock.
This frame was something we recognised from past years when former Marshall-area state representative Marty Siefert, and Steve Sviggum before him, led the Republican caucus in the house, although in those days, those dirty hipsters mostly just didn't share rural social values as the caucus defined them.
It wasn't so much about agriculture during their tenure--and that would have been a hard one for Kurt Zellers to pull off from Hennepin County. Those appeals to those social values didn't pan out so well in November, however, so on to the Old McDonald defenders riffs it is.
Since the first day of this session, Bluestem's been sad to see you more than live up to our expectations, as you go on and on (and on and on) about agriculture committee structure and leadership. You've gone on the floor of the House, in letters-to-the-editor of rural papers serving swing districts where Democrats were elected, and in your own column.
Most Minneapolis lawmakers spend their careers thinking the only
important activities happen within the metro area, and telling folks in
Greater Minnesota how to live.
Forgive us if we find that a little hard to believe. The last time Bluestem's editor saw Rep. Jean Wagenius, whom others in your caucus (Rep. Drazkowski comes to mind) call an "environmental extremist," she was at the Minnesota Farmers Union convention just before Thanksgiving, taking time to listen to farmers. While exceedingly civil in the tradition of the organization, those farmers weren't shy about sharing their concerns.
I can't say I heard her tell anyone how to live.
Help for Beginning Farmers: You Know You Want To
Nor does that seem to be the preoccuption of Speaker Thissen, unless you consider some of the past legislation he's introduced as telling us how to live. I suppose that we could see HF 3290 from the 86th session that way.
That's an bill in which there are:
Income tax credits provided to encourage beginning farmers, beginning
farmer program administered by the Rural Finance Authority modified, and
money appropriated for beginning farmer individual development
accounts.
Pretty rough stuff by a guy from the mean streets of Minneapolis telling people in Greater Minnesota how to live, I thought, until I read the bill and thought it sounded familiar.
It's pretty much identical to HF0860, a bill which you introduced in the 87th session, in which "Beginning farmer program tax credits provided." My former state Representative, Ron Shimansky, was a co-sponsor, as were DFLers Terry Morrow and Kent Eken.
That the sponsorship passed from Thissen to you with the change in control of the House isn't surprising. What is disappointing is that the Legislature hasn't passed the bill. Bluestem can't think of any group of farmers organized in Greater Minnesota--from the Land Stewardship Project to the Farm Bureau--that doesn't want programs to help beginning farmers.
It's even more apparent that the state should be working on this, given the unfortunate fact of Congressional ag leaders--and funding for the Beginning Farmer and Rancher Development Program--being left out of the fiscal cliff deal.
Getting together with Speaker Thissen and Representative Eken and re-introducing this legislation--then getting it passed through both ag policy and the environmental, natural resources and agriculture finance committee--might be a better use of your time than drafting divisive, urban-bashing columns.
Had I continued to serve as chair of the now eliminated House
Agriculture and Rural Economies Finance Committee, I planned to use the
majority of these funds (Agri Fund) for rural development and ag literacy and
education programs — things like 4-H, FFA, and Farm America. Now they
appear to be gone in favor of economic development programs which may or
may not assist rural Minnesota.
Really? That's a foregone conclusion? You so lack ability as a legislator that you can't make the case for 4-H and FFA? Or other types of rural development that helps the whole state? We're willing to bet that you can, if you spend less time submitting letters newspapers in swing districts and grandstanding in front of the cameras in the House chamber. Or writing inflamatory sentences like:
Minnesota cannot survive without our farmers and agriculture, so why is
the House majority attempting to demonize the men and women who put
food on everyone’s table?
. . . I was disappointed to read my colleague Rep. Rod Hamilton’s letter
in this newspaper attacking specific DFL legislators over the issue of
how the agriculture committees are structured and accusing DFLers of not
representing our rural districts. The session is barely a week old, yet
Rep. Hamilton would rather fan political flames than join together in
working productively on important agriculture issues.
Traditionally,
we have successfully advanced agriculture issues in the Legislature in a
bipartisan fashion. For example, in 2011, the agriculture budget was
the only finance bill we passed with broad bipartisan support before the
state shutdown. Rep. Hamilton’s negative tone is not the right
approach. As Chair of the Agriculture Policy Committee, I believe that
we will present a stronger voice for rural Minnesota by working together
as both Democrats and Republicans.
Challenging the advocacy
skills or commitment of rural members just because they are DFLers and
now are the majority caucus of the Minnesota House is not helpful in
getting to the outcome we all desire.
Poppe's concerns are echoed by Wagenius's vice chair, Andrew Falk, in an article in today's Sauk Centre Herald. Now, Bluestem not only knows young Falk, but his father, Murdock-area farmer Jim Falk, so it's hard to imagine any of the Falks not standing up for farmers and rural Minnesota, much less engaging in "demonizing" farmers.
Representative Andrew Falk (DFL-Murdock) is the vice-chair of the House Environment, Natural Resources and Agriculture Finance committee. He has been an active farmer his whole life, and has served in the legislature since 2008.
"I really believe that Rep. Hamilton is trying to make hay with this simply because he's upset about no longer being chair of the Ag Finance committee," Falk stated.
Falk stressed two important points on the matter.
"First, Dennis Ozment, who retired in 2008, was chair of the former House Ag, Environment and Natural Resources committee in the 2005 and 2006 sessions. While I haven't served with him, I've since gotten to know him and think highly of him," Falk said. "This structure was not an issue while Republicans were in charge. This seems like petty partisanship to me.
From 2007 to 2010, agriculture finance was a part of the House Agriculture and Veterans Affairs Finance committee. Rep. Al Juhnke (DFL-Willmar) chaired that committee before he lost re-election in 2010.
Ozment, a fire captain, represented Rosemount and Dakota County, which, although part of the metro area, still includes farms, and parts of Goodhue and Washington Counties. The committee also had the same name for a stretch in the 1990s, when it was chaired by former St. Paul representative C.Thomas Osthoff.
Indeed, Osthoff chaired the committee at height of the "Hog Wars" in Renville County. While some tried to frame the controversy as simply city folks moving out to the country without anticipating the smell of manure, if we're honest about the fight, we'll recall that the citizens of Renville County ended up electing DFLer Gary Kubly in that fight, certainly no ally of "Big Pig" but no enemy of farmers, either.
And the Sauk Centre Herald article goes on, with Farmer and Representative Falk adding that he'd like to talk to you and Rep. Wagenius, who holds some farmland of her own, about your concerns:
"My point is that throughout the years, agriculture has been included with other committee focuses," Falk said. "I know Rep. Wagenius. She has a farm in Douglas County with 50 acres. Between the work of her and myself as vice-chair, we won't let agriculture be diminished."
And Falk's quite willing to work with you on preserving that funding from ethanol payments for rural projects:
When asked about Hamilton's concern about agriculture funding, Falk replied, "If he knows of specific bills being introduced that take funding away from ag and put it to other areas, I'd like to know about them. In terms of something like the expiring ethanol producer payments, I'd like to focus on gearing that funding towards next-generation renewable energy. I don't want us to get into these rural vs. metro fights, especially in the opening week of the session."
Bluestem looked up the funding you're concerned about, Representative Hamilton, and it looked like the enabling legislation funds rural development projects through five years.
Write More Pro-Rural Legislation, Fewer Partisan Letters
If someone drops a bill in the hopper proposing to change that, take Vice-Chair Falk up on that. You and the Caucus might have to forego setting up your 2014 campaign rhetoric to do this, but maybe really working for rural Minnesota, rather than a return to power on the part of your caucus, is more important--especially given the demographic loss of power for all of rural America, regardless of party.
You haven't introduced any bills yet, as far as your page and the revisor's office reveal. Those proposals for ag youth education from last session? The ones you didn't have a co-sponsor for? They're good ideas.
Maybe you should talk to the chair and the vice-chair of the committee whose structure and leadership you scorn and see if they'll co-sponsor them. Of course, FFA and 4-H don't have to be just rural organizations; indeed, engaging urban kids in agriculture education is the bee's knees, if you ask us.
But Bluestem might not be the ones to help you out with that, Representative Hamilton. Reach across the aisle and chambers to check out freshman Senator Foung Hawj, from St. Paul's East Side. He's on the right committees and prior to getting elected, he received an award from the USDA for efforts related to urban agriculture. You might have some common ground.
In short, write fewer letters and more legislation for farmers.
Sincerely,
Bluestem Prairie
P.S. Speaking of common ground, Representative Hamilton: please quit framing urban and rural as environmentalist versus farmer. We've been going to watershed meetings and listening to farmers talk about erosion and water quality. We're pretty sure we heard farmers in the Le Sueur River Watershed say that they'd rather see the soil staying on their creeksides than becoming sediment choking Lake Pepin. Dividing people upstream and down doesn't help anybody.
Graphic: A Rod Hamilton meme.
If you enjoyed reading this post, consider giving a donation via paypal:
All of the statements, opinions, and views expressed on this site by Sally Jo Sorensen are solely her own, save when she attributes them to other sources.
The opinions, statements, and views of contributing writers are their own.
Sorensen, editor and proprietor of Bluestem Prairie, served as a New Media training and strategy consultant for the Minnesota Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party from October 2009 through mid-April 2010. She now serves clients in the business and nonprofit sectors.
Recent Comments